What is the best simple low cast GPS? - Moderated Discussion Areas

  ContinuousWave
  Whaler
  Moderated Discussion Areas
  ContinuousWave: The Whaler GAM or General Area
  What is the best simple low cast GPS?

search | FAQ | profile | register | author help

Author Topic:   What is the best simple low cast GPS?

Gene in NC posted 09-09-2003 07:09 PM ET (US)
Hear Etrex satisfaction loud and clear. Good tips and testimonials.
How bout the even smaller new Garmin Geko 201, or better yet, whatever you prefer.
doobee posted 09-09-2003 07:47 PM ET (US)
I don't like the small screen Garmins. If you're backpacking and need something really lightweight they're fine. On a boat, which is a slightly less stable platform, doused with spray, and buffeted by wind and vibration, the small screen is difficult to read, and less practical. The Garmin 76 is a better way to spend your money.
Buzzorouter posted 09-09-2003 08:10 PM ET (US)
Gene in NC. I'll be watching this post real close. I was looking over my map of the lower Delaware Bay. All of the good fishing spots are marked in GPS coordinates. I am also in the market for a GPS.
To all: How important is mapping? It seems that you spend considerably more for one that has it. Are the cheap ones as accurate?
doobee posted 09-09-2003 08:30 PM ET (US)
Generally speaking, the more you spend, the better the detail. Even the cheap ones are pretty good as long as you have a paper backup for soundings.
Having a bird's eye view of where you are is especially helpful if you are in waters where you're not familiar with the landmarks and aids to navigation.
Gene in NC posted 09-09-2003 09:46 PM ET (US)
Doobee, Garmin 72 seems to be a new version of 76 with lower resolution but same screen size and some function stripped. Sound right?
West Marine prices:
Geko 201 $140
72 160
76 220
eTrex basic at several locations $115 to $120, and on sale at Dick's Sporting Goods this week at $100.
Moe posted 09-09-2003 10:58 PM ET (US)
From what I read, with it's limited memory, the 72 cannot use BlueChart or Fishing Hot Spots. Like the 1 MB base 76 model (not the GPSMAP 76), it's limited to the Points of Interest database. I've looked at the area we boat in on Lake Erie on Garmin's MapSource Viewer on their web site, and the Marine POI is seriously deficient in coastline detail and number of nav-aids shown, even compared to the Fishing Hot Spots database you can also view online. That had decent detail when I looked at it, but I'd still rather have BlueChart.
To me, a non-charting GPS is fine if you know the area you're in, i.e. where the shoals, reefs, and other hazards are between waypoints. Trying to find your GPS coordinates on a paper map underway, much less at night or in fog, is a lot harder than seeing where you are on an electronic chart.
You get what you pay for. I wouldn't buy less than a GPSMAP76 or GPSMAP76S as a primary GPS. The Etrex Legend can also do Fishing HotSpots and BlueChart and is dunkable, but can't show tides and doesn't float.
--
Moe
triblet posted 09-10-2003 12:55 AM ET (US)
The accuracy of the cheap GPSs is "good enough". Almost all
current GPSs have WAAS capability which puts the accuracy
at about 9 feet. That's provided you can receive the
WAAS birds which are not in the best locations (their day
job is comms to large commercial vessels). You should be
able to receive the WAAS birds on the open ocean anywhere
in CONUS and Hawaii. Alaska and maybe Pacific NW might
be problematic. You won't get them in California mountain
lakes because they are low on the horizon.
The one exception to WAAS capability is, I think, the
eTrex Classic (the fancier eTrexen have WAAS), which means
the accuracy is about 45' which is still pretty good.
Certainly good enough to get you home in the fog.
My primary GPS on the whaler is a Garmin 162. I've also got
one of the fancier eTrexes for hiking and for input to the
car nav software on my laptop. The eTrex is a pain to read
on moving boat.
The most important feature of any GPS is YOUR ability to use
it. Practice IFR navigation under VFR conditions, and the
day the fog clamps down, no problem. Navigate using both
the GPS and your eyeballs everytime you go out. And show
your regular buddies how to use it, if only enough to get the
lat/long displayed so they can call the CG when you have a
heart attack.

Chuck
jameso posted 09-10-2003 08:44 AM ET (US)
Chuck,
Well said, I taught my children how to call 'Mayday' and to give the coordinates.
The title of this thread seems to be an oxymoronic statement. I think GPS is important and hardly leave the dock without it. GPS requirements will vary from one user to the other, I would not be without mapping (Garmin 76)because one tidal creek looks the same as 10 others. Believe me getting lost a couple of times will make you appreciate the technology. Then on the other hand if you just want to pick up Lat/Long and maybe navigate a large body of water with few nav hazards non mapping is OK.
Don't scrimp on the $ if safety is at stake.
My 02, Jim
Knot at Work posted 09-10-2003 09:24 AM ET (US)
Great question.
In my opinion it really boils down to what your going to use it for, and how big your whaler is.
I have a 170 Montauk, and console space is a premium. That said, I recommend the Garmin 188. Skip the color, but this is the best of all 4 worlds. A transom mounted transducer,
it has Speed, Depth, fishfinder, and Map and GPS. One really awesome feature is a Mark for Man over board that will allow you to return by seconds and feet to the spot of the mark, great to use for that Hazard or that fish.
The best reason is you need a multi function due to limited space.
Garmin makes a great product. It fits well with the whaler
Jeff
Tom2697 posted 09-10-2003 10:31 AM ET (US)
I used a Garmin Etrex for about 4 years before upgrading. This unit allowed me to learn a new bay system as well as venture near-offshore and find some reefs and wrecks. It took some homework to use properly (manually entering different waypoints in before my trip) but it worked fine. I probably would still use it as my main GPS except for a few facts: (1) it does not interface to other electronics, (2) I had to program manually all the navaids for a 40 mile run (100+ markers), and (3) I had to navigate the inlet in 3' conditions, at night, with 0 visibility using only this unit. That was when I decided to buy radar and couple it with a mapping GPS. For those sensible folks who do not venture offshore in all sorts of nasty conditions, the Etrex is a great unit, at a good price!
skred posted 09-10-2003 10:38 AM ET (US)
ETREX ! The operative words here were "low-cost". Of course, a "low-cost" military fighter costs over $30 million, so I guess it's all relative....
alkar posted 09-10-2003 11:38 AM ET (US)
I like the Lowrance LMS-320. Yes, at almost $600 it's much more money that an e-trex, but it's still in the lower quarter of the price range, and the Lowrance gives you MUCH more for your money. It's a combination unit, so you get GPS AND a good, high-resolution fishfinder, while only using one spot on your console. The LMS fishfinder is equivalent to the X-91/x-87; it has enough power to provide good detail and separation on the bottom in deeper water. The GPS unit provides decent mapping detail even without the available Navionics chips (which provide extrordinary detail). Most importantly, you can read the screen easily while underway. If you're feeling flush when you get your tax returns, you can add the navionics chip for your area and have a first rate system.
I would not buy a GPS unit without mapping. The decent mapping units are almost completely idiot-proof. Anybody who can read a map can steer your boat back to port. That's a very nice safety feature.
If you set the LMS-320 to show your track it's easy to return along your original path. That's a wonderful feature when you're retreiving all the crab pots you set on your way out. It's also pretty nice when you're back at the dock and you want to compare fishing strategies with your buddies you chose a different route. The route looks like a tracing on a nautical chart.
I've got an e-trex. It's a wonderful little unit for backpacking, and it'll get you back to port if you know how to use it, but it isn't a good primary unit for a boat.
csj posted 09-10-2003 10:32 PM ET (US)
Gene, Having had a hand held for several years to save a few bucks sounded great. The reality is that a gps maping system is much better especially if your boating in unfamiliar waters. I finally purchased a garmin 162, having already installed a fish/depth finder. As stated by others the 188/162 are all good units, keeping price in mind. If you don't have a fish/depth finder I would suggest the garmin 168. I think that is one of the best priced units out there. Needless to say there are better (expensive) units out there, to include color but not really neccessary.

Hop to:

Contact Us | RETURN to ContinuousWave Top Page

Powered by: Ultimate Bulletin Board, Freeware Version 2000
Purchase our Licensed Version- which adds many more features!
© Infopop Corporation (formerly Madrona Park, Inc.), 1998 - 2000.

Author	Topic: What is the best simple low cast GPS?
Gene in NC	posted 09-09-2003 07:09 PM ET (US) Hear Etrex satisfaction loud and clear. Good tips and testimonials. How bout the even smaller new Garmin Geko 201, or better yet, whatever you prefer.
doobee	posted 09-09-2003 07:47 PM ET (US) I don't like the small screen Garmins. If you're backpacking and need something really lightweight they're fine. On a boat, which is a slightly less stable platform, doused with spray, and buffeted by wind and vibration, the small screen is difficult to read, and less practical. The Garmin 76 is a better way to spend your money.
Buzzorouter	posted 09-09-2003 08:10 PM ET (US) Gene in NC. I'll be watching this post real close. I was looking over my map of the lower Delaware Bay. All of the good fishing spots are marked in GPS coordinates. I am also in the market for a GPS. To all: How important is mapping? It seems that you spend considerably more for one that has it. Are the cheap ones as accurate?
doobee	posted 09-09-2003 08:30 PM ET (US) Generally speaking, the more you spend, the better the detail. Even the cheap ones are pretty good as long as you have a paper backup for soundings. Having a bird's eye view of where you are is especially helpful if you are in waters where you're not familiar with the landmarks and aids to navigation.
Gene in NC	posted 09-09-2003 09:46 PM ET (US) Doobee, Garmin 72 seems to be a new version of 76 with lower resolution but same screen size and some function stripped. Sound right? West Marine prices: Geko 201 $140 72 160 76 220 eTrex basic at several locations $115 to $120, and on sale at Dick's Sporting Goods this week at $100.
Moe	posted 09-09-2003 10:58 PM ET (US) From what I read, with it's limited memory, the 72 cannot use BlueChart or Fishing Hot Spots. Like the 1 MB base 76 model (not the GPSMAP 76), it's limited to the Points of Interest database. I've looked at the area we boat in on Lake Erie on Garmin's MapSource Viewer on their web site, and the Marine POI is seriously deficient in coastline detail and number of nav-aids shown, even compared to the Fishing Hot Spots database you can also view online. That had decent detail when I looked at it, but I'd still rather have BlueChart. To me, a non-charting GPS is fine if you know the area you're in, i.e. where the shoals, reefs, and other hazards are between waypoints. Trying to find your GPS coordinates on a paper map underway, much less at night or in fog, is a lot harder than seeing where you are on an electronic chart. You get what you pay for. I wouldn't buy less than a GPSMAP76 or GPSMAP76S as a primary GPS. The Etrex Legend can also do Fishing HotSpots and BlueChart and is dunkable, but can't show tides and doesn't float. -- Moe
triblet	posted 09-10-2003 12:55 AM ET (US) The accuracy of the cheap GPSs is "good enough". Almost all current GPSs have WAAS capability which puts the accuracy at about 9 feet. That's provided you can receive the WAAS birds which are not in the best locations (their day job is comms to large commercial vessels). You should be able to receive the WAAS birds on the open ocean anywhere in CONUS and Hawaii. Alaska and maybe Pacific NW might be problematic. You won't get them in California mountain lakes because they are low on the horizon. The one exception to WAAS capability is, I think, the eTrex Classic (the fancier eTrexen have WAAS), which means the accuracy is about 45' which is still pretty good. Certainly good enough to get you home in the fog. My primary GPS on the whaler is a Garmin 162. I've also got one of the fancier eTrexes for hiking and for input to the car nav software on my laptop. The eTrex is a pain to read on moving boat. The most important feature of any GPS is YOUR ability to use it. Practice IFR navigation under VFR conditions, and the day the fog clamps down, no problem. Navigate using both the GPS and your eyeballs everytime you go out. And show your regular buddies how to use it, if only enough to get the lat/long displayed so they can call the CG when you have a heart attack. Chuck
jameso	posted 09-10-2003 08:44 AM ET (US) Chuck, Well said, I taught my children how to call 'Mayday' and to give the coordinates. The title of this thread seems to be an oxymoronic statement. I think GPS is important and hardly leave the dock without it. GPS requirements will vary from one user to the other, I would not be without mapping (Garmin 76)because one tidal creek looks the same as 10 others. Believe me getting lost a couple of times will make you appreciate the technology. Then on the other hand if you just want to pick up Lat/Long and maybe navigate a large body of water with few nav hazards non mapping is OK. Don't scrimp on the $ if safety is at stake. My 02, Jim
Knot at Work	posted 09-10-2003 09:24 AM ET (US) Great question. In my opinion it really boils down to what your going to use it for, and how big your whaler is. I have a 170 Montauk, and console space is a premium. That said, I recommend the Garmin 188. Skip the color, but this is the best of all 4 worlds. A transom mounted transducer, it has Speed, Depth, fishfinder, and Map and GPS. One really awesome feature is a Mark for Man over board that will allow you to return by seconds and feet to the spot of the mark, great to use for that Hazard or that fish. The best reason is you need a multi function due to limited space. Garmin makes a great product. It fits well with the whaler Jeff
Tom2697	posted 09-10-2003 10:31 AM ET (US) I used a Garmin Etrex for about 4 years before upgrading. This unit allowed me to learn a new bay system as well as venture near-offshore and find some reefs and wrecks. It took some homework to use properly (manually entering different waypoints in before my trip) but it worked fine. I probably would still use it as my main GPS except for a few facts: (1) it does not interface to other electronics, (2) I had to program manually all the navaids for a 40 mile run (100+ markers), and (3) I had to navigate the inlet in 3' conditions, at night, with 0 visibility using only this unit. That was when I decided to buy radar and couple it with a mapping GPS. For those sensible folks who do not venture offshore in all sorts of nasty conditions, the Etrex is a great unit, at a good price!
skred	posted 09-10-2003 10:38 AM ET (US) ETREX ! The operative words here were "low-cost". Of course, a "low-cost" military fighter costs over $30 million, so I guess it's all relative....
alkar	posted 09-10-2003 11:38 AM ET (US) I like the Lowrance LMS-320. Yes, at almost $600 it's much more money that an e-trex, but it's still in the lower quarter of the price range, and the Lowrance gives you MUCH more for your money. It's a combination unit, so you get GPS AND a good, high-resolution fishfinder, while only using one spot on your console. The LMS fishfinder is equivalent to the X-91/x-87; it has enough power to provide good detail and separation on the bottom in deeper water. The GPS unit provides decent mapping detail even without the available Navionics chips (which provide extrordinary detail). Most importantly, you can read the screen easily while underway. If you're feeling flush when you get your tax returns, you can add the navionics chip for your area and have a first rate system. I would not buy a GPS unit without mapping. The decent mapping units are almost completely idiot-proof. Anybody who can read a map can steer your boat back to port. That's a very nice safety feature. If you set the LMS-320 to show your track it's easy to return along your original path. That's a wonderful feature when you're retreiving all the crab pots you set on your way out. It's also pretty nice when you're back at the dock and you want to compare fishing strategies with your buddies you chose a different route. The route looks like a tracing on a nautical chart. I've got an e-trex. It's a wonderful little unit for backpacking, and it'll get you back to port if you know how to use it, but it isn't a good primary unit for a boat.
csj	posted 09-10-2003 10:32 PM ET (US) Gene, Having had a hand held for several years to save a few bucks sounded great. The reality is that a gps maping system is much better especially if your boating in unfamiliar waters. I finally purchased a garmin 162, having already installed a fish/depth finder. As stated by others the 188/162 are all good units, keeping price in mind. If you don't have a fish/depth finder I would suggest the garmin 168. I think that is one of the best priced units out there. Needless to say there are better (expensive) units out there, to include color but not really neccessary.