Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'GPS 101 - Which GPS For Me' started by AFCFORME, Jan 16, 2012.
Any real reason to spend the extra money on getting the 62s? Sorry, bit of a n00b here.
62 is very accurate.
I never owned a 60csx, but I did replace my Delorme PN-40 with a 62s and couldn't be happier. I've had great luck using PowerEx recharageable batteries in it. But if you plan to hard wire it to the bikes power, go with the 78s.
Here's a couple of comparisons:
To sum it up, 62/78 hold 200 tracks of 2,000 points each vs 20 tracks of 500 ponts each for the 60/76. The 62 does not have 12V power input (deal breaker), the 60/76 & 78 all do.
If track storage is one of your needs, then the 78 at twice the $150 price for a 76Cx is what you need.
The garmin 62/78 will hold 10,000 trackpoints per track. That alone is worth the extra money in my opinion, 500 points doesn't give you enough resolution for longer trails.
Thanks a lot guys!
Yes, it does, but it's though the mini USB connection.
How long? For Dual Sport rides, I use one track per gas stop about 100-130 Mi. That is a total of 2,000-2,600 miles. I can always get to a computer before I finish that many miles.
Sorry but it does not, that is a 5V input not 12V input.
it has a external power adepter non the less.
the real issue is it's a less robust usb vrs a round 4 pin not the voltage.
yes for massive rides like the tat and such i can see the need, but otherwise if the price is right on a 60csx the 20 track/500 points is completely usable.
That's it in a nutshell.
Got a hell of a deal on a slightly used 62s on craigslist so i went with that.
I'm not even thinking massive rides. I'm thinking I want to head out to my local trails where there are about 1,000 km's of mostly tight single track and ATV trails. I want to be able to load up those tracks and then ride what I feel like that paticular day. Which is what I've done with 2 tracks, I found I needed 20,000 tracks to give me a decent resolution so I can find my way thru my trails. My friend has and Etrex with the 20 tracks at 500 points each limit. He can only view a fraction of the trails that we're going on. Either that or reduce the resolution so that it's completely useless.
If I was to do a specific route I wouldn't need so many track points.
Something doesn't sound right here. I generally find that .05 mile resolution is more than good enough for navigating trails. Thus a 500 point track would cover 25 miles and 20 tracks would cover 500 miles or close to 1000 km. You could get full coverage by going to .1 mile between points.
If this doesn't work then your trails network must be dense beyond anything I am used to.
The 62 does not come with any "power adapter". You can use any common device charger with a usb connector to power a 62. But then you are powering your $300 GPS with some $3 POS power supply that is probably not water proof and not very reliabile. There have been reports of people getting their external power supply wet and it shorted the 12V input to the output. This puts 12V into the 3V input of the GPS turing it into a piece of $300 toast!
I did the math on one 10,000 point track I have and the resolution is .07 km's per point. Close to what you mention. There's no point in arguing what resolution is best, that can very greatly with the terrain.
But given the choice I wouldn't want a GPS that's limited to 500 points per track. Heck if there was a version of the garmin 62 that let you do more points per track I'd buy it if it wasn't too much more. I don't see why GPS manufacturers impose these track point limits. Probably hardware limited to hit price points. I'd prefer to only have to turn one track on and off instead of 20. I got the GPS as an aid to help me, not to be a hassle.
Still limited to 10,000 total track points.
60 series: 20 X 500 max per segment (total 10,000), 1,000 waypoints, 50 routes
62 series: up to 200 segments, not sure if can exceed 500 per segment now without truncating - haven't tried it (still up to 10,000 total), 2,000 waypoints, 200 routes
Disappointing that there is still a 10,000 trackpoint ceiling, especially with the ability to have 200 (versus 20) segments.
I believe the 62 holds 200 tracks of 2,000 points each. Which there is no "Saving" required, just give an old Adtive Log a name and download it.
Recording relies on available memory and numerous individual track logs could be saved automatically until a memory card is full just as is the case with the 60 series.
Uploading a usable file is where the limitations of segments and points manifest themselves. If I try to load more than 10,000 track points total or more than 200 track segments total I will have exceeded the upload capacity of the unit and the the file will get truncated leaving out the excessive points or segments or both.
Better give Garmin a call and have them change the specs they publish for their products. 200 X 2,000 = 400,000 (40 times what they say their 10,000 track point ceiling is).
Of course I could be wrong about all of this as I am relying on their published product information and not direct personal experience with the unit.
(I really would like to know if they still truncate at 500 points per segment though.)
Maps & Memory:
Preloaded maps: yes (topographic)
Ability to add maps: yes
Built-in memory: 500 MB
Accepts data cards: microSD™ card (not included)
Track log: 10,000 points, 200 saved tracks
The DeLorme PN-60 has this track spec -
Holds up to 10 tracks (20,000 points per track), 1,500 user-defined waypoints, and 100 routes.
This is one of the reasons is was disappointing when Garmin came out with a new and expensive unit (without a good power plug arrangement) that could handle 200 separate tracks but that did not expand the 10,000 track point ceiling.
The Delorme suffers from a 10 track upload constraint but has plenty of track points. The Garmin has plenty of track segment upload capacity, but lacks the track point ceiling to make it worth while.