I have to say the Garmin 60CSX is the most accurate unit I've seen
under all conditions and I have a Magellan meridian and a explorist
210. With that new Cirf chip it seems to get you to ground zero
quicker . The explorist 210 has the most bang for the buck,You really
don't need a PDA because it displays type of container,full
name,terrain,difficulty,date last found and the full hint.
On 11/13/06, Brian Casteel <
bcasteel@uccinc.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> I don't recall having problems like that in most cases. In fact, often
> times while sitting on my butt writing my cache log, I'll look over to the
> GPS and watch it flirt with 0' on a regular basis. If it happens to get no
> closer than 5' on a cache, I'd consider that quite excellent overall.
> Magellan has advantages over Garmin and likewise Garmin over Magellan. The
> most obvious between the 2 is the abundance of mapping software options
> Garmin has available to the very limited Magellan options. Of course, with
> the newer gen Garmin units, satellite acquisition is much better with the
> new SeRF chip.
>
>
>
> Brian
>
> Team A.I.
>
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
>
>
> From: az-geocaching-bounces@listserv.azgeocaching.com
> [mailto:az-geocaching-bounces@listserv.azgeocaching.com] On
> Behalf Of Cordell Harris
> Sent: Monday, November 13, 2006 10:06 AM
> To: listserv@azgeocaching.com
> Subject: Re: [Az-Geocaching] Am I missing something - Magellen 200s
>
>
>
>
> 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
>
>
>
> DISCLAIMER: This message is confidential, intended only for the named
> recipient(s) and may contain information that is privileged or exempt from
> disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient(s),
> you are notified that the dissemination, distribution or copying of this
> message is strictly prohibited. If you receive this message in error, or are
> not the named recipient(s), please notify the sender at either the e-mail
> address or by calling the telephone number associated with this
> transmission. Please delete this e-mail from your computer (or discard this
> fax). Thank You.
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>
>
____________________________________________________________
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
(text/plain)