Need info on Garmin Oregon 600 GPS

[BoxKite]

I'm replacing my GPS12, and almost decided on a Garmin Oregon 600. No built-in topo map, and no camera. Does anyone have an opinion on this or other Garmin favorite models ?

Would appreciate info on

1) real-world battery life
2) dust and water on the touchscreen
3) overall reliability

Thanks.

[kepPNW]

I have considered that one as well, and am torn between it and the newer 64 models. I've been using an Oregon 450 for the last four years, and am generally happy with it. But I sometimes have antenna envy with my friends' 62s. I definitely like the touch screen much better than needing to fumble buttons, though! And mine hangs outside my pack 100% of the time - no worries about dust or water whatsoever. (That said, a friend with a 650 said he had issues with raindrops mimicking touch. I use a screen protector, and he didn't; not sure that's the essential difference, but...?) I carry four spare AA rechargeables, but have never needed to replace batteries during a dayhike when starting fresh. Thing is, I often don't start fresh, so, yeah. I'd guess I get close to 20 hours from a charge.

Anyway, I mostly responded to say... Don't worry about the map, especially if you're "only" hiking in the PNW. You can get a far better one, for free, at http://www.switchbacks.com (NWTopos).

(Oh, and I carry both a standard camera and cellphone, so I'd never pay extra for yet another in a GPS unit.)

[Peabody]

I use a Garmin eTrex30 (new model eTrex30x). It does everything I need for a day hike. It's small and light weight. I carry it on the front strap of my pack, so it's super easy to check. Accuracy hasn't been an issue, down loaded tracks all seem accurate. Fully charged batteries last all day no problem. I always carry a spare set and I've never needed them.

Most importantly it answer the two basic questions I have while hiking.

1) Where the hell am I?
2) Where the hell is the buick?

[BoxKite]

I've gone back and read the info for both the 64* and new etrex* series. I think either of these will be good, and both are far better than my ancient GPS12. It might come down to screen size, and whether a touchscreen is really needed. I noticed the new etrex advertises a 25 hour battery life.

Most of the reviews for the 600 are good, but the bad reviews are really bad.

I mostly need 1) very robust, 2) easy to use, 3) decent interface, 4) reliably accurate, 5) power sipper. Almost all of them have plenty of point/track/map capacity. The maximum wilderness time will be 4-5 days, so extra batteries will be needed no matter what I pick. I like the idea of the quad helix antenna on the 64*, but no way to prove it's actually better.

[BoxKite]

So, I talked to Garmin today and they clarified the differences between the Oregon, GPSMAP64, and the eTrex series. BTW Garmin just released the Oregon 700 series this morning, so I might look at those.

Long story short, two different Garmin support folks said the GPSMAP64 is the best choice for 'serious' back country hiking. Garmin agreed the Montana/Oregon/GPSMAP/eTrex all have the same basic location capability. But, they said the eTrex is mostly for 'young families' and 'scouts' who occasionally hike, the GPSMAP64 is for hunters, winter enthusiasts, and 'serious' back country hiking, and the Oregon is for those wanting better styling and touchscreen, and who need road navigation as well as hiking. And the Montana is the 'Cadillac' version of the Oregon.

Garmin gave their explanation for dedicated GPS versus Smartphone. According to them all Smartphones use cellphone assist and cell triangulation to derive position, along with the GPS sat system. They claimed that if you do not have a cellphone subscription, or the phone is out of range, the Smartphone GPS will still work, but not as fast and not as accurately. As well, they claimed most cellphone GPS is heavily geared for urban environments, not back country.

The main reason I do not want cellphone GPS is that I do not have a dedicated cellphone subscription, and don't plan on getting one. I have an emergency only cellphone, but that's it.

I will test the Garmins again, and maybe get the GPSMAP 64.

[aiwetir]

I'm not buying their cell phone story.

I started trying out my iPhone at work, wildlife biology, in 2014 to see if it could be a viable substitute. In all this time of testing (carrying 3 devices for a year) I've found it completely acceptable in all but one use. So I now use my iPhone all the time both professionally and recreationally and it is comparable and often better than my GPSmap 60CSx, exceeds all the Garmin Edge 500/510/520s that I've owned. A 64 version will likely be better than the iPhone though, but how accurate do you need it? The iPhone is notoriously bad at actually getting you to a very specific place on the ground (such as in geocaching, which I don't do, but it's similar to some of the work I need to do) so I still need a GPS for work depending on what I'm doing.

That's another discussion though. The screen on the phone far exceeds the 60CSx though

[Peabody]

So, I talked to Garmin today and they clarified the differences between the Oregon, GPSMAP64, and the eTrex series.<snip>
Long story short, two different Garmin support folks said the GPSMAP64 is the best choice for 'serious' back country hiking. Garmin agreed the Montana/Oregon/GPSMAP/eTrex all have the same basic location capability. But, they said the eTrex is mostly for 'young families' and 'scouts' who occasionally hike, the GPSMAP64 is for hunters, winter enthusiasts, and 'serious' back country hiking, and the Oregon is for those wanting better styling and touchscreen, and who need road navigation as well as hiking. And the Montana is the 'Cadillac' version of the Oregon.

Mrs P: Is that a new GPS?
Me: Yes.
Mrs. P: What was wrong with the old one?
Me: It was for 'young families' and 'scouts'

Like Garmin said....."all have the same basic location capability"

This YouTube clip shows the GPSMAP 64s vs eTrex 30x. Link

I like the panning speed of the GPSMAP 64s vs the eTrex 30x. But then I like the lighter weight of the eTrex 30. I could care less about the routing capabilities, a Smart Phone and an app like Waze can't be beat.

[kepPNW]

According to [Garmin] all Smartphones use cellphone assist and cell triangulation to derive position, along with the GPS sat system. They claimed that if you do not have a cellphone subscription, or the phone is out of range, the Smartphone GPS will still work, but not as fast and not as accurately.

Well, Garmin lies. My Samsung GS7 recorded better X/Y coordinates (Z is an entirely different story!) than my Oregon 450 on my last hike, and it was in airplane mode for over half the hike.

[aiwetir]

Even though I prefer the screen and interface on my phone, I sure wish I could afford a nice dedicated unit.

I'm interested to see what you end up with.

[BoxKite]

Yea I more or less agree with you guy's replies. Garmin is good, but I wonder about some of their info. The second Garmin contact did admit they have trouble explaining eTrex, since as he put it "the touch version is almost the same as the Oregon". For all of their products, the max points/tracks/maps is well beyond the average user's needs.

I checked out info for the new Oregon 700. The 700 seems better than the supposed Montana "Cadillac" series, except for screen size.

Garmin has taken "product differentiation" to an absurd level, considering all their products have nearly the same guts. I did not realize until today that they have many "GPSMAP" units, some for hiking, some for boating, some for "commercial", and so on. But they're all the same guts more or less.

This was so much easier in 1975, just needed 1) hiking stick (cane pole with tip cut off), 2) hiking shoes (high top converse all stars), 3) hiking pack (my grandmother made it for me), 4) field glasses (grandfather won them at the moose club).