Anyone got a Montana or Monterra?

[Ham]

My Oregon 450T is now venerable in terms of tech - about 5ish+ years old. I do like it, I've used it handheld, for bike and for driving. But, finding myself needing another bike mount I am asking myself, do I need to upgrade? If so, what to?

The Oregon 650 will fit all the brackets I have, and is the smallest of the lot, the other two are a bit more bloaty size-wise and don't look as robust. Anyone want to help me to decide?

(If anyone fancies my Oregon 540T with 2 bike brackets feel free to make an offer)

[PloddinPedro]

I have used a Montana 650 for several years for cycling (Audaxing mainly) and as a hybrid* car satnav. What specifically are you needing to know about them?  (* In the sense that it gives me the option of "navigating" like a conventional satnav a Route or Track of my own devising and which I have downloaded from Basecamp as a .gpx file.)

[Ham]

What am I needing to know? The killer reason to upgrade

I really like my Oregon, I love thinking of the places I've been with it, where it has taken me, the odd turns, the fun geotagging photos.

But it is six years old. No matter that the case still says "Oregon" I suspect the latest versions are going to be shiny,  not to mention the alternatives.

So, what do I perceive as the key points? The biggest two niggles with the Oregon are: first, the speed to locate initially which can take 20 minutes sometimes (eg, moving continents or just when it is having an off day) and the screen, which can be difficult to see. Any new shiny will likely fix that. The second is the screen which can be difficult to see. I suspect the new Oregon won't be that different, but the Monterra and Monterra are both daylight readable (allegedly)

Features I really like about the Oregon include the small size (Monterra/Montana are bloated) and the ruggedness (again, from what I can see, the Mont/ara don't come anywhere close being basically mobile phones.

And, of course, it still works perfectly casting sense doubt over spending £300 or more for a gadget that isn't necessary.

[PloddinPedro]

It sounds to me, at the risk of being blunt, that you've basically answered your own questions! You like the Oregon, it still works and it appears to do everything you want. You're right in saying the Montana is a brick - I use it on the bike only when I have aerobars fitted and I can use a home built mounting arrangement using a RAM mount to nestle the Montana down between the aerobars. The visibility issue I can't comment on, since I've not used an Oregon, but I can say that the Montana isn't quite as readable as my Map62, which is not a touchscreen and in my opinion, is the better for it. I don't know if the Monterra has made any meaningful progress in this regard.

The major benefit for me is the satnav option with my own Tracks/Routes, which very few conventional satnavs do (or at least, used to do when I bought the Montana) and the extra screen size, which is handy for me since I use it also on a recumbent, when it's further from my eyes and which presents a whole fresh set of problems!

The speed to relocate after having moved continents can't surely be a problem you encounter all that often? I've taken a variety of Garmins on holiday in Europe and they've all taken a few minutes or more to get a fix. I'm aware of this and allow time for it.

I'm using a variety of Garmins, accumulated over time, and if you forced me to get rid of all of them bar one, it would be the Map62 I'd keep.

[Ham]

Interesting, thanks, I think I can cut out the Montxxxx as a result.

The speed to relocate after having moved continents can't surely be a problem you encounter all that often? I've taken a variety of Garmins on holiday in Europe and they've all taken a few minutes or more to get a fix. I'm aware of this and allow time for it.

You might have thought so, you'd be wrong. In the case of this device, going from London to Yorkshire can be a changed continent. And yes, when I think about it, I just put it outside somewhere for half an hour and it sorts itself out.

As I said, it's that and the screen that would make me upgrade, and almost certainly to the 650 if I was going to. Given that people pay about £100 for an operational 450 (Look at this ffs) then it would only be £160 to upgrade, with the added bonus of extra battery life (not a real issue for me though).

[PloddinPedro]

Ah well, Yorkshire, yes, I see what you mean - that is a different world! (In a nice way, of course  )

[Auntie Helen]

Why not upgrade to the new Oregon? Much better screen, quick satellite fix, more sensible menus. The only downside is battery life - I always carry spares.

[Ham]

Battery life is quoted (hah!) at 18 hours on rechargeable compared to the 12 (?) quoted and achievable on my current one, if I remember correctly. Is the new Oregon worse than the old? What batteries do you use?

[Auntie Helen]

I use Eneloop rechargeables and I suppose I get maybe 12 hours if the backlight is off. I used to get much more than that with the old Oregon.

I bought the 650 which has a special battery but it's only 2000maHs so less than my Eneloops so I don't use it. Also the camera on the Oregon (phone camera is better). Not worth the extra cost in my experience.

[Ham]

Interesting, the camera certainly isn't a selling point these days, the reason I'd get the 650t is for the topo maps, although this is available I don't know how it will compare with Garmin. The elevation plot ahead is enough to make me take the plunge, but that must need topo to do it. The 600 only has 300Mb of memory (without using a card) which isn't enough to put UK map on - just seems distinctly ungenerous. The 650 has 4Gb and may indicate it is a newer model?

What do you think about the robustness of the 650 compared to the 450 (I think you used to have one of those if I remember rightly?). The 6xx seem to have an expanse of un-recessed glass.

[Auntie Helen]

I used to have a 300. I am very happy with the robustness. I don't have a screen protector but have no real fears for it and it's not yet got scratched despite me having it for nearly two years.

The quality of the screen is light years better. You can view it in strong sunlight.

[Ham]

The quality of the screen is light years better. You can view it in strong sunlight.

OK, I'm sold.

Now, question is, 600T or 650 for around £200, or 650T for £265? Think it has to be 650 for the memory, so to T or not to T, that is the question?

I think, not, as I fancy the 1:24:000 rather than 1:100,000

[tiermat]

Whatever you get, remember to load the POIs for hotels in Spain! That feature was really handy the last time in Girona!

[Ham]

Note to self: you conveniently forget Handtec list prices without VAT every time, don't you?

After several attempts to discuss the different versions they were showing on the website (1 x normal, 2 x refurbished - NOH and open box) I ended up ordering the NOH. which it turns out is a baaad idea. That is a factory refurbished unit in a plain box, which was missing quite a few bits. By contrast the open box is their own returned item. Anyhow, the £20-ish difference didn't strike me as good value, but it has worked out in the end. They're taking the NOH version back and selling me the brand noo for pretty much the same, with Saturday delivery. Well done Handtec!