GPS unit recommendations?

The message <ojl6i3tj1l8gmisepbvgi08oisvaa4vtlm@>
from Phil Cook <u-r-walk@p-t-cook.freeserve.co.uk> contains these words:

> -
> Phil Cook, last hill: Geal Charn above Glen Markie

You should have dropped in for a dram afterwards!

Richard
NN639943

Richard Spencer wrote:

>The message <ojl6i3tj1l8gmisepbvgi08oisvaa4vtlm@>
>from Phil Cook <u-r-walk@p-t-cook.freeserve.co.uk> contains these words:
>
>> -
>> Phil Cook, last hill: Geal Charn above Glen Markie
>
>You should have dropped in for a dram afterwards!
>
>Richard
>NN639943

Humph! If I'd known, I might have. I was staying at the Strathspey
Hostel in Newtonmore for a couple of nights. The Glen Hotel served my
alcohol needs, though the range of ales was little uninspiring, I'd
been spoilt by the Clachaig. :-\

--
Phil Cook, last hill: Geal Charn above Glen Markie

"Paul Saunders" <pvs1@wildwales.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:

>Mike Lane wrote:
>
>> I don't understand. What happens to old GPS units to render them
>> useless?
>
>Nothing, they're not useless at all.
>
>> Is it like mobile phones, where apparently one can't be seen using
>> last year's model ;-)
>
>No, it's not that. There are newer improved features. I upgraded from the
>GPS12 to the 60CS and some of the improvements are as follows:
>
>Mapping unit rather than non-mapping (far more useful)
>10x trackpoint capacity (I often ran out with the GPS12)
>Many more waypoint types (better for differentiating features)
>Colour (very useful, not just pretty)
>Altimeter (better than GPS altitude)
>EGNOS (better accuracy)
>Improved power consumption.
>
>The last point makes a very big difference. The GPS12 took 4 AA batteries
>and a set of rechargeables would typically last 8 hours. For a weekend away
>I'd usually carry 12-16 batteries, and that's quite a bit of weight! The
>60CS only uses 2 AA batteries and are supposed to last 32 hours IIRC (I
>haven't actually timed them), so I can last a whole weekend on just 2,
>although I always carry at least 2 spares. This makes a big difference to
>the overall weight.
>
>As for EGNOS, that's one of the the biggest differences between modern units
>and older ones. It can give much better accuracy, but in practice, that's
>really only useful for micronavigation. Aside from being able to mark
>waypoints with slightly better accuracy, I can't honestly say that it makes
>much difference in actual use.
>
>Many of the extra features are important to me because I get a lot of use
>out of them (like the many different coloured waypoint icons and the large
>number of trackpoints) but a lot of people don't use these things and prefer
>a minimalist philosophy of carry a small basic unit that just gives them a
>grid ref.
>
>For that purpose, the GPS12 is just as useful as any modern unit. However,
>you can now get much smaller and lighter units to perform the same
>functions, so why carry a brick and a dozen batteries when you can get a
>tiny unit that slips into a pocket and runs off a couple of AAAs?
>
>But for a single day walk, the GPS12 is just as useful as it ever was. If I
>didn't have a 60CS now I'd still be happy to use it.
>
Paul: I don't know if you saw my comments about the poor performance
of my GPS 12 in Prague? That's the key motivator now for me to
upgrade, as I'd assumed that the issue was sensitivity. You don't
mention that above?

--
Terry, East Grinstead, UK

"Paul Saunders" <pvs1@wildwales.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:

>Terry Pinnell wrote:
>
>> Paul: I don't know if you saw my comments about the poor performance
>> of my GPS 12 in Prague? That's the key motivator now for me to
>> upgrade, as I'd assumed that the issue was sensitivity. You don't
>> mention that above?
>
>Yes I saw that. I assume that the fact you were in a city was the cause of
>your problems, due to all those buildings blocking the signals. EGNOS
>probably wouldn't help either since the geo-stationary satellites are all
>above the equator, so they're quite low in the sky from northerly latitudes
>and would usually be blocked by buildings in a city.
>
>As for reception, I know that the GPS12 had better reception than the later
>eTrex models. A lot of people complained about the eTrexes. The 60CS has a
>much better antenna than the eTrexes, but I can't honestly say I've noticed
>any difference between it and the GPS12.
>
>Ystradfellte Falls has always been the big problem area for me and I'd hoped
>the 60CS would be better there, but I still frequently lose the signal so
>I'd guess that the antenna is on a par with the GPS12, which I've always
>been happy with (I rarely lose reception anywhere else).
>
>I did see a track around Ystradfellte recorded with a Magellan Sportrak
>IIRC, and that didn't lose lock at all, which I was quite impressed with.
>
>The latest 60 and 76 models have a much more sensitive antenna though, which
>I'm sure others can advise you about, but I'm perfectly happy with my 60CS
>(and my old GPS12) 95% of the time.
>
>Paul

Thanks, appreciate that follow-up.

--
Terry, East Grinstead, UK

The message <1v79i35jrtckhumjlqgos552ek87n3b5sn@>
from Terry Pinnell <terrypinDELETE@THESEdial.pipex.com> contains these words:


> (Yes, it's the SMC maps I'm intending to add.)

If it is that, just that, have you tried GPSU? I carefully avoid
touching registry, myself. Installing the SMC contours, peaks, coasts
and so forth, with GPSU is a doddle. (And I have Win xp x64, with the C:
partition for DOS, and Windoze in D: just to be difficult!)

Richard

Paul Saunders wrote:
> No, it's not that. There are newer improved features. I upgraded from the
> GPS12 to the 60CS and some of the improvements are as follows:
>
> Mapping unit rather than non-mapping (far more useful)
> 10x trackpoint capacity (I often ran out with the GPS12)
> Many more waypoint types (better for differentiating features)
> Colour (very useful, not just pretty)
> Altimeter (better than GPS altitude)
> EGNOS (better accuracy)
> Improved power consumption.

I agree with your points except "Altimeter (better than GPS altitude)".
I have considerable experience with barometric altitude having had
a) ~2000 hours flying light aircraft, much of it IFR.
b) had a surplus aircraft quality altimeter mounted in my car for some
years back in the pre-GPS days.

I usually get estimated error on my 76Cx of 2 to 5m and would expect
double this for elevation values. The calibrations on the aircraft
altimeters I have used were at 20 foot (6m) intervals. This provided
more than sufficient precision since that order of accuracy would only
be available near the ground, near the airport and for recent tower
supplied altimeter settings.

I had an occasion to stop at a forestry office in the mountains about an
hour or so's drive east of Seattle having set the altimeter in my car at
a Seattle airport. It was more than 100 feet (30m) out. And, yes, I've
heard but don't agree with the arguments in favour of the built in 2D
barometric altimeter.

Now, when we can get GPS combined with inertial nav in a handheld, ...

Ted

Terry Pinnell wrote:
> Paul: I don't know if you saw my comments about the poor performance
> of my GPS 12 in Prague? That's the key motivator now for me to
> upgrade, as I'd assumed that the issue was sensitivity. You don't
> mention that above?

There is a _big_ improvement in sensitivity between my GPS-V and my 76Cx.

Also I would add to Paul's list that the Cx and CSx units use the
microSD car to which you can save your tracklogs. Not only is the
number of essentially unlimited, the tracklogs have date and time saved.

Ted

Paul Saunders wrote:
> Ystradfellte Falls has always been the big problem area for me and I'd hoped
> the 60CS would be better there, but I still frequently lose the signal so
> I'd guess that the antenna is on a par with the GPS12, which I've always
> been happy with (I rarely lose reception anywhere else).

Have you ever tried with an external antenna (Garmin GA 25MCX) in your
hat or on the roof of your car? While the 76Cx is much more sensitive
than my GPS-V, I still occasionally loose lock in the mountain valleys
of British Columbia, Canada.

Ted

The message <57OdnV2xr6xx6LnaRVnyvAA@pipex.net>
from "Paul Saunders" <pvs1@wildwales.fsnet.co.uk> contains these words:

> I don't know about the screen, but the one on my 60CS works fine in
> sunlight.

> There is one big difference between the two units, the 76 is MUCH bigger,
> yet it has the same size screen. I was surprised when I first saw the 76 in
> real life, much bigger and bulkier than I'd like, but not heavy. You might
> want to check the actual dimensions more closely.

Buoyancy. The price you pay for having a gps that floats.

--
Roger Chapman
Nearest Marilyn still to be visited - Great Orme.
89 miles as the crow flies,
considerably more as the walker drives.

Bitstring <fg2pv6$po1$1$8300dec7@news.>, from the wonderful
person Nigel Cliffe <me@> said
<snip good stuff>
>The above all said, if you are not planning to purchase a Garmin map product
>to load at the same time as the SMC data, then the SendMap utility mentioned
>on the SMC pages will transfer maps to the Garmin device, and you avoid all
>the registry stuff completely.

Mapsource does have the advantage of letting you display/select what you
are loading, and you can store a list (well several lists) or mapsets to
load. However, as you say, the main thing going for it is 'mix and
match' across many map products.

The whole registry thing is only an issue because of the incredibly user
hostile way Mapsource dies if anything is in the wrong place, or spelled
wrong (with a suggestion you might like to re-install. Yeah, right!). A
really robust piece of C++ software kludging.

--
GSV Three Minds in a Can
10,002 Km walked. 1,952 Km PROWs surveyed. 35.5% complete.