eTrex Vs Oregon?

[BikinOn]

My trusty 705 is giving me problems and will soon undergo surgery to hopefully restore it to health, however I always try to have a plan B in case I mess it up 

The majority of people I see on Audux use Garmin's eTrex 30, but I can't help noticing the Oregon has a larger and higher resolution screen. Obviously it's a bit bigger and heavier, but we're not talking crazy numbers here. The only downsides I see are the touch screen and slightly lower battery life; the cheapest one is a bit memory challenged, other than that what am I missing? Surely its not just the few pounds difference (hardly a big factor when amortised over the projected life of the unit) that makes it so popular?

https://buy.garmin.com/en-US/US/catalog/product/compareResult.ep?compareProduct=113532&compareProduct=63349&compareProduct=87774

Is there anyone out there using an Oregon with any thoughts on it? Does the eTrex 30 have hidden depths?

[Oscar's dad]

I have always used eTrex units, currently it's an E30.  The screen is fine in terms of size and resolution.  I like the fact that it runs on AA cells which obviously can be easily replaced with easy to carry spares.  Does the Oregon have an internal battery?

[mcshroom]

Touch screens and winter gloves do not mix very well, whereas I'm happy with the operation of my Etrex20 while wearing gloves.

I'm sure either would do a decent job though.

[Ham]

I use an Oregon, (450T) and I'm very happy with it indeed. I bought it as a multipurpose device: cycling, walking/hiking, skiing, driving and it does all of that well.

The most annoying feature (and that of many Garmin I think) is the time it takes to start up in a new location (can be 20 min to find itself). cycling, I find the size of the screen very useful, it is a very rare occasion that it gets its virtual knickers in a twist leaving the display NOT where you going (ie, with the turns at the bottom and the map the wrong way). The touch screen is great, as it works with gloves, although it isn't the most sensitive. Batteries are AA so spares are easy.

Clearly I haven't used an eTrex so can't compare, but my view is that the Oregon is top notch for a does-it-all device. If you do want to use it for driving (say in countries not covered in the Europe of standard car sat nav) don't expect it to be as good as the car dedicated devices, but it is entirely usable

ETA while McShroom may be right generally, the Oregon does work with normal style gloves, however thick.

[Kim]

The Oregon screen's, while bigger, is a bit mushier looking than that of the eTrex.

Physical size is either a positive or a negative, depending on exactly how you're planning to use it.

Touchscreen is, as ever, a personal preference thing.  I'm not a fan, but it's not like the joystick thing on the eTrex is all that great while you're rattling about on a bike.

There isn't really much in it in terms of functionality.

[fuaran]

Yes, they are very similar in terms of features, either would work well for cycling or walking etc. If you are using maps (especially OS maps or similar), then it is nice to have a bigger/higher res screen.
The internal memory doesn't really matter, its cheap to add a MicroSD card anyway.

Though there are a few differences, depends on which models you are comparing.
eg the Etrex 30 supports Glonass (whereas the Oregon 450 doesn't), so it may be a bit more accurate and quicker to get a position. Though probably won't make much difference most of the time.
Apparently the Oregon 600 is quite an improvement, with a better/brighter screen, faster processor, and improved software. It does have Glonass, plus adds a few extra features, eg the option of a rechargeable battery pack, and Bluetooth for connecting to the Basecamp Mobile app (currently iPhone/iPad only).

[Auntie Helen]

I am extremely happy with my Oregon (which is now almost four years old and has been used daily for 2+ hours every day). I would certainly buy another one.

Sometimes on group rides I find myself having to look at Wowbagger's Garmin (I think it's an eTrex but it might be a Vista) and I find the tiny screen very poor, plus the wobbly joystick thing. Much easier to press on the Oregon screen (mind you, it's nowhere near as nice a screen to use as the iPhone, for example). The lack of limitation in routepoints/trackpoints is also very useful although I'm not sure if the eTrex suffers from this limit.

I would definitely go with the Oregon, although be aware that in very bright sunlight the screen can be tricky to see. This hasn't actually caused me any issues in my vast usage of it. Oh, and it hasn't broken down or otherwise misbehaved in that time either.

Mine also finds its satellite fix with 5-10 seconds unless I've moved a significant distance (i.e. to somewhere in Germany) where it might take about a minute. I have no idea why Ham has such trouble with his.

[Ham]

It's a known "feature" on Garmins, It happens when it needs to start from scratch, the reason has been covered elsewhere here and has to do with the channels used or some such. It seems to happen when either (a) there is a big change (eg, Thailand, Georgia) or a substantial Latitude and Longitude change. Once it has "found itself" it's fine and online instantly or within seconds.

The 600 does look attractive.... anyone want to make me an offer on my 450?

[Kim]

It's a known "feature" on Garmins, It happens when it needs to start from scratch, the reason has been covered elsewhere here and has to do with the channels used or some such. It seems to happen when either (a) there is a big change (eg, Thailand, Georgia) or a substantial Latitude and Longitude change. Once it has "found itself" it's fine and online instantly or within seconds.

It's a known feature of *all* GPS receivers.  If it knows nothing (no data in memory, been off for two weeks or more), it has to wait for the details of orbital positions to be transmitted in full.  Then it can start working out where it is from scratch.

If it knows where the satellites are, but not where itself is, it can start to work out where it is from scratch immediately.

If it's had a fix within the last couple of hours *and* hasn't moved hundreds of kilometres, it can pick up from where it left off and re-acquire a fix in seconds.

Add fudge factor as required for old chipsets, poor signal or limited view of the sky.

(AGPS on smartphones uses the cellular network to sidestep straight to the warm or hot start phase.  Pretty clever.)

[Ham]

Ah yes, it was greenbank who pointed me to this http://www.gpsinformation.net/main/gpslock.htm on the thread where I was whinging about the first point being wrong.

And this is what I was referring to

The Garmin receiver seems to have two channels, and it multiplexes them amongst up to satellites it is searching for. Other receivers have more physical channels, so the can do more parallel searches.

and

Also in the completly stupid, cold-start mode the Garmin receivers seem to assume that the position is invalid as well as the almanac data, so it begins searching for PRN1, PRN2 .... all the way up to PRN32 trying to find the first 3 usable satellites. This wide search can take 20 minutes
or more.

[Kim]

Ah yes, it was greenbank who pointed me to this http://www.gpsinformation.net/main/gpslock.htm on the thread where I was whinging about the first point being wrong.

And this is what I was referring to

The Garmin receiver seems to have two channels, and it multiplexes them amongst up to satellites it is searching for. Other receivers have more physical channels, so the can do more parallel searches.

and

Also in the completly stupid, cold-start mode the Garmin receivers seem to assume that the position is invalid as well as the almanac data, so it begins searching for PRN1, PRN2 .... all the way up to PRN32 trying to find the first 3 usable satellites. This wide search can take 20 minutes
or more.

Good article!

Though note it's referring to the GPS-38/40/45, which are pretty old devices.  I wouldn't assume that it applies to more modern chipsets, like the one in the yellow eTrex (which was heavily marketed as having a 12-channel receiver)

[Ningishzidda]

I sold my Garmin,  cus the screen was a bit small.

I still have another item for sale...

[Aushiker]

Touch screens and winter gloves do not mix very well, whereas I'm happy with the operation of my Etrex20 while wearing gloves.

Based on my experience with a Garmin Edge 800, 810, a Oregon 600 and various Android phones it really depends on the touch screen technology. The Edge units work fine with full fingered gloves whereas the Oregon 600 hasn't for me (same with the phones). I really don't understand why Garmin didn't use the same technology in the Edge units in the Oregon series to be honest.

My recent experiences with my Garmin Oregon 600 are documented here and whilst reinstalling/updating the firmware has resolved a lot of the issues I had, for my bicycle riding and touring duties I have found the Edge units more than adequate.

Andrew

[Ningishzidda]

One way round the touchscreen/glove problem is to use a stylus.

Whether the stylus is poked into a holder while riding, or attached to the index finger of one's glove.

I use thinsulate wooly gloves and the tips of the fingers are converted into styli by the application of clear adhesive and left to harden.

[Auntie Helen]

I seem to have no problems with my Oregon 300 and my thick gloves.

[Ham]

....or my 450 and skiing gloves