Garmin 60CSx - disappointed

[darren]

I finally broke down and bought a gps rcvr - the Garmin 60CSx. The unit seems nice enough, but the maps are really disappointing. For testing purposes only, I have acquired a set of the Garmin US 100k maps and the Garmin Eastern US Natl. Parks 24k topo maps. My take:

The 100k maps are pretty useless - especially in Hawaii. They do not even have road names on them.

The 24k topo maps are nice and have a nice level of detail, however the coverage area (natl parks and forests only) is very limited. It is good if you want to hiking in the White Mtns, Green Mtns, or Baxter, but if you hike, bike, or kayak anywhere else you are out of luck.

Since there is no 24k topo maps available from Garmin for Mass or Oahu (portions of Maui + Big Island only), you are stuck with the 100k maps. I loaded the Mass 100k map and it is a joke. Especially near the coast. I checked out my home kayaking grounds and the map is near useless. It shows land where there is no land, water where there is no water, and it is even missing entire islands. The 100k map set doesn't even have street names. Huh? I thought this was 2008.

From what I have been told you can load detailed maps from Natl. Geographic on to your computer and build routes in advance and download the route waypoints (not the maps) to the gps handheld. Then when you are in the field you can follow your pre-planned route even if according to the gps map you are going across a lake (if you are hiking) or going across land (if you are kayaking). Not good if you do not like to pre-plan your hikes or paddle trips. I do not want to use a computer to pre-plan my kayaking routes. I want to use my gps if the crap hits the fan while I am out kayaking. If the fog rolls in I want to know where the nearest island is etc. I don't want to have to spend hours pre-planning my hikes and paddles on a computer and then stick to pre-planned routes when I am in the field.

I can buy the Bluewater maps from Garmin for about $120, but the fine print (actually garmin makes the print VERY fine) is that for the $120 Bluewater America map set, you only get a SMALL sliver of maps. You need to unlockck slivers ($116 each) as you want them. To cover the coast line from RI to Maine, it would cost over $500 for just the maps. You have to be kidding me!!! I bought a Magellan Meridian Color with the FULL america blue water map set for $500 for work. That is the handheld plus ALL the maps. Garmin wants $500 for just a small slice of maps alone. That is unreal. Also, the base maps on the Magellan were much better than the Garmin. I remember looking at my home kayaking area on the Magellan and actually being surprised at how much detail the "road" map had of the water.

So a lot of people here talked me into buying the Garmin. Please help me see what I am missing. Is it true that you can not buy 24k topo maps for the handheld for all areas? And by areas I mean the entire island of Oahu and the entire state of Massachusetts? Do I really need to live with the detail of 100k maps (and crappy ones at that)? Do I really need to spend another $120 to get street names on my crappy 100k maps? Do I really need to get on a computer to mark a waypoint and download the waypoint to the handheld so that when I am in a major harbor I will know that there is a major island in front of me?

I'm thinking of returning the 60CSx. I've heard a bunch of people say that it is the "best". If that is the best, then gps is not worth the money for me. It is 2008. I expect scrolling raster scans of 24k topo maps with DTED elevation shading and I expect the entire US covered, not just a few parks.

The last time I was this disappointed after spending this much money I was at a car dealership service department.

UGH.

- darren


ps: for those of you with the 24k natl park topo maps - who is "Edward" and when did he put a trail up Eisenhower?

 

[Dugan]

Thank you for your timely post. I'm currently vacillating between the Garmin 60CSx and the Earthmate DeLorme PN-20. In looking at specs, the two seem a lot a like. In looking at the maps, I noticed the same thing. It's a big factor in favor of the PN-20 (1:24,000 USGS quads of the entire US). Like you, it makes me wonder why Garmin and its poor maps (outside of Nat'l Parks - which is, well, most everywhere) are considered such a great thing.

(I haven't looked at Magellan mostly because there's little or no talk of it among the hiking boards. Perhaps it is time to take a look.)

 

[peak_bgr]

Actually it's very good for certain things. Unfortunatly you are right, it is limited in that way. The 100K maps are very generic. The 24K maps are National Parks East, Cantral and West. They are very good, and very accurate, if you want to explore the the parks it includes. If not, it's very unfortunate but you have work with the 100k for out side those areas.

They have a new unit out right now called the Colorado. It's maps are in 3D, but I'm unsure right now as to the specifics of the mapping detail.

Darren-For kayaking have you looked into a GPS set up for more marine specific needs. Actually Magellen makes excellent marine GPS's which can be used as a crossover, for land or water. Check them out.

 

[bcborder]

Above the Timber

There is a company that produces their own 24K topo maps for Garmin GPS units, http://abovethetimber.com/. Unfortunately they're only selling maps for Washington and Colorado ;-(

Apparently they've figured out how to upload decent maps to Garmin. There's a challenge for all you computer/map geeks out there!

I have a Garmin eEtrex Vista and recently upgraded to the 60CSx. It usually knows its position in under 30 seconds from power up and very rarely loses the satellites, even in heavy brush and steep valleys. In that sense it's a big improvement from the eTrex Vista. I bought both the Topo 2008 and North American Street maps and I don't think the street maps are worth the money.

I do wish the maps were better. For bushwhacking and mountain biking though, I'm glad I upgraded.

 

[Paradox]

...
1) the CSx never, ever, ever, lost any satellite lock

I've said it before... If the unit is not picking up a signal we might as well be carrying a ariound a rock. The maps are a plus, but I use them only to ballpark things.

 

[darren]

Dugan - I couldn't even find US topo maps for sale on the magellan website. It looks like Magellan is just focusing on road and marine use.

peak_bgr - As I stated, I have used the Magellan Meridian Color (no longer made) with the Magellan Blue Water maps in the past. They are great and the pricing of the magellan blue water maps vs. the Garmin ones is very different. Magellan blows Garmin out of the water on this one. I want 1 gps to handle both land and water uses. Everyone talks about how good the Garmin is for hiking so I just didn't think that it would suck so bad for marine use.

ferrisjrf - How often did the Delorme lose signal and what type of cover / terrain did it seem to have trouble with?

Thanks

- darren

 

[Kevin Rooney]

I upgraded my older Garmin MapSource to Topo 2008 several months ago when there was a rebate. I think all told it cost something like $27. The newer version has slightly better shading, but I haven't found the maps that much different/better than the old version. Still, it was a good investment since Topo 2008 is a better base mapset for the GPS than the factory installed version.

I also purchased one of the NG State series - IIRC there are 28, with all of NE in one. I bought the CA version. It's a better map set than Topo 2008, and I've found that I can create a "route" from a Garmin track either by saving it as a .GPX file or importing it directly from the GPS. From my limited experience, "track" and "route" are quite similar. The best way I've found of downloading a route from NG to the GPS is a direct connect using a USB cable. So, it's not a perfect arrangement, but it works.

I view the quality of a GPS and the quality of maps as two separate issues.

Do I wish that maps were updated more frequently, regardless of who sells them? Sure, and I'd like Google Earth to update the 20 year-old maps they have of my house. Overall though - the technololgy is far better than it was even 5 years ago.

 

[DougPaul]

I finally broke down and bought a gps rcvr - the Garmin 60CSx. The unit seems nice enough, but the maps are really disappointing. For testing purposes only, I have acquired a set of the Garmin US 100k maps and the Garmin Eastern US Natl. Parks 24k topo maps. My take:

The 100k maps are pretty useless - especially in Hawaii. They do not even have road names on them.

Which set of 100K topos? The old (4 CDs) or the new 2008 (1 DVD)?

Both are imperfect copies of the USGS 100K topos. (2008 adds DEM data and a smaller contour interval. It also loses some nautical details. Some places are better, some are worse. Overall, most seem to feel it is an improvement.)

I personally find the 100K topos (paper/DRG or digital DLG) a bit coarse for hiking. The GPS is best used in conjunction with paper maps. In general, I can see my position between the GPS and a more detailed paper map by simple inspection.

DRG=digital raster graphics (ie a scanned image)
DLG=digital line graphics
DEM=digital elevation map

The 24k topo maps are nice and have a nice level of detail, however the coverage area (natl parks and forests only) is very limited. It is good if you want to hiking in the White Mtns, Green Mtns, or Baxter, but if you hike, bike, or kayak anywhere else you are out of luck.

A full country 24K set would be ~16 times bigger than the 100K set or ~46GB. Presumably Garmin didn't feel it was worthwhile to produce a product requiring 10+ DVDs. You could also only store a small area in your GPS at any one time. (That was a serious problem with the early mapping units--Garmin's biggest had 24MB of mapping memory at one time. Packing enough maps for a long trip often involved some difficult decisions. (Solving the "knapsack problem"...) )

Since there is no 24k topo maps available from Garmin for Mass or Oahu (portions of Maui + Big Island only), you are stuck with the 100k maps. I loaded the Mass 100k map and it is a joke. Especially near the coast. I checked out my home kayaking grounds and the map is near useless. It shows land where there is no land, water where there is no water, and it is even missing entire islands. The 100k map set doesn't even have street names. Huh? I thought this was 2008.

Old US topo is better than topo 2008 for nautical use--it even includes (old) buoy locations. (Besides, do you plan your sea kayaking with topo maps or nautical charts?)

From what I have been told you can load detailed maps from Natl. Geographic on to your computer and build routes in advance and download the route waypoints (not the maps) to the gps handheld. Then when you are in the field you can follow your pre-planned route even if according to the gps map you are going across a lake (if you are hiking) or going across land (if you are kayaking). Not good if you do not like to pre-plan your hikes or paddle trips. I do not want to use a computer to pre-plan my kayaking routes. I want to use my gps if the crap hits the fan while I am out kayaking. If the fog rolls in I want to know where the nearest island is etc. I don't want to have to spend hours pre-planning my hikes and paddles on a computer and then stick to pre-planned routes when I am in the field.

I personally plan my hikes using paper or digital maps (ie in the traditional way) and may or may not put some waypoints or a route on the GPS. In the field, I generally navigate by tradtional methods (follow the trail, use map and compass, etc) and mostly just use the GPS as verification, but if I become disoriented, I can get my location and a good heading from the GPS.

A non-autorouting GPS does point-to-point navigation. Just as with paper charts, you are responsible for choosing appropriate course legs and avoiding hazards to navigation. (The 60CSx will autoroute on maps that support it--eg some road maps and 24K topos supposedly support autorouting on trails. But the maps have errors (or incomplete information) and the driver is ultimately responsible for where he drives.)

I have had to hunt for a buoy in heavy fog in a 38' sailboat. In retrospect, I would have been much happier if I had had a GPS... (They didn't exist back then.)

I can buy the Bluewater maps from Garmin for about $120, but the fine print (actually garmin makes the print VERY fine) is that for the $120 Bluewater America map set, you only get a SMALL sliver of maps. You need to unlockck slivers ($116 each) as you want them. To cover the coast line from RI to Maine, it would cost over $500 for just the maps. You have to be kidding me!!! I bought a Magellan Meridian Color with the FULL america blue water map set for $500 for work. That is the handheld plus ALL the maps. Garmin wants $500 for just a small slice of maps alone. That is unreal. Also, the base maps on the Magellan were much better than the Garmin. I remember looking at my home kayaking area on the Magellan and actually being surprised at how much detail the "road" map had of the water.

IMO, the Bluewater maps are rather expensive. (Printed charts aren't cheap either...) Many of the roadmaps play the locking game (required by the map suppliers) and I have seen a number of complaints. I don't know who requires the locking game for the Bluewater maps--Garmin or the map supplier.

So a lot of people here talked me into buying the Garmin. Please help me see what I am missing. Is it true that you can not buy 24k topo maps for the handheld for all areas? And by areas I mean the entire island of Oahu and the entire state of Massachusetts? Do I really need to live with the detail of 100k maps (and crappy ones at that)? Do I really need to spend another $120 to get street names on my crappy 100k maps? Do I really need to get on a computer to mark a waypoint and download the waypoint to the handheld so that when I am in a major harbor I will know that there is a major island in front of me?

A GPS has a very small display which provides a very small window for looking at a big map. (A paper map is very helpful for overall situational awareness.) One has to learn to zoom the GPS display in (for detail) and out (for surroundings). The display can also be set for more or less detail. Many of the smaller features are only shown as you zoom in--deciding how much to display is a delicate balance between showing detail and becoming too cluttered to be readable.

BTW, old US topo has the major street names near my house and appears to have all of them on topo 2008. I also have a digital roadmap for use in the car... (It, unlike point-to-point navigation, knows enough to stay on the roads and go around the ponds... )

A GPS can also record a very accurate track of where you have been. Some find it interesting/amusing to see where the bushwack/paddle really went.

I'm thinking of returning the 60CSx. I've heard a bunch of people say that it is the "best". If that is the best, then gps is not worth the money for me. It is 2008. I expect scrolling raster scans of 24k topo maps with DTED elevation shading and I expect the entire US covered, not just a few parks.

The 60CSx is one of the best of the hiking GPSes, but it is not a miracle--it has limitations to make it practical to carry on a hike. Have you taken the time to learn its options and how to use it? Tried using it on hikes/paddles where you didn't really need it? It may grow on you. (Of course, it may not either.)

I had studied GPSes for several months before I bought my first one. And then I had to fiddle with it for a week or so before I became comfortable with it.

ps: for those of you with the 24k natl park topo maps - who is "Edward" and when did he put a trail up Eisenhower?

If you check the sources, the trail is called "Edwards" on the USGS 24K map. It is unnamed on the 100K USGS map, but is correctly named on both the old and new Garmin 100K topos.

The 60CSx has its limitations, but for $300 (+ maps), it is IMO a fairly impressive piece of technology which can be very useful in the field.

Doug

 

[nazdarovye]

I have a 60csx, and whenever I stop, the track jumps all over the place - often 100 feet or more at a time. The GPS thinks it's moving 20mph sometimes, even though I'm standing still.

The display and mapping and other features are good - probably better overall than the Colorado 400t I had a chance to try as well - but the jumping issue is really frustrating.

 

[DougPaul]

Thank you for your timely post. I'm currently vacillating between the Garmin 60CSx and the Earthmate DeLorme PN-20. In looking at specs, the two seem a lot a like. In looking at the maps, I noticed the same thing. It's a big factor in favor of the PN-20 (1:24,000 USGS quads of the entire US). Like you, it makes me wonder why Garmin and its poor maps (outside of Nat'l Parks - which is, well, most everywhere) are considered such a great thing.

(I haven't looked at Magellan mostly because there's little or no talk of it among the hiking boards. Perhaps it is time to take a look.)

I haven't looked at the DeLorme or Magellan products in any detail myself, however there seem to be a number of rather experienced users on the usenet groups who are underwhelmed by them.

One such user is on something like his 10th GPS and uses them in his car, hiking, and professionally on boats. He recently switched from Magellan--his current favorite is the 76Cx (electrically identical to the 60Cx and very similar to the 60CSx.)

The 60/76 Cx/CSx are currently some of the most versatile high-featured consumer GPSes on the market today. (Many models have been dumbed down for mass appeal or to broaden a product line.)

Doug

 

[SAR-EMT40]

I have several Garmins including a Vista C and a 76CS and I also own a PN-20. While I might say there is a slight and I do mean slight advantage in the Garmin for signal acquisition and its ability to maintain sat lock. The PN-20 is very good. Their is no practical difference in accuracy that I have seen. I have done trail mapping and have traveled the same trail in different directions with 15 foot differences in the two tracks. That is on more than one heavily overcast drizzling day. As far as planning there is no competition anywhere in the country. The PN-20 has 1:24000 type USGS maps for virtually the entire country as well as sat photos which are even more recent than most USGS maps so they can be used to help update them. I consider the Delorme software to be better than Mapsource in most instances also. Most of my testing has been in deciduous forest with the leaves off but I have also been in many fir and spruce sections up north.

Some of this is subjective, but not all.

Regards,
Keith

 

[DougPaul]

I view the quality of a GPS and the quality of maps as two separate issues.

I agree.

However, since the suppliers try to limit you to their own mapping products, in practice, they are all parts of a single system. Before purchasing GPS hardware, one should also look at the available mapping products.

There are people who have figured out how to make maps for Garmin GPSes and are doing so. If you try it, you will discover it is a lot of work...
http://mapcenter.cgpsmapper.com/
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/map_authors/
http://gpssledmaps.com/guide/

Doug

 

[DougPaul]

I have a 60csx, and whenever I stop, the track jumps all over the place - often 100 feet or more at a time. The GPS thinks it's moving 20mph sometimes, even though I'm standing still.

I've never seen this. I wonder if you have a problem with your GPS.

Doug

 

[DougPaul]

Doug, do you think this could be an issue regarding the lat/long of the GPS unit while in use? I don't think so, but I've not looked into it in detail. All I know id that in the few months I've been using my CSx (probably put 300 miles on so far, all in the northeast), I've not run into this issue.

Don't think so. See post #17.

Doug

 

[SAR-EMT40]

Here are a couple of clips of the same area. The Topo 6 map on the right window. The left window has an aerial photo and the 1:24000 USGS capture.

Just a taste.

Regards,
Keith

 

[Toe Cozy]

DeLorme has a 30 day return period, right? Why not order one, test it out and see what you think. That's the only way to know if it's right for you. Everyone's got his/her opinion, but your reaction to the device is what counts. You're the one who's got to use it. If it's no good, return it. Delorme often hustles me via email with $299 packages, this is the regular price but every other month I get an email with the "deal" price. I bet you could get that if you work it right with the customer service person. If you're not in to bushwhacking (which I know you're not...ew, there might be spiders and prickly seed things. Okay and maybe higher risk of another broken leg. Whatever. ) then the extreme accuracy may not matter. And even for most bushwhacks I would do, "extreme" accuracy isn't a requirement.

The Delorme lacks Canadian maps. I see that as a real downside for my future hiking plans. So, for now, I remain GPS-less. I will continue to mooch GPS needs from my hiking partners! (Spongebob, Nancy). However, I think I would go with the DeLorme PN-20 if someone held a gun to my head and made me choose a GPS. Hopefully that never happens because it's absurd.

Sorry you're having buyers remorse. Can you return the Garmin if you decide it's not for you?

The caveat to all my comments. I know nothing really useful about GPS. I don't even own one. Yet. Mostly I'd buy the Delorme just because "everyone" goes with the Garmin and I don't like to follow the crowd. Not logical, I know. But that's the truth, everything else is justification for my choice. I'm sure Doug Paul will be all over this soon enough with some real info.

Nevermind, I see he already has while I've been blathering away.

In the end, it's all about what works for you. I would say if you can try them and return them within a certain time period why not experiment?

 

[Raymond]

My ladyfriend bought me a 60CSx for Christmas because she thinks it will keep me from ending up as a bleached skull in a stream. A month later, she bought me the National Parks East disc.

I have yet to try out the GPS receiver on an area covered by the topographic maps (only around my home, more or less, here in Massachusetts). I’ve noticed that it doesn”t seem particularly accurate. For example, I carried the receiver on a climb of Mt. Watatic in February. When I transferred the track onto the map in the computer, the track showed that I had spent some time on the south side of Route 119, and I hadn’t. I’d been no farther south than my car’s spot in the parking lot, and not especially close to 119. On a walk around my neighborhood, the track showed that I’d crossed over onto the north side of Route 2, and I hadn’t done that, either. On yet another walk, while carrying the 60CSx and staring at its map as I walked, it showed that I was well over on the other side of Route 2, while I was actually right over the middle of it (on a bridge, natch, not down in the median). And it’s not as if the satellite just didn’t have a good fix on me, say not within a couple hundred feet, either; it supposedly had me within 10 or 20 feet. (I’ve yet to see it claim accuracy closer than 10 feet.)

Also, in trying to locate summits on the map that’s in the computer (the National Parks East), I’ve noticed that the elevation that’s listed at the bottom of the window changes as I carefully move the arrow or waypoint flag around — yet those elevations never match the listed elevations. And when I tried to set waypoints for Catskill summits (not covered by the topos), the elevations are off by hundreds of feet. In other words, I can get the summit coördinates off the Internet, but when I go to those coördinates on the Garmin map, the elevations aren’t even close to being correct (and of course I can’t see any contour lines to see if I’m actually on top of the mountain or not). On areas covered by the topos, the elevations are closer, but still usually shy of correctness. Sometimes by a few feet, sometimes by a few dozen. I don’t think the problem is that the datums don’t match, because they do.

Any idea what’s going on here?

I look forward to trying it out in an area covered by the topos.

 

[DougPaul]

My ladyfriend bought me a 60CSx for Christmas because she thinks it will keep me from ending up as a bleached skull in a stream. A month later, she bought me the National Parks East disc.

My GPS didn't prevent my skiing accident. It only meant that I could measure where it happened... (I knew well enough by traditional means, too.)

I have yet to try out the GPS receiver on an area covered by the topographic maps (only around my home, more or less, here in Massachusetts). I’ve noticed that it doesn”t seem particularly accurate. For example, I carried the receiver on a climb of Mt. Watatic in February. When I transferred the track onto the map in the computer, the track showed that I had spent some time on the south side of Route 119, and I hadn’t. I’d been no farther south than my car’s spot in the parking lot, and not especially close to 119. On a walk around my neighborhood, the track showed that I’d crossed over onto the north side of Route 2, and I hadn’t done that, either. On yet another walk, while carrying the 60CSx and staring at its map as I walked, it showed that I was well over on the other side of Route 2, while I was actually right over the middle of it (on a bridge, natch, not down in the median).

These problems can be caused by operator error. (How were you carrying it, how good is your skyview, etc. Also are you in a multipath area, do you have a bad satellite constelation, etc.) Or the GPS is often more accurate than the maps that people use to plot a track. There are too many details missing from this story to analyze the situation adequately. (I'm sorry--I don't have time to dig in right now.)

And it’s not as if the satellite just didn’t have a good fix on me, say not within a couple hundred feet, either; it supposedly had me within 10 or 20 feet. (I’ve yet to see it claim accuracy closer than 10 feet.)

The estimated position error (EPE) does not tell you the accuracy in any rigorous fashion. General accuracy is 95% of being within 10 meters if you have a good signals, no multipath, a good skyview, and proper antenna orientation.

Also, in trying to locate summits on the map that’s in the computer (the National Parks East), I’ve noticed that the elevation that’s listed at the bottom of the window changes as I carefully move the arrow or waypoint flag around — yet those elevations never match the listed elevations. And when I tried to set waypoints for Catskill summits (not covered by the topos), the elevations are off by hundreds of feet. In other words, I can get the summit coördinates off the Internet, but when I go to those coördinates on the Garmin map, the elevations aren’t even close to being correct (and of course I can’t see any contour lines to see if I’m actually on top of the mountain or not). On areas covered by the topos, the elevations are closer, but still usually shy of correctness. Sometimes by a few feet, sometimes by a few dozen. I don’t think the problem is that the datums don’t match, because they do.

Any idea what’s going on here?

OK, I'll assume that you have matched the datums properly. The 60CSx has several methods of calibrating the barometric altimeter. Did you use one? (If autocalibrating, it takes 1/2 hour or so.) (It is also possible to get the GPS altitude from a menu off the satellite page.) The newer Garmin topo maps include a DEM--the Mapsource indicated altitude is from the DEM, not the contours. Both have errors and the numbers may not match exactly. Used properly, the autocalibrated GPS is usually within 10 ft or so. I haven't checked the accuracy of the topo map (DEM) altitudes.


FWIW, it can be very hard to diagnose such problems over the net. Novice users often do something poorly or incorrectly and are unaware of it. When they ask their questions, they may not mention the critical details and the helper simply has to guess things that would be immediately obvious if both were together in the field. (I'm not pointing fingers at any individual here--just pointing out the difficulties. It is a bit like treating a serious medical problem over the net...)

Doug

 

[SAR-EMT40]

My ladyfriend bought me a 60CSx for Christmas because she thinks it will keep me from ending up as a bleached skull in a stream. A month later, she bought me the National Parks East disc.

I have yet to try out the GPS receiver on an area covered by the topographic maps (only around my home, more or less, here in Massachusetts). I’ve noticed that it doesn”t seem particularly accurate. For example, I carried the receiver on a climb of Mt. Watatic in February. When I transferred the track onto the map in the computer, the track showed that I had spent some time on the south side of Route 119, and I hadn’t. I’d been no farther south than my car’s spot in the parking lot, and not especially close to 119. On a walk around my neighborhood, the track showed that I’d crossed over onto the north side of Route 2, and I hadn’t done that, either. On yet another walk, while carrying the 60CSx and staring at its map as I walked, it showed that I was well over on the other side of Route 2, while I was actually right over the middle of it (on a bridge, natch, not down in the median). And it’s not as if the satellite just didn’t have a good fix on me, say not within a couple hundred feet, either; it supposedly had me within 10 or 20 feet. (I’ve yet to see it claim accuracy closer than 10 feet.)

Also, in trying to locate summits on the map that’s in the computer (the National Parks East), I’ve noticed that the elevation that’s listed at the bottom of the window changes as I carefully move the arrow or waypoint flag around — yet those elevations never match the listed elevations. And when I tried to set waypoints for Catskill summits (not covered by the topos), the elevations are off by hundreds of feet. In other words, I can get the summit coördinates off the Internet, but when I go to those coördinates on the Garmin map, the elevations aren’t even close to being correct (and of course I can’t see any contour lines to see if I’m actually on top of the mountain or not). On areas covered by the topos, the elevations are closer, but still usually shy of correctness. Sometimes by a few feet, sometimes by a few dozen. I don’t think the problem is that the datums don’t match, because they do.

Any idea what’s going on here?

I look forward to trying it out in an area covered by the topos.

Whenever I hear of a problem of a persistent horizontal error of less than 150 meters or so I first check that it is a Datum related mismatch.

Vertical error can be different though. The DEMs are discrete and as such any height values reported (if they are not on the exact spot where the reading is taken) from them are interpolated. It has been a long time since I looked at the DEM but if I remember correctly the measurement values are 100 meters apart. That can cause some very odd readings at times. Especially when compared to a specific known height like a mountain top. If the actual mountain top doesn't have an exact entry in the DEM then the 4 surrounding discrete values are used. If the 4 discrete points surrounding it are all less than the mountain peaks values (happens very often) then the interpolation is going to have a weird value, considerably less than it should. This is just one easy to see example. There are others.

Keith

 

[Peakbagr]

My own experience from almost constant use of the 60CSx over the last 2 years is that the altitude displayed seldomly differs from where it is, and then, by just a few feet. And it agrees with other 60's and the hand wrist altimeters others carry.

When the tracklog shows that our hike differed from where a summit or trail showed on a map, it appears that the USGS maps from which the mapping software is taken is incorrect. The trail has either been relocated slightly, or its location is incorrectly shown on the map. The same sometimes occurs with roads being slightly misrepresented on maps.
I can remember a 'whack on a Catskills 100, Churchill Mt. We were clearly on the wooded summit, or within feet, yet when I downloaded the tracklog at home, it appeared we skirted the summit. Thats not too an uncommon occurence with some of the trail errors on the maps in the Catskills or on other, older versions of USGS maps. More the fault of the maps as they converted into the software than the GPS.

DougPaul mentioned new user familiarity. How you set the GPS up may add to or detract from accuracy. How often you set it to record trackpoints or what distance between trackpoints on trails with lots of ups and downs.

For my puposes, I think the only purpose the Garmin maps serve is for the selection of maps for your mapsets. The 100K maps are very poor to use on the computer for anything. But thats where the Nat'l Geo maps on the computer compliment the Garmins. On the small screen environment of the GPS unit, both the 100K and 24K onboard maps show your position relative to the contour lines, trails, lakes and roads that are also displayed. I use a full sized USGS map to look at routes and hikes, then go to the NG software to plan a route and place waypoints. Uploaded to the GPS works fine for me in the field as I also have the papermaps with me as well.