...for a new GPS receiver. I'm looking seriously at the Garmin GPS Map 62s. does anyone have one of these? Any comments? :confused::confused:
Printable View
...for a new GPS receiver. I'm looking seriously at the Garmin GPS Map 62s. does anyone have one of these? Any comments? :confused::confused:
I've heard some people say they like them in the national chat. But why not have an Oregon just a few more bucks? I'm not sure how much I care for the touch screen (Though Lee would like the world to be touchscreen!), but the screen size is considerably more which would be a draw for me - 240 x 400 pixels as opposed to 160 x 240 pixels. The 62 does have more built in memory, but the Oregon has a data card slot.
We're going to have to buy news one in the future too, so we are looking, but right now is not the time.
Oregon 400t! We like ours!:)
My Oregon 400 coupled with some GSAK macros have made my cache loading and logging very easy. My new hides have been reported as very accurate coords. And I seem to be finding caches just fine.Quote:
Originally Posted by dubord207
How many caches can you put on the Oregon?
Sheesh! I'm getting old, and I like "the familiar". The GPSMap 62 is so much like the GPSMap 60csx I'm used to... :D:D
From what I've gathered, all Garmins labeled "geocaching friendly" can store 5000 caches. And you could always add more as POIs. I wish they were more clear in listing their capabilities.
Here is Garmin's page comparing the Oregon® 450 to the GPSMAP® 62.
You can also download the manuals to look at to help decide what features you may or may not like.
Both the Oregon and the 62 will hold 2,000 geocaches.Quote:
Originally Posted by brdad
I believe that is 2000 waypoints, which have a different place in memory than caches.Quote:
Originally Posted by WhereRWe?
I think you can also store caches on the card, someone can help explain if you need to load them onto the unit or not first....
Here is a section on this page of Garmin's web site:
I also noticed in a review that there is a 200 GPX file limit, which would only be a concern to those downloading caches one by one and loading them individually.Quote:
Go Paperless
Some of our more popular outdoor devices support paperless geocaching – allowing you to send locations directly to the unit without having to manually enter your coordinates. With paperless geocaching, you’ll have cache descriptions, ratings, and recent log info stored directly on your device – so there’s no need to take paper printouts along with you. All you need is a premium account1 at geocaching.com and a compatible handheld device. As an added benefit, you can store up to 5,000 caches and their descriptions, hints and recent attempts directly on your Garmin handheld – saving time and resources. It’s another great way to help you log more caches in less time!
As I said before, they could explain things more clearly!
Found this tidbit, not sure if it is correct or not. Taken from http://garminoregon.wikispaces.com/Geocaching#HowTo
Quote:
GC4.) How many geocaches can I load onto my Garmin Oregon?
The Oregon 300 and 400 support up to a maximum of 2000 geocaches (in addition to the 1000 waypoint limit). The Oregon 450 and 550 support up to 5000 geocaches. All Oregons support a maximum of 200 gpx files. If you exceed either the geocache limit or the file limit the Oregon will warn you. If you exceed either limit, caches will be omitted from your Geocache list and it is not predicable as to which caches will be dropped.
############################3
GC6.) Does the Garmin Oregon have a gpx file size limit?
Yes. If the total size of all gpx files exceeds 8MB-10MB the Oregon may fail to display some or all of the geocaches that these files contain. The exact limit has not been characterized yet. Typically, if you use PQs this limit will never become a factor because PQs only contain 5 logs per cache keeping the file sizes smaller. However, if you use GSAK and do not limit the number of logs to 5 you can end up with very large gpx files that will cause this problem.
Verify: Needs verification -- I've heard reports of people using much larger files on the x50.
Mainiac1957 has helped me with the techno learning curve for my Oregon but I am loading more than 4000 caches from GSAK. Love mine and happy I made the switch. Still asking for help on occasion and happy the guru (named above) is still willing to help.
A few fellow NY cachers have the 62st and have written their comments.
go to http://www.geocachingny.org/
then FORUMS , and TECH TALK, GPSMAP 62st
the oregon 450 and the 62s hold 5000 caches. The Oregon 400, 300 etc series hold 2000.
Not sure about the 62, but I've noticed that the GPSMap 60csx with the outside antenna seems to do better in the woods that our Oregon. The Oregon has a hard time updating in thick woods.
I like my 450, thought I'd want the 450t but I really don't think the topo map is all that important for the way we geocache. Neither one of the GPS's we use, my 450 or Pam's eTrex Venture like the thick woods. Pam loves hers and I love the paperless on mine....except it seems Pam has a knack for asking me questions that can only be answered on one screen and I'm usually not on that screen when she asks.
I will say that there will be a period of learning if you choose the Oregon. The 62 will do much of what the Oregon does minus the touch screen. Yes, as Dick pointed out the difference with the Oregon is in the series number. If it's a x00 then it hold up to 2000 geocaches, where a x50 it will hold up to 5000. When I went to Washington for Geowoodstock I only had to load my GPS once for the entire trip. That was all I wanted for Washington, Oregon, and British Columbia. That was a huge advantage. The only other item I question is whether the 62 does field notes. I use that feature on mine. It may not matter to you. If you come to the cache bashe and are still undecided check mine or someone else's there.
I am the same way there, in fact I find that you can download your own maps into the unit more appealing than having standard maps in it. Having detailed maps of places like the Bangor city forest loaded in would be great when you are in those areas so you can find the correct foot trail.Quote:
Originally Posted by JustKev
In fact, I bet having a database of custom maps of parks and trail systems in an article on this site would be a nice addition to the site and an asset to members who have GPSrs which can use them. It appears to be a fairly simple process to create the maps.
What macro to you use to get the caches you've found off the Oregon and into geocaching.com? I still have to manually retrieve the GC codes to log.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mainiac1957
FieldNotesImportandLogBeta.gsk is the one I use for logging. There are several steps involved but it works nicely.
The 62 series does do the field notes as well.
I've always been impressed with the reception on the 60csx - the only time we've lost reception is when we go through a tunnel - which is one reason I'm leaning towards the 62csx with the "quad-helix" antenna.
I have been considering upgrading from the GPSMap 60 to one of the Oregon's based on comments from other cachers as well reports here. The biggest draw for me is capacity of caches and the paperless feature, which I now use my BlackBerry for. However, I'm very happy with the 60 and would like to stay with it....hence now considering the 62. Then there's the slight worry in the back of my mind about newly-released products and the concern of "undiscovered" bugs.
I didn't get as far as your link when I stumbled across a link to this site, which has an excellent review of the GPSMap 62-series. :D:DQuote:
Originally Posted by Sabby
Here's another review from GPSInformation: GPSMap62/78