Re: Good GPS for multi day?

"Tom Russo" <tom.km5vy@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:71d2c4e8-cabf-48ba-9f15-b026c126a997@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Mar 27, 12:05 am, Dot <dot.h@#duh?att.net> wrote:
Tony S. wrote:
What would be a good GPS for either a multi-day adventure race or
extended fast-packing? The main functions I'm looking for, off the
top
of my head, are:

1) continuous recording of as much data as possible for later
downloading
2) good real-time displays including dist traveled, speed, long/lat
3) long battery life and ability to swap batteries since no
recharge
would be possible
4) waypoints for establishing various food caches
5) as small and light as possible

[...]

Be sure you get something with a newer chip (in Garmin, it's the Sirf
chip).

SiRF Star III, to be more precise. But yeah, you want the newer
technology.

I really like my GPSmap
60CSx.https://buy.garmin.com/shop/shop.do?cID=145&pID=310
I don't care about looking at things while I'm running, so it rides
in
my pack when I'm running. If I'm doing trail work, it's more handy.

I also use the GPSmap 60CSx, and usually it sits in a little pouch on
the shoulder strap of my hydration pack when I run with it. I don't
even mind running with it in my hand, but it becomes a distraction so
I try not to. I think most people would hate running while holding
it, but it's light enough that I don't even notice it in the front
pouch of my hydration pack.

Honestly, I don't find the barometric altimeter and electronic compass
as useful as I thought they would be, and if I had to make this
decision again I'd probably just buy the 60Cx (no S for "sensors") and
save a few bucks.

To conserve batteries on most units, disable WAAS and enable "battery
saver." You'll get marginally less precision, but the difference in
battery consumption is considerable. Sometimes I've accidentally left
this unit with WAAS enabled and in Normal mode, and it chews batteries
up quickly (half the battery life?). WAAS supposedly gives you
better position fixes, but only if you have good, continuous views of
the two WAAS satellites, and at a terrific expense in power. And make
sure you set it so that the electronic compass is off most of the time
except when you're stationary. It eats batteries, too.

I believe it can handle Garmin maps, but most of the areas I run in
aren't well mapped or are rolling steep hills where anything being
slightly off might show you at bottom of hill rather than on ridge.
Plus
70 ft hills don't always show up on 100-ft contour maps. So I never
bothered putting maps in it, which are another cost. That way I'm not
bothered by extraneous lines. People using them on long trips would
definitely benefit.

It definitely takes Garmin maps, and you can even roll your own for
free if you're motivated enough to do so:
http://home.roadrunner.com/~creek/garmin.htm
gives a pretty good tutorial for how to do it, although I use a
slightly different process to get the contour lines than he does.

I do this especially if I can get hold of good trail data from some
local source like a county GIS department, park service, or the USFS,
all of which is free data. Doing it this way gives you way more
detailed and current maps than you could buy from Garmin, but takes a
fair amount of up-front work. Worth while if going into some serious
wilderness areas. I always do this before a backcountry ski trip -- I
also use some GIS tricks to map out areas where slope and aspect are
especially favorable for avalanches. I haven't yet needed that level
for trail running, but I'm trying to get there. You might find this
process worthwhile for an adventure race, too, if you're a map geek
like I am.

Dot, you might like to do that since you find that the areas you use
are poorly mapped. If you get the higher resolution digital elevation
models from USGS or other sources and contour them, you can make
really fine contour maps, much better than the 100ft contour crap that
Garmin sells. The ones I make are typically as detailed as 1:24000
scale USGS topo quads, whereas Garmin sells stuff that's more like
1:100000. When I'm really keen to have quality maps, I even sometimes
get really high resolution elevation models from the county GIS group,
contour them, and make maps out of them with local trail data
overlaid. These have 1-foot-per-pixel resolution and are almost
always overkill, but fun to get hold of.

Major trips get downloaded into TopoFusion, which has more analysis
capabilities than most of the garmin software, but I don't think it's
convenient to use for daily runs. The guys that wrote it are
cyclists,
and into trail mapping. I kinda like supporting the private
entrepreneurs rather than big companies if they provide something
that
works at least as well.

I've also used gpsbabel to offload tracks from my GPSmap 60CSx and
then into serious GIS software, or have uploaded the GPX files to
www.mapmyrun.com which will overlay them on Google maps or produce a
KML file for viewing in Google Earth. (actually, gpsbabel could do
that itself).

The etrex series has since updated their chips and are probably
better
than what they were. I prefer the buttons on the 60csx rather than
the
etrex setup, but that's me, and the larger size is a small cost for
*me*.

I, too, prefer the button layout of the 60CSx. I had an eTrex
Venture for a long time. The buttons are on the sides (except for the
clickstick) and never did seem that intuitive. It did pretty well
(with respect to acquiring satellites) in tough terrain, but I wore
out some of the buttons after a few years of hiking and running with
it and replaced it with the 60CSx.

I think both of the above models can handle about 10,000 track
points.

My 60CSx is limited to 10000 points.

Not sure if the memory cards in the 60csx are for tracks or to
include
maps, which I haven't bothered with.

I'm pretty sure it's just for maps. My unit has a biggish memory card
in it and it is still limited to 10000 track points.

Good to know Tom, thanks for all your precise information. I have to
digest what everyone has said and do some research of my own to narrow
down the choices. I printed out yours and Dots replies for reference!

-Tony


I think both use regular batteries. I know the 60 uses 2 AA, and
lithiums work great - maybe 30 hours, but I never remember to keep
track
of when I put the batteries in so lose track after a few weeks. I
know I
use it 13 hrs straight at RP, and probably 10-20 hrs after that.

Again, your milage may vary depending on settings like WAAS, battery
saver and electronic compass.

--
Tom Russo KM5VY SAR502 DM64ux
http://www.swcp.com/~russo/
Tijeras, NM QRPL#1592 K2#398 SOC#236
http://kevan.org/brain.cgi?DDTNM
In some cultures what I do would be considered normal.
-- Ineffective daily affirmation


.

Loading