Sorry - another GPS question

Sorry I can't help with the GPS72 V GPS76 as I'm not
familiar with them but I can't help thinking the Garmin Geko
201 might be worth a look for you?

Cheers, Jiffy

Michael S said:

Apologies to all for yet another GPS question...

I've decided to get with the times and treat myself to a
GPS. However, as somebody who knows nothing about them I am
finding the choice a little bewildering! I've gone over all
the past threads on the subject, which has helped, and done
a bit of searching on the www, but would still appreciate
some pointers.

So, here goes: I will be using the GPS on hill-walks around
the UK (mostly Lake District and Scottish Highlands). I
don't *think* I want mapping, I don't need anything top of
the range, but I probably want more than the bog-standard.
I would like to be able to connect to the PC. I imagine
I'll be using it for navigation in conjunction with map &
compass, and also to save tracks of routes I've walked for
'analysis' (if poss?) on the PC when I get home. Battery
type is not an issue, as I use both AA and AAA anyway. I'd
like it to be waterproof, as I sometimes find myself out
and about in horrendous weather.

I think the only GPS that isn't decently waterproof is the
Lowrance iFinder which is just splashproof (what were they
thinking of?) I accidentally tested my Garmin by dropping it
in a stream the other day.

Quoted message said:

I would like as many trackpoints as possible, but as I've
never used a GPS I don't know whether 2000 (for example)
would be adequate or not... I often do mountain walks in
the region of 15 miles
- if I wanted a fairly detailed tracklog of such a walk,
would 2000 be enough??? How many trackpoints are required
per mile, say, to get a decently detailed tracklog of a
walk (if that's a logical question)?

2000 will be plenty for a day or two's walk. The Garmins
you mention will let you decide how you want to use the
points. Distance time or a few levels of automatic. For
what it's worth my old GPS12 (1024 points) is set to one
track point every 40 seconds and that will last me about
ten hours, or more if I switch it off during stops. The
faster you move the more often you will need points to keep
detail in your track.

Quoted message said:

Anyway, after a little research and quite a bit of random
stabbing in the dark (!), I'm considering the GPS72 or the
GPS76. Does this sound like a logical decision for my
needs??? Also, what are the differences between the two in
practice? Looking at various websites, and using the
comparison facility on a website that was suggested
elsewhere, it seems as though the GPS76 has a bigger
display (or better resolutiuon - not sure which)

Better resolution they are the same size.

Quoted message said:

, the ability to attach an external antenna, and a
different voltage range (???). Also, on the GPSW site, the
extra £45 for the 76 gets me an interface cable included.
So, is it worth the extra £45 for the 76? And if I get the
72, how much will an interface cable set me back???

A lot less than £45. You can get the Garmin specific plugs
from Pfranc or other third party suppliers will sell you a
cable for about £15.
--
Phil Cook looking north over the park to the
"Westminster Gasworks"
95/284 5/219 c.100/300 (>900m with drop>100m )

"Michael S" <[email hidden]> schreef in bericht
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Apologies to all for yet another GPS question... Michael S

Don't apologise, other people don't apologise for another
tent question or the best route question or the lightest
gear question. If you don't ask you will never know.

Theo

[email hidden] (Michael S) wrote in news:f1b7a803.0405120555.6b5ab5d2
@posting.google.com:

<snip>

Quoted message said:

Sorry for so many questions, but I really do find it
difficult to differentiate between all the models!

Many, MANY thanks in anticipation!

Regards,

Michael S

I recomend the Geko 201. Its resonably cheap, 10,000
trackpoints, 500 waypoints, and 20 routes. Its not a mapping
GPS, but I didn't see the need for one for UK hillwalking. I
certainly don't believe a mapping GPS will show a map of
comparable detail to a OS map.

The only issue I have with the Geko 201 is that the power
button is far too easy to press, thus turning the reciever
on and draining the batteries! I believe later models of
the 201 have the power button surrounded by a raised lip
of plastic. I have taken the gps out in heavy rain, and
found no problem (although according to Garmin, the
battery compartment is not waterproof although the rest of
the unit is).

hope this is of help.

--
Brian

Michael S said:

So, here goes: I will be using the GPS on hill-walks
around the UK (mostly Lake District and Scottish
Highlands). I don't *think* I want mapping,

A bonus but not essential. However the better specified
units tend to be mapping units.

Quoted message said:

I don't need anything top of the range, but I probably
want more than the bog-standard. I would like to be able
to connect to the PC.

All but the Geko 101 can do that. You'll need a lead so
factor that into the price. I think the mapping units
usually include a lead.

Quoted message said:

I imagine I'll be using it for navigation in conjunction
with map & compass,

You can imagine that. You can even persist in doing that if
you enjoy luddism, but if you learn how to use it
effectively (and that means pre-plotting waypoints in your
computer) you'll find the compass quickly becomes redundant
and you rarely ever need to consult the map (except to check
fine details). It's quite possible to do entire walks in any
weather conditions (thick fog, night) without ever taking
your map and compass out of the rucksack - in fact it's very
convenient not to have to, especially in bad weather. Usual
disclaimer about always carrying a map and compass of
course... (map is still useful, compass is just a backup).

But if you really want to do it the hard way and get the
least value for money out of your investment, you can
continue to navigate with map and compass leaving the GPS
switched off in your rucksack, only taking it out and
switching it on when traditional methods fail you. When this
happens you can simply read the grid ref off the GPS to
check where you are, but be warned, those who rarely use
their GPS may not be very familiar with it's use and may not
have the datums or displays set correctly, so errors can
occur. If you instead use it as your primary navigation tool
then any errors will quickly become apparent and you'll
become used to the quirks of it's use.

Naturally it won't work inside caves or buildings, sometimes
doesn't work in steep valleys and can have trouble in dense
forestry (esp if in battery save mode), so there are
occasions when it will fail you, but not as many as the
luddites would have you believe. Most of the time it works
fine, even in forests.

Quoted message said:

and also to save tracks of routes I've walked for
'analysis' (if poss?) on the PC when I get home.

Absolutely poss. If you really want to analyse you'll need a
"proper" GPS program like Ozi.

Quoted message said:

Battery type is not an issue, as I use both AA and
AAA anyway.

Which would make the Geko 201 a good choice.

Quoted message said:

I'd like it to be waterproof, as I sometimes find myself
out and about in horrendous weather.

All are, except the Lowrance iFinder.

Quoted message said:

I would like as many trackpoints as possible, but as I've
never used a GPS I don't know whether 2000 (for example)
would be adequate or not...

I'd recommend a unit with 10,000.

Quoted message said:

I often do mountain walks in the region of 15 miles
- if I wanted a fairly detailed tracklog of such a walk,
would 2000 be enough??? How many trackpoints are
required per mile, say, to get a decently detailed
tracklog of a walk (if that's a logical question)?

Trackpoint use varies from unit to unit and within each unit
via different settings so it's difficult to say. My GPS12
has 1024 trackpoints and I get perhaps 15 - 25 miles out of
it, depending on the complexity of the route. A long walk on
good paths with get a greater distance, but lots of zig
zagging uses up more.

The eTrex has more trackpoints but apparently eats them up
much faster.

2000 should be enough for a weekend, but not enough for a
week, that's why I recommend 10,000.

Quoted message said:

Anyway, after a little research and quite a bit of random
stabbing in the dark (!), I'm considering the GPS72 or the
GPS76. Does this sound like a logical decision for my
needs???

A reasonable choice.

Quoted message said:

Also, what are the differences between the two in
practice?

I've just checked the specs and the only difference is that
the 76 has a higher resolution screen. Higher res is good
but without mapping it's not particularly important so it
doesn't seem to justify the extra cost. Trackpoints are the
same so there doesn't seem to be much advantage over the 72.
I've used the 72, it's quite a nice unit. Although a bit
bulky compared to the latest miniature models, it's not
heavy, only using 2 AAs.

My preference is for the 76 map series. Obviously they cost
a lot more but they come with 10,000 trackpoints as well as
the obvious maps. The 76S contains an electronic compass
(largely unnecessary) and the altimeter/barometer
(desirable). Much discussion has taken place about the
advantages of the barometer over the normal GPS altitude.
The latter is fine for general use but the barometer gives a
smoother altitude profile.

If you really don't want maps but want more trackpoints,
get the Geko
201. If you fancy the altimeter & compass version, get the
301. Alternatively the Magellan SporTrak looks a very
good model if 2000 points is enough. I think I'd
prefer that to the Gekos.

Quoted message said:

Looking at various websites, and using the comparison
facility on a website that was suggested elsewhere, it
seems as though the GPS76 has a bigger display (or better
resolutiuon - not sure which), the ability to attach an
external antenna, and a different voltage range (???).

I don't know what the significance of the latter is, but the
main use for an aerial would be on a car or to wear on your
hat if you are really obsessed with getting the best
possible signal. Normally it's not a problem.

Paul
--
wilderness-wales.co.ukwilderness-wales.co.ukOpen ↗
wildwales.fsnet.co.ukwildwales.fsnet.co.ukOpen ↗
photosig.comuserphotosOpen ↗

Michael,

As you want to track every step that you do on a 15 mile
walk, I would suggest to buy a model with a connector for an
external antenna. This way you can fix the external antenna
ON your hat (by far the best position to capture the
satellites) and you can leave your GPS receiver IN your
pocket (much more comfortable than carrying it all the time
in your hand), only taking it out if you want to do some
navigation. This way the batteries will last much longer too
in case of cold weather. BTW the basic GPS Exercises on our
site are based on the GPS 76.

Good luck

--
Andreas van Hooijdonk gps-practice-and-fun.comgps-practice-and-fun.comOpen ↗

"Michael S" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Apologies to all for yet another GPS question...

I've decided to get with the times and treat myself to a
GPS. However, as somebody who knows nothing about them I
am finding the choice a little bewildering! I've gone over
all the past threads on the subject, which has helped, and
done a bit of searching on the www, but would still
appreciate some pointers.

So, here goes: I will be using the GPS on hill-walks
around the UK (mostly Lake District and Scottish
Highlands). I don't *think* I want mapping, I don't need
anything top of the range, but I probably want more than
the bog-standard. I would like to be able to connect to
the PC. I imagine I'll be using it for navigation in
conjunction with map & compass, and also to save tracks of
routes I've walked for 'analysis' (if poss?) on the PC
when I get home. Battery type is not an issue, as I use
both AA and AAA anyway. I'd like it to be waterproof, as I
sometimes find myself out and about in horrendous weather.
I would like as many trackpoints as possible, but as I've
never used a GPS I don't know whether 2000 (for example)
would be adequate or not... I often do mountain walks in
the region of 15 miles
- if I wanted a fairly detailed tracklog of such a walk,
would 2000 be enough??? How many trackpoints are
required per mile, say, to get a decently detailed
tracklog of a walk (if that's a logical question)?

Anyway, after a little research and quite a bit of random
stabbing in the dark (!), I'm considering the GPS72 or the
GPS76. Does this sound like a logical decision for my
needs??? Also, what are the differences between the two in
practice? Looking at various websites, and using the
comparison facility on a website that was suggested
elsewhere, it seems as though the GPS76 has a bigger
display (or better resolutiuon - not sure which), the
ability to attach an external antenna, and a different
voltage range (???). Also, on the GPSW site, the extra £45
for the 76 gets me an interface cable included. So, is it
worth the extra £45 for the 76? And if I get the 72, how
much will an interface cable set me back???

Sorry for so many questions, but I really do find it
difficult to differentiate between all the models!

Many, MANY thanks in anticipation!

Regards,

Michael S

I really like the electronic compass on my summit, it makes
the "magic pointer" a lot more responsive, especially when
standing still, and it's a good backup if you lose
reception. I would probably get the 301 if I were replacing
my Summit.

I think an altimeter is a gadget though, very accurate if
you calibrate it, but I can't be bothered.

Budget for some mapping software, it makes the whole
experience much more fun! You can just enjoy your walk and
not worry too much about checking the map etc. The Memory
Map SW with the aerial photos is great.

Also get yourself the best re-chargeables you can, and
remember to turn the compass off when you don't need it,
saves on power.

Don't smash it on the first time out like I did! A case
might be a good idea (no point in me getting one, it's
already scratched to buggery!)

All the units I've seen are waterproof, and I've used mine
in very heavy rain with no problems.

Leave the map and compass in your sack, you won't need them
once you get the hang of it.

DO keep a rough track of where you are on the map, then if
the thing dies you can escape with ye olde map and compass!

DON'T try and use it when you're driving, you'll crash!

Be careful, already heard of someone being mugged for
theirs!

Make sure it's attached to you at all times, lose it and
you'll hate yourself!

Think that's it, enjoy!

Lewis

(Michael S) said:

I'm considering the GPS72 or the GPS76.

I can say that I've been very happy with the GPS76 I bought
about 18 months ago. It has certain marine features which I
wanted and although bigger than than the Etrex and Gekko
type models, is certainly not heavy to carry. It is WAAS /
EGNOS capable, although the European EGNOS system is still
in test phase I think. Not that you really need that
capability for normal walking purposes.

I've never used up the full capacity on routes, despite the
rather limited memory, but more space for trackpoints would
be useful on a multi-day trip. Battery life using 2 x 2300
ma NiMh rechargeables is OK.

I think that unless you really need the external aerial the
GPS72 would do a very similar job - the specs are certainly
similar. My GPS76 mostly lives in the top (lid) pocket of
the rucksac, and that seems fine for reception unless under
heavy tree cover or deep in a valley. The display is very
clear and quite customisable.

Pete B

--
Pete Bland

(Michael S) said:

Apologies to all for yet another GPS question...

I've decided to get with the times and treat myself to a
GPS. However, as somebody who knows nothing about them I am
finding the choice a little bewildering! I've gone over all
the past threads on the subject, which has helped, and done
a bit of searching on the www, but would still appreciate
some pointers.

I know the feeling. It's not easy to know what the questions
are, let alone the answers.

Quoted message said:

So, here goes: I will be using the GPS on hill-walks around
the UK (mostly Lake District and Scottish Highlands). I
don't *think* I want mapping, I don't need anything top of
the range, but I probably want more than the bog-standard.
I would like to be able to connect to the PC. I imagine
I'll be using it for navigation in conjunction with map &
compass, and also to save tracks of routes I've walked for
'analysis' (if poss?) on the PC when I get home.

My Vista is a mapping unit and I would not want a gps
without. It came with PC lead. Very small and easy to carry.
Loads of trackpoints and very good control of how it logs
the track. Very accurate. Good reception (if used
correctly).

Battery type is not an issue, as I use both AA and AAA
anyway. I'd like it to be

Quoted message said:

waterproof, as I sometimes find myself out and about in
horrendous weather. I would like as many trackpoints as
possible, but as I've never used a GPS I don't know whether
2000 (for example) would be adequate or not... I often do
mountain walks in the region of 15 miles
- if I wanted a fairly detailed tracklog of such a walk,
would 2000 be enough??? How many trackpoints are required
per mile, say, to get a decently detailed tracklog of a
walk (if that's a logical question)?

I can use 4000 in a day if I wish - gives the most
detailed track.

Incidentally - get some good PC software & learn to use it.
If tracklogs are the priority, you won't beat OZI (but you
have to find your own maps).

Quoted message said:

Anyway, after a little research and quite a bit of random
stabbing in the dark (!), I'm considering the GPS72 or the
GPS76. Does this sound like a logical decision for my
needs??? Also, what are the differences between the two in
practice? Looking at various websites, and using the
comparison facility on a website that was suggested
elsewhere, it seems as though the GPS76 has a bigger
display (or better resolutiuon - not sure which), the
ability to attach an external antenna, and a different
voltage range (???). Also, on the GPSW site, the extra £45
for the 76 gets me an interface cable included. So, is it
worth the extra £45 for the 76? And if I get the 72, how
much will an interface cable set me back???

Vista has same resolution screen (but much smaller).
Lead is free.

Quoted message said:

Sorry for so many questions, but I really do find it
difficult to differentiate between all the models!

Many, MANY thanks in anticipation!

Regards,

Michael S

In article
<[email hidden]>, Michael S
<[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

However, the cables are RS232, and I don't have such ports
on my computer. He said that Garmin do a RS232-USB
converter, but it costs a small fortune, so he had tried a
cheapo 3rd party convertor and it didn't work. Are there
likely to be compatability issues, or was it just cos he'd
bought a cheapo ('[censored]'😉 convertor???

It may not have been the converter that was the problem but
the driver that came with it. There is an outfit that sells
cables and USB converters as well as the connectors to make
the cable yourself. I have bought connectors from them and
their service is great. They have a good reputation and I
would expect their converter to work fine. Their site:

lynks.co.uklynks.co.ukOpen ↗

The USB converter is here:

lynks.co.ukusb.htmlOpen ↗

--

dscs.demon.co.ukdscs.demon.co.ukOpen ↗

Chris Malcolm <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

KRO said:

I would add that the electronic compass will reduce your
battery life by a fair degree.

Unless you set the compass options to keep the compass
mostly off,
e.g., only to switch on after 3 stationary minutes, and to
switch off immediately speed exceeds 0 mph., plus
either turning the entire GPs, or at least the compass,
off, when you stop for a break. Under those circs you
can use the compass whenever you want, while using very
little extra battery.

What kills the battery with the compass feature is having
the compass turn on automatically while you're having your
lunch break. It's easily avoided.

My unit came apparently optimised for car driving, with the
default compass settings only turning the compass off when
my speed exceeded 12mph, a speed I never even reach while
walking, so it gobbled batteries until I changed the
settings.

The Vista, which nobody has mentioned, has 10,000 track
points with variable plotting frequency criteria. It has the
facility for mapping, and it allows easy switching on/off of
the static compass with a long press on the page button. A
good upgrade from the Summit, IMHO.

Mine came with the PC cable, but I bought it in the US, so I
don't know whether UK prices include it, but it would be
worth finding out . . .
--
Gordon

In article <[email hidden]>, Paul Saunders
<[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

Norman said:

I am surprised Steve hasn't got the required 9 pin serial
ports. Most motherboards have two.

But perhaps they haven't been installed in the case.
Simply a matter of poking the appropriate holes and
plugging in the ports, if he has them (sometimes they come
with a plug in lead rather than as part of the motherboard
- same with USB).

Most new laptops no longer have the RS232 serial ports so
that might be his problem.

--

dscs.demon.co.ukdscs.demon.co.ukOpen ↗

Quoted message said:

What are the best options regarding internet purchases?
Anybody used places like gpsw.co.uk or gps4less.co.uk, and
if so, are they ok or a bit dodgy? Reading general reviews
by 'strangers' is fine, but it's always good to hear it
'first hand'.

GPSW have a good reputation and I have personally found
their service excellent - fast, efficient and good prices.
Friends have also had good experiences with them.

I do not recall hearing anybody experiencing good or bad
things with gps4less.

Other friends have had very good service from tracklogs:

tracklogs.co.uktracklogs.co.ukOpen ↗

--

dscs.demon.co.ukdscs.demon.co.ukOpen ↗

Steve Rumsby <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Steve does have the required 9 pin serial port, but it is
on the back of the PC and a serious pain to get to because
of where the PC is. My GPS cable is a combined serial & 12V
power cable, so when I take the Geko on long car journeys I
need to disconnect the cable, and re-connect it afterwards.
£5 for a USB serial port that I can put in a more
convenient place was well worth it.

Gordon found it a nuisance having to swap between his GPS
cable and his games joystick/steering wheel when his machine
only had one serial port, so he plugged an extension cable
in the PC which brought the plug out to a more accessible
location. Now he has a machine which sensibly has two serial
ports. :-)

(Plus the usual USBs of course).
--
Gordon

Paul Saunders <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

Jim Hutton said:

Are you sure about the OS mapping, Paul ?

That's what I've been told. It was discussed here recently.
Can't remember who it was, but someone visited a show and
saw a new Magellan with OS mapping. No info on their
website yet though (but I haven't checked recently).
Apparently he was told that Garmin are also working on OS
maps but theirs aren't ready yet (different format).

Quoted message said:

If so, what scale & what coverage & what model Garmin ?

Probably 50k, probably the whole UK (but a limited amount
uploadable to the GPS at any one time due to memory
contraints). The models are the 76C, 76CS, 60C and 60CS.
Prices are roughly 500-600 dollars each. The map CDs are of
course extra.

There would be serious restrictions on map area, even at
50k, judging by the fact that I can only load about 2/3 of
UK Roads & Recreation maps into the 24Mb of the Vista.

Compare that level of detail with what the OS maps contain,
and I would imagine that the area would be much less.
However, this would not be a great disadvantage to the
walker, who normally uses less than an OS map on a day walk.
Except for a few members here...... ;-)
--
Gordon

Chris <proteus1@gmxDOTnet.?> wrote

Quoted message said:

KRO said:

I didn't know MM3 would allow scanned maps. It's quite
annoying the restrictions that the OS (government owned)
are putting on use of "their" maps. Sorry, I'm gettin
annoyed, did I pay taxes for that?

That's rip-off Britain, once again!

As a pensioner/taxpayer, I don't object to my taxes
subsidising all the replacement knee joints for serious
walkers who bugger their knees by walking too seriously, but
honestly - if they can afford all the expenses incurred in
serious walking, petrol, GPS, walking poles, tents, etc,
surely they can afford a bloody map?
--
Gordon

In article <[email hidden]>, Paul Saunders
<[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

Gordon said:

There would be serious restrictions on map area,

Probably.

Quoted message said:

even at 50k, judging by the fact that I can only load
about 2/3 of UK Roads & Recreation maps into the 24Mb of
the Vista.

The Garmins have 115 meg I believe.

The 60 series have 56MB of non-expandable memory.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Compare that level of detail with what the OS maps
contain, and I would imagine that the area would be
much less.

Perhaps, but I suspect the GPS mapping wouldn't have as
much detail as the paper maps. Wossname already said that
the Magellan mapping didn't show buildings. Contour lines
might be more widely spaced, no need for textures in
forests and open ground, less text perhaps. Hopefully the
level of detail would be configurable so you could leave
out some detail to cover a larger area.

That is not an option (other than autoroute recalculation
information) with existing Garmin mapping.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

However, this would not be a great disadvantage to the
walker, who normally uses less than an OS map on a day
walk. Except for a few members here...... ;-)

Yes, but it would be a great disadvantage if you go away
for a week and plan to visit several different areas,
especially after spending all that dosh on one. Big
question therefore is whether it's possible to load
multiple small areas or whether you are limited to one
contiguous area. If the latter it may be necessary to carry
a laptop on long trips.

The former is the norm for other Garmin mapping so, unless
the OS have decided to restrict use, I expect that will be
the case. With the existing mapping you can also mix and
match different map products in the same receiver (e.g. topo
in an area and road maps in the same and / or other areas)
and switch them on or off at will with the menus.

--

dscs.demon.co.ukdscs.demon.co.ukOpen ↗

In article <[email hidden]>, Paul
Saunders <[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

The Garmins have 115 meg I believe.

The 60 series have 56MB of non-expandable memory.

So the 76 series looks to be the best.

The Map 76S has only 24MB and the plain 76 has 8MB so it
depends how you define best.

The 60 series are lighter, smaller and have better spec
(e.g. 256 colour screens as opposed to 4 grey) and better
battery life. They are the new kids on the block and they
are UGLY :-(

--

dscs.demon.co.ukdscs.demon.co.ukOpen ↗

In article <[email hidden]>, Paul
Saunders <[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

So the 76 series looks to be the best.

The Map 76S has only 24MB and the plain 76 has 8MB so it
depends how you define best.

Quoted message said:

The 60 series are lighter, smaller and have better spec
(e.g. 256 colour screens as opposed to 4 grey) and better
battery life. They are the new kids on the block and they
are UGLY :-(

I was talking about the 76C and 76CS, did you miss those?
They have 115 meg of memory, plus 256 colours. They are the
best new kids and cost more than the 60 series.

Sorry, yes I did miss those. They don't seem to have been
released yet.

--

dscs.demon.co.ukdscs.demon.co.ukOpen ↗