Since the pros and cons of phones versus dedicated GPS devices has been discussed of late I thought I'd compare my trusty Garmin 60CSX against my Galaxy 7 phone on Eagle creek Yesterday. While both had problems I was surprised how much better the Galaxy did over the Garmin. Galaxy recorded the same distance in and out to within a tenth of a mile while the Garmin was all over the place!
Blue=Garmin, Red=Galaxy
Garmin 60CSX versus Galaxy 7
- retired jerry
- Posts: 14398
- Joined: May 28th, 2008, 10:03 pm
Re: Garmin 60CSX versus Galaxy 7
thanks
that does it, I'm getting a Galaxy 7
at least I've been saying I'm going to do that for years. Plus the smart phone is a camera, phone, MP3 player, bigger screen,...
that does it, I'm getting a Galaxy 7
at least I've been saying I'm going to do that for years. Plus the smart phone is a camera, phone, MP3 player, bigger screen,...
- adamschneider
- Posts: 3711
- Joined: May 28th, 2008, 10:02 pm
- Location: SE Portland
- Contact:
Re: Garmin 60CSX versus Galaxy 7
I'm impressed. All three of the smartphones I've owned (two from LG, one from Samsung) have been crap in the GPS department.
Re: Garmin 60CSX versus Galaxy 7
My GS7 kicksass on my old Oregon 450 horizontally, but I've only found one app (AlpineQuest) that can dampen the wild vertical swings. It's convinced me to get a newer dedicated unit, probably either the 64s or Oregon 700. GLONASS rocks! And when they add Galileo support... oh boy!
Karl
Back on the trail, again...
Back on the trail, again...
Re: Garmin 60CSX versus Galaxy 7
It would be interesting to see this repeated with the Galaxy vs a 64s. I think even the 62 is much more accurate than the 60csx, and I believe (per some testing Pablo did a couple years ago) that the 64 is even better than the 62.
Still impressive results from a phone though. How was the battery drain while you were taking the track? That's my biggest concern with using a phone as a main GPS unit.
Still impressive results from a phone though. How was the battery drain while you were taking the track? That's my biggest concern with using a phone as a main GPS unit.
#pnw #bestlife #bitingflies #favoriteyellowcap #neverdispleased
Re: Garmin 60CSX versus Galaxy 7
Pretty sure the "real difference" is GLONASS support. More satellites, more luck keeping the signal in canyons. I don't prefer tracking with my phone because of the battery issue. On a 20-miler, taking a couple 360°s along the way and using a few other random apps, I need to recharge while hiking.Bosterson wrote:It would be interesting to see this repeated with the Galaxy vs a 64s. I think even the 62 is much more accurate than the 60csx, and I believe (per some testing Pablo did a couple years ago) that the 64 is even better than the 62.
Still impressive results from a phone though. How was the battery drain while you were taking the track? That's my biggest concern with using a phone as a main GPS unit.
Karl
Back on the trail, again...
Back on the trail, again...
- RobFromRedland
- Posts: 1094
- Joined: May 28th, 2008, 10:03 pm
Re: Garmin 60CSX versus Galaxy 7
Very interesting - thanks for posting this. I will be getting a Galaxy S8 on Friday, so it will be interesting to see if it does as well or better than the S7.
I don't really care too much about the vertical element, so that has never really been a huge deal for me. Karl, have you ever used a program called TopoFusion? It has a "climbing analysis" option which kind of looks like what you might want. Here is a screenshot of the analysis of a track I had: So per the tool, it shows the raw GPS track showed 2242 feet of elevation gain and the "filtered" version showed only 1988 feet. At least that is how I read it.
Not sure if that is the kind of think you are looking for, but it might be something to check out. TopoFusion isn't cheap to register, but it does have a free version that puts "holes" in maps as an incentive to register. I originally bought it many years ago to add GPS coordinates to photos - it will also produce one of those maps with clickable points to show the photo on the page (kind of like google earth does).
I don't really care too much about the vertical element, so that has never really been a huge deal for me. Karl, have you ever used a program called TopoFusion? It has a "climbing analysis" option which kind of looks like what you might want. Here is a screenshot of the analysis of a track I had: So per the tool, it shows the raw GPS track showed 2242 feet of elevation gain and the "filtered" version showed only 1988 feet. At least that is how I read it.
Not sure if that is the kind of think you are looking for, but it might be something to check out. TopoFusion isn't cheap to register, but it does have a free version that puts "holes" in maps as an incentive to register. I originally bought it many years ago to add GPS coordinates to photos - it will also produce one of those maps with clickable points to show the photo on the page (kind of like google earth does).
Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well-preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming: WOW! What a ride! - Hunter S. Thompson
Re: Garmin 60CSX versus Galaxy 7
As was already mentioned above, I believe the main difference is that the S7 supports the GLONASS network, and is essentially working off twice as many satellites as a 60CSX
Re: Garmin 60CSX versus Galaxy 7
Agreed Nat, would really like to see this comparison with a 64. Re battery life I didn't do anything else with the phone but in Airplane mode it used about 25% of it's available battery power.Bosterson wrote:It would be interesting to see this repeated with the Galaxy vs a 64s. I think even the 62 is much more accurate than the 60csx, and I believe (per some testing Pablo did a couple years ago) that the 64 is even better than the 62.
Still impressive results from a phone though. How was the battery drain while you were taking the track? That's my biggest concern with using a phone as a main GPS unit.
Re: Garmin 60CSX versus Galaxy 7
Oh, I didn't know the S7 could use GLONASS. (I'm still running an S4!) That definitely would make a difference. My 60csx goes absolutely nuts in tight canyons in the Gorge; pretty sure a newer unit would fare much better.Lurch wrote:As was already mentioned above, I believe the main difference is that the S7 supports the GLONASS network, and is essentially working off twice as many satellites as a 60CSX
#pnw #bestlife #bitingflies #favoriteyellowcap #neverdispleased