OK Scott. Did I fail to mention that we have had the opportunity to compare the performance of (7) seven Magellan and Garmins against each other while doing something like 500 plus caches all over the US. In my original missive a forgot about the emap unit. The units we used are the Garmin Emap, 76CS, Etrex Legend, Etrex Legend Vista Cx. The 3 Magellans were all Sportrack Pros. We seem to keep dropping them! Maybe I should also note that none of the units failed operationally. Of all the Garmins the Etrex Legend is the best,
e.g. sensititivy and accuracy. All the others have/had serious errors of 7 to 10 ft on the high resolution scale. These errors are consistent with caches that were placed by careful knowledgeable cachers. We have also had opportunity to compare waypoints established scientifically by standards. The 3 Magellan Sportrack Pros were all perfect replicas and were dead on. I am not hostile toward Garmin, but cannot ignore results. Both mapsource and mapsend topos (I have both) will allow exchange of waypoints but not maps. What I would like to be able to do is use Delorme topo maps (superior) in either or both brands of receivers with Garmin waypoint symbols. My backhand at Garmin is simply because they are the industry leaders in terms of sales and promotions and for now get to set the trend. Magellan Sportrack Pros are a great deal and very adequate for geocaching. I repeat my offer to trade the etrex legend vista Cx for a eXplorist 500. There is nothing wrong with the vista Cx except the offset mentioned above.
On 11/13/06, Roping The Wind <arizcowboy@hotmail.com> wrote:
>From: "Cordell Harris" <cordh5@gmail.com>
>Magellan has better, more user friendly receivers that are more sensitive
>and accurate. If >unconvinced, try caching with the owner of a Magellan
>Sportrack Pro. Presently, we own two >Garmins a etrex legend and an etrex
>legend vista cx.
The etrex line uses a patch antenna, which IMHO, is crap. Upgrade to the new
60CSX and you will probably never see anything more accurate. I do not
beleive that you can compare two GPS units for accuracy on a single geocache
or any geocache for that matter. The cache owner's coordinates could be off
for one. Also, both your GPS units will give slightly different readings on
where the cache is supposed to be. To find true accuracy, take a waypoint
and mark it with your GPS. Of course, with any GPS, you have to leave it
there for a few minutes for a most accurate reading (too many inexperienced
cachers hide a cache, hit mark on their GPS and leave and dont allow the GPS
to average location). Now, walk away a few hundred feet or more and then
come back to ground zero and see where your GPS takes you. Do this with two
units that you want to compare and see which one is most accurate.
Of course, as Loran said, all GPS's these days are decently accurate. They
will all take you to a waypoint and get you within 30 feet or less. Do the
example above once and you will find that both GPS's did their job well
enough. If you want to find truly which unit is better, with there still
being slight errors in GPS's, you will still need to do the example above
several times to average your results out to truly see which unit is better.
Seems nit picky. Well it is... as I just said, all GPS's are accurate
enough. Still, if you want a GPS for just geocaching or marking waypoints,
then a patch antenna Etrex or a Magellan GPS Blazer 12 (now that is ancient!
and I have one too) is all you need. If you want to mark a little hole in
the ground that an ant just went in to and then come back a week later to
find it... then you need to spend the bigger dollars for a unit with a 12
channel SiRFstar III high-sensitivity (WAAS-enabled) chip and built-in quad
helix antenna, with external antenna connection (like the Garmin 60csX).
Either units will get you to a geocache or any point for that matter. But
the latter technology will, on average, get you to a specific point more
consistantly.
>Garmins are overpriced/overrated and as industry leaders don't like the
>strangle hold they maintain >on proprietary mapping software. We badly
>need mapping software that will function universally in >handhelds.
Correct me if I am wrong, but doesnt Magellan also use proprietary mapping
software? (Mapsend). I could be wrong on this, but I beleive both Magellan
and Garmin have their own specific mapping software that must be used for
mapping. I think both brands will accept some other mapping software, but
only for uploading and transfering of waypoints, tracks, etc and not maps.
If you want maps in your unit, you have to use their own mapping software
(Mapsend or Mapsource).
Scott
Team Ropingthewind
_________________________________________________________________
Try the next generation of search with Windows Live Search today!
http://imagine-windowslive.com/minisites/searchlaunch/?locale=en-us&source=hmtagline
____________________________________________________________
Az-Geocaching mailing list
listserv@azgeocaching.com
To edit your setting, subscribe or unsubscribe visit:
http://listserv.azgeocaching.com/mailman/listinfo/az-geocaching
Arizona's Geocaching Resource
http://www.azgeocaching.com