13 forum posts
Back in July there was a brief thread on GPS units, but it seemed to peter out. I'd like to re-open the discussion with a few specifics.
I'm OK with map and compass. But I find walking a compass course accurately enough to hit a small lake or meadow isolated behind several miles of brushy forest all too often ends in "Plan B" -- realize you've missed the lake, cuss, walk due south until you hit the road, trudge back to the car, and go somewhere else next weekend.
A friend recommends the Garmin GPSMAP 60C SX, saying that it seems to have better deep-forest reception than some newer models. I notice Trailspace reviewers like it too, but some also give Garmin's eTrex Legend and eTrex Summit HC good marks. And the unreviewed Garmin Oregon 200 sounds intriguing, as does the DeLorme Earthmate GPS PN-30.
But I don't know squat about any of them.
Philosophically I prefer a single-purpose unit, not one combined with a digital camera, a heart rate monitor, restaurant guide, or Rock Band 2. I want to navigate to specific lat-long coordinates along a route, and of course be able to back-track myself. Very detailed maps are probably not necessary, as I envision using the unit in combination with good paper maps and aerial images, but some kind of topographic map display is a must.
Is there a consensus or an undercurrent of opinion on what a GPS unit(s) are best for back-country travel?