Android Galaxy S5 vs. etrex 20

[+Kevjm101]

Just curious the differences between tech specs for these two.

 

I'm wondering how much better buying a handheld GPS unit like the Etrex 20 would be compared to a Galaxy s5. Would I notice an increase in signal strength?

 

It would be hard coming from the beautiful screen of the S5 to the small screen of the etrex.

 

If the signal strength between the 2 would be almost similar, I'd keep the S5.

 

any thoughts?

[+luvvinbird]

I have an S4 which I have occasionally used for geocaching but I much prefer using my eTrex 20 (or 30). The very screen you mention is hard for me to see while using the app whereas my receiver's screen is even better to see in sunlight. I also like the way it feels, it can hang from a lanyard, way better battery life, much more rugged, etc., etc. What it can't do, of course, is to log the find at GZ. A friend at work has the S5 and, being plastic, a lot of the chrome has chipped off making it look as though it's had some rough use. Hey, maybe he's been using it for geocaching, lol. Seriously, this has been a hotly debated issue...phone vs GPSr. It just boils down to personal preference.

[+BlackRose67]

One way to look at it:

Drop your phone, you've likely got a $600 paperweight.

Drop your GPS, pick it up and keep going.

 

For what it's worth, I use a smartphone and a GPS when I cache.

Edited March 25, 2015 by BlackRose67

[+Viajero Perdido]

Give the phone a try in bright sunlight before you decide. Some screens wash out, but it seems on newer models it's not a problem. With my newish Nexus 5, in brightest sunlight all I have to do is turn my body so the phone's in my own shade, and I can read the screen easily.

 

The nice thing about a phone is you can choose the software you use for caching. Lots of choices there, especially on Android.

 

As you can tell from my signature, I'm now a phone cacher. And lovin' it.

[+Gitchee-Gummee]

I should think you need to define your version of "signal strength", and what you think "signal strength" does.

 

Typically, such a reference -- signal strength -- it applies to the how strong the device signal is being transmitted.

GPSr units or a phone being used as a GPSr unit, don't "transmit", they receive.

 

The amount of signal strength being received is dependent upon two things: antenna efficiency and/or external obstruction.

 

 

Astounding advances have been made in phone antennae as of late. The difference between the two unit-types is coming close to being negligible.

 

If you are thinking about the switch based solely upon the receiving capabilities... I would say not to bother.

There are other, more important reasons to consider use of a dedicated unit over a phone, and vice-versa.

 

EDIT; context

Edited March 25, 2015 by Gitchee-Gummee

[+noncentric]

I started using a smartphone, then bought an Etrex 20 a few months later. I'm so glad that I got the Etrex. The main difference wasn't the accuracy, although there were a couple times when hiking that the GPSr seemed less jumpy than the phone. The biggest difference though was the ruggedness and feel of the devices. For reference, I used both an LG Optimus Pro and Galaxy S5 Active.

 

I'm not so concerned about dropping the Etrex or about laying it down on the ground or having it get wet.

As far as the screen size, if I'm just looking at an arrow, then an Etrex-sized arrow is plenty large. And holding or attaching an Etrex to my bag is just more comfortable for me than doing the same with a smartphone.

Also visibility and battery strength is better for me on the Etrex. I'd have to turn the screen brightness way up on the smartphone, which drains the battery even faster. I know some people carry external batteries or extra batteries for their smartphone, which is an option.

 

Ultimately, it's whatever works best for you. Plenty of cachers use just a smartphone, and plenty of cachers don't own a smartphone. Personally, I carry both. I use the Etrex if it's more than a park-and-grab cache, but I'll still have my smartphone and use that if I want to look at the cache page to read logs or view pictures. If I'm just doing a park-and-grab or urban cache, or if I'm doing a Wherigo, then I'll use just my smartphone.

 

There are a lot of topics in the forums debating smartphone vs GPSr. Below is a sampling of topics, if you feel like killing some time:

Here

Here

Here

Here

Here

Here

Here

Here

[+coachstahly]

I have a S5 I use for spur of the moment caching and it gets me to where I need to go just fine. My app of choice even provides a routing option (so does my GPSr with my 24K topo map). Otherwise, I use my dedicated GPS unit for longer trips. Every once in a while I'll pull out my S5 to read the cache page without all the html garbling up the GPS description. Both work fine but the fact that I have better battery life as well as the decreased fear, of dropping my GPS vs. dropping my phone, is worth the extra money, in my opinion.

[+J Grouchy]

I've only ever used a phone - first a Galaxy S3 and now an LG G3. The former got pretty buggy after an Android update to KitKat, but the latter has given me no problems at all and has been terrific.

 

But today I broke down and ordered an eTrex 20. Why? Because I'm planning some longer duration caching excursions this spring and summer (one next Thursday and a trip out west in June). The biggest drawback I've found when using my phone is battery life. Not just normal use battery life, but the severe hit it takes when the cellular signal is weak or nonexistent. Not just phone signal, but the 3G/4G data signal. A week and a half ago I was down at a state park in an area with very poor reception. In the two or three hours we were there, my phone battery went from roughly 87% down to about 7%. Granted, a lot of that was from me trying to access the geocaching maps and log a cache I found there.

 

I just don't want to run into that problem on my upcoming trips...I want to be able to enjoy the search without having to get nervous about the battery dying.

 

Why the eTrex? Well...I did briefly own an eXplorist 310, but I hated it and would never buy another Magellan GPSr because of it. I've heard many good things about the etrex line and I got a good deal on the 20. We shall see...!

[+BlackRose67]

I've only ever used a phone - first a Galaxy S3 and now an LG G3. The former got pretty buggy after an Android update to KitKat, but the latter has given me no problems at all and has been terrific.

That's good to know. I'm currently using an LG Optimus G and am planning on getting an LG G3 soon.

 

Not just phone signal, but the 3G/4G data signal. A week and a half ago I was down at a state park in an area with very poor reception. In the two or three hours we were there, my phone battery went from roughly 87% down to about 7%. Granted, a lot of that was from me trying to access the geocaching maps and log a cache I found there.

Depending on the app you use, you can load static OSM maps so you don't need to rely on the network for the map.

I also log with my phone via Field Notes once I get home. Saves battery.

 

If I'm in an area where there is little to no signal, I put the phone in Airplane Mode. GPS still works fine.

[+Kevjm101]

Thanks. Your all very great, and are a nice bunch of people. Alot of people on the internet these days seem to just fight in a forum, your all real nice. thanks.

 

I appreciate the info on the screens, and batter life (which I did not give much thought to before). I think I'll go with the etrex.

 

I appreciate the help.

 

-Kevin

[+JohnCNA]

..I want to be able to enjoy the search without having to get nervous about the battery dying.

 

Well, you'll love the eTrex, then. My eTrex 30 would run 24 hours straight with eneloop 2400 batteries installed. Or three 8-hour days, etc.

[+luvvinbird]

..I want to be able to enjoy the search without having to get nervous about the battery dying.

 

Well, you'll love the eTrex, then. My eTrex 30 would run 24 hours straight with eneloop 2400 batteries installed. Or three 8-hour days, etc.

I used my eTrex 30 (with Eneloop batteries, natch) while cruising for a week in the Caribbean during the last week of February. I had my receiver on every day then, am still using it now and I've yet to change the batteries.

[+VermontPi]

LOL I have the same phone and just got the Etrex 20 last week. So far I had some technical problems, mostly operator error on my behalf...but so far it's pretty nice to have both. My battery was dying a lot when using my phone and the signal wasn't as strong. I have yet to take the GPS out in the field until I download my GPX files from my Pocket Query, but when I do I will let you know how it works.

 

So far for just having Alkaline batt in for the last 2 days and turning it on and off, it's lasting with a full charge.

 

The other difference between caching with a phone and GPS is, a min of 3 satellites connects with the phone and sometimes that's all you get. With a GPS you have 10 or 13 sat that it communicates with thus making it more reliable and accurate. There is a total of 30 sat up in space, maybe more. You get a better reading off the GPS and it's less jumpy when finding caches.

 

Plus, you also have true North and magnetic North and whichever one you prefer, you can choose on the GPS where as with your phone....I don't know what the phone goes off of.

 

The only benefit I see for having the S5 with you is having real time information about caches. Like if you are a premium member and someone places a new cache out in the world while you're out caching with the GPS, the GPS does not update you like the phone would so you can be a FTF. Also, i just learned you can't select "found it" on the GPS and update your online finds. You have to wait until you hook your GPS up to the comp to update your online "found it" list. With the phone, you can select "found it" right out in the field. Plus, it's always good to have a cell with you when you are hiking for emergency situations, so I would definitely bring both!

 

Happy Caching!

Edited April 6, 2015 by VermontPi

[+Viajero Perdido]

a min of 3 satellites connects with the phone and sometimes that's all you get.

It certainly seems to depend on the phone. Right now, my Nexus 5 is getting 17 satellites while sitting on the desk beside me. (This phone seems every bit as accurate as my old Garmin, purely a subjective opinion of course.)

 

They sure don't make it easy to find out more about a phone's (well, this phone's) GPS capabilities. Like WAAS, not even a hint about whether it's used or not, in the screens or any marketing materials I could find. Or about the multi-constellation support if any. (A pleasant surpise once I got it and turned it on.) I wish phone makers would be more forthcoming with this kind of nitty-gritty; it matters to us.