[Az-Geocaching] Am I missing something - Magellen 200s

Mon Nov 13 11:59:48 MST 2006

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 at 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 at listserv.azgeocaching.com
> [mailto:az-geocaching-bounces at listserv.azgeocaching.com] On
> Behalf Of Cordell Harris
>  Sent: Monday, November 13, 2006 10:06 AM
>  To: listserv at 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 at hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>  >From: "Cordell Harris" <cordh5 at 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 at 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 at 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
>
>
>