GPS Comparison
In addition to my Garmin Edge 305 for biking (or maybe to replace it?), I want a light and accurate topographical GPS for hiking. Garmin has a huge product line, from which it's very difficult to choose. This is how I finally came to a decision.
Now, I actually kept my Edge 305 for now. This is after realizing that my short-term need to enter waypoints by coordinates in advance was possible since firmware 2.40 and I happened to have tested 2.30 in 2005 when I bought it... That said, below is my reasoning for when I'll replace the Edge 305 with something more well-rounded.
I want a GPS in which I can always see my current coordinates, as well as those of previously stored waypoints. (The Edge 305 shows you your coordinates when you ask to create a new waypoint, which you can then back out of, but doesn't show you the coordinates of previously defined waypoints. Why this firmware limitation?)
Topography on-board isn't an absolute must, but if I'm going to replace my Edge 305 it might as well be an upgrade. It'd be useful to have roads in there too, to replace my paper maps (try that on a windy day!) on my biking outings.
A colour screen is of no importance to me, especially if it costs battery life or weight. I want the GPS to be compatible with my ultra-light backpacking hikes.
I've narrowed the list down to 7 suspects:
| eTrex H | Geko 201 | Geko 301 | GPS 60 | eTrex Vista H | eTrex Summit HC | eTrex Vista HCx | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MSRP (USD) | $100 | $150 | $245 | $200 | $200 | $230 | $300 |
| Sensitivity | high | low | low | low | high | high | high |
| Sensors2 | no | no | yes | no | yes | yes | yes |
| Volume (ml) | 171 | 114 | 114 | 3121 | 171 | 180 | 180 |
| Weight (g) | 150 | 96 | 96 | 198 | 150 | 156 | 156 |
| Battery (hrs) | 17 | 12 | 9 | 28 | 18 | 14 | 25 |
| Display Size | 64x128 | 64x100 | 64x100 | 160x240 | 160x288 | 176x220 | 176x220 |
| Memory | - | - | - | - | 24MB | 24MB | microSD |
Footnotes:
1. Actual volume is lower because measurements include antenna.
2. Electronic compass and barometric altimeter.
Conclusion
- eTrex H Essentially a more affordable version of my Edge 305, without the barometric altimeter and with a slightly different firmware, without some of the training features and with a few extra navigation ones. Still no mapping. Excellent choice for the $100 price tag, with the higher sensitivity receiver than the regular eTrex for a mere 10% premium. If I didn't have the Edge 305 already, I'd probably buy the eTrex H which has by far the best value for the money.
- eTrex Vista HCx Full-featured, with surprisingly good battery life given the colour screen. The only mapping GPS being considered which can also provide step-by-step road directions, hence its top spot despite being the most expensive of the bunch. Given the feature set, this is excellent value for the money, albeit more money. :) I'll be tempted to replace my Edge 305 with this one, as it's more well-rounded, while the Edge 305 is highly centered around biking. (So what if the Vista HCx doesn't count calories and manage "virtual partners"? I don't use that anyway.)
- eTrex Vista H Full-featured and still as light as the eTrex H, greyscale display and good battery life. It's second in line because in my view, if I'm going to spend $200 on a GPS receiver for the sensors and mapping ability, I might as well spend $300 and get full-blown step-by-step road directions.
- Geko 301 (ELIMINATED) I need high sensitivity, so I can't use the Geko 301. If I only used GPS in open spaces though, this would be my #1 choice because it's small and light, although for $250 it's tough for Garmin to justify the low sensitivity receiver. Why risk it? Go for a high-sensitivity model.
- eTrex Summit HC (ELIMINATED) Less battery life than its neighbours the Vista HCx or the Vista H, colour display but no turn-by-turn route directions, it's an odd combination of features.
- Geko 201 (ELIMINATED) Low sensitivity, no compass or altimeter, just too simple for my needs.
- GPS 60 (ELIMINATED) Heaviest and largest of the bunch, and the deal-breaker is the low-sensitivity receiver.