magellan explorist 500

[Adk_dib]

anyone have any experience with this model? I am looking to purchase one. It says that it can be used in the car also.

 

[Paradox]

If you can get it cheap, why not. In my humble opinion the Garmin products are with similar specs and features are easier to use, are more ergonomically desigened and just seem to work better. I am sure you will find lots of very different opinions out there. I have no experience with any manufacturers of GPSr's other than Garmin, Kenwood, and Magellin. The Kenwood used to come standard in Ford cars. We do not use the Kenwood we got with our Ford Expedition. We just put the Garmin streetpilot 2720 in the Expedition and use that. Car models typically have routing features that allow to set start and end points and will pick routes for you. this takes some of the fun out of it for me but the wife likes it.

 

[Bobby]

On the same note, I have my eye on a Garmin etrex vista. Anyone familiar with this unit?

 

[DougPaul]

Magellan explorist 500: anyone have any experience with this model? I am looking to purchase one. It says that it can be used in the car also.

I don't have any experience with this model, but check out the maps before you buy. Garmin's topo maps used to be much better, don't know if Magellan has caught up. Reviews at http://www.gpsinformation.net.

Doug

 

[DougPaul]

On the same note, I have my eye on a Garmin etrex vista. Anyone familiar with this unit?

I have one, so do a number of others on this BBS. It is a perfectly reasonable unit. The 60CS and 60CSx are better but more expensive. Specs at http://www.garmin.com. Reviews at http://www.gpsinformation.net.

Doug

 

[moose_mckenzie]

I went from a Magellan SporTrak Color to a Garmin 60Csx. Each has it's dis / advantages. I like the maps on the latter, but the former has a far better antenna with the ability to pick up satellites under heavy canopy; I have even picked up satellites inside my home.

Moose

 

[DougPaul]

I went from a Magellan SporTrak Color to a Garmin 60Csx. Each has it's dis / advantages. I like the maps on the latter, but the former has a far better antenna with the ability to pick up satellites under heavy canopy; I have even picked up satellites inside my home.

Careful comparisons have shown the two commonly used antenna types (patch and quadrifilar helix) to give similar performace. (Note that consumer external antennas are patch antennas.)

There is a problem with comparing the lock-holding ability of GPSes from different manufacturers--they have different standards of when to report a loss of lock. Magellan is significantly more generous in declaring a lock than is Garmin. See http://www.vftt.org/forums/showthread.php?t=7393 for more detail.

The Garmin 60CSx (and 76CSx) has been reported to have very impressive reception under less than ideal conditions, primarily due to their use of the SIRF-III GPS chipset. (I haven't seen a direct comparison with any Magellans, but unless they use this chipset, they are unlikely to be as good in this respect.)

Doug

 

[danno]

On the same note, I have my eye on a Garmin etrex vista. Anyone familiar with this unit?

I have the Garmin Vista CX. I like the unit. I got Vista because it has an altimitor (barometric). This is a nice feature, though it isn't always accurate, you have to calibrate it sometimes depending on the weather. Also, for not too much extra $, I think the color is pretty sweet in the CX model.

The Vista CX I got came with a 64mb microSD card, which has allowed me to add Garmin's Mapsource Topo for all of Maine, NH, Vermont, and MASS, including the Boston area.

Also, the Vista CX comes with a USB port. I think the regular Vista just comes with a serial port. The USB port is a faster port.

Hope the info is useful for yuo. Let me know if you have any specific questions.

-dan

 

[DougPaul]

I have the Garmin Vista CX. I like the unit. I got Vista because it has an altimitor (barometric). This is a nice feature, though it isn't always accurate, you have to calibrate it sometimes depending on the weather. Also, for not too much extra $, I think the color is pretty sweet in the CX model.

The Vista CX I got came with a 64mb microSD card, which has allowed me to add Garmin's Mapsource Topo for all of Maine, NH, Vermont, and MASS, including the Boston area.

Also, the Vista CX comes with a USB port. I think the regular Vista just comes with a serial port. The USB port is a faster port.

Note that the Legend Cx and the Vista Cx do not contain the SIRF-III GPS chipset.

Color is a great help for viewing maps on a small screen. B&W is fine for text displays.

I use the automatic (GPS-based) calibration for the barometric altimeter. Generally accurate to within 10ft or so once the calibration has settled (can take 1/2 hr or more--I generally auto-calibrate on the drive to the trailhead).

A USB port is fast, but some applications and software require a serial (RS-232) port. Check before you buy.

Doug

 

[SAR-EMT40]

On the same note, I have my eye on a Garmin etrex vista. Anyone familiar with this unit?

I have the Vista C, not the Cx and am very happy with the unit.

YMMV,
Keith

 

[DougPaul]

I have the Vista C, not the Cx and am very happy with the unit.

Just in case there is any confusion:
The eTrex Vista, eTrex Vista C, and eTrex Vista Cx are all different models. See http://www.garmin.com for details, specs etc.

Doug