# Garmin GSMap 60CSx or Vista HCx?



## skunkty14 (Jan 7, 2005)

Looking for some advise on a GPS unit. I've done a fair amount of reading on this forum, Singletracks, etc. but thought folks on here might be able to provide some feedback based on what I'd like a GPS unit to do for me.

1. Getting less lost/navigating new trails & riding areas (would also see limited use for hiking)
2. Loading rides from Motionbased to follow others routes & rides.
3. Logging distance, elevation, etc. for rides (I know pretty much any decent unit will handle this).
4. This might be a sticking point: creating maps of local ride areas. I'd like log data for trails that I ride, mark the intersections with waypoints that I can number/name with info from printed maps. I'd also like to mark features (rollers, drops, etc.) along the way and overlay everything over a topo or Google maps image

I've been looking at the GSMap 60CSx because I like the barometric altimeter but realized that the Vista HCx what appears to be essentially the same capabilities but with a smaller screen and internal antenna but at a lower price. Am I missing some key comparison points where one model excels vs. the alternative. In case it matters I will be using a Mac to manage all my data, but from what I've read here and at Garmin Connect that Mac compatibility won't be much of an issue.

Thanks for the assistance!


----------



## oohsh_t (Aug 11, 2007)

I have the 60CSx, It will do everything you listed... Actually, I don't know about motionbased.

I have a mac, You can get Garmin Bobcat or MacGPS pro.
Overlaying new trails on Google earth is my favorite thing to do.

You can also you can record - Time moving, Time stopped, Highest speed, Altitude and about 10 other options.
The only thing it doesn't do is cadence and heart rate.

To get a great road map you need to get Garmin's city navigator.
You will need a 2 gb micro SD card to hold the entire US
I use a 1 gb and load the areas I am going as I need them, I have the state of Florida loaded with room to spare right now.


----------



## RockyRider (Nov 21, 2004)

*+1 on what oosh said*

I have the 60 CSx and the an etrax with the internal antenna and the other thing that I would point out is the 60s ability to get a good signal pretty much anywhere. The etrax looses it in the trees and pretty much anywhere else. I like to overlay my routes in google earth too, and when you are making a track it shows it on the screen so you can back track easily or save the track to use later as you ride. I like the larger screen on the 60 because it makes it so much easier to see everything. The only knock I would give it is the battery gage on it because it shows full power until about the last hour and it dies pretty quick after that- but thats with alki's and I haven't tried my rechargables in there yet.


----------



## slocaus (Jul 21, 2005)

From this comparison, you will have to buy the SD card for the Vista, included with the 60CSx. And the Vista does not have the tide table that the 60CSx includes.

I have had a 60CSx for a couple years, and it does all you ask and more. It looks like the Vista HCx does it all too. I think size is the deciding factor. Have fun choosing.


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

Size and button layouts are the biggies. It's less of a concern now than it used to be, but the internal patch antenna on the etrex receivers actually is not quite as good as the quad helix antenna on the 60/76 series. The 60/76 receivers also have external antenna capabilities that the etrex series lacks. If you want to be more serious about mapping, the 60/76 receivers will be a better fit. If you're more serious about just keeping track of where you've been and where you are, then either one will work (with the etrex having the smaller size advantage for h-bar mounting).

Button layout is the final major difference. I personally don't care much for the click stick on the etrex. I like the directional pad of my 76 with separate enter, exit, zoom, page, find, and power buttons oriented around it.


----------



## skunkty14 (Jan 7, 2005)

Thanks for the great info so far everyone.

Slocaus, I did the same comparison last night via Gamin's webpage and noticed the same points you pulled out. Though the 60CSx comes with a 64mb card, from what oohsh_t mentioned above it looks like a larger card will be needed to store any resonable amount of data on the unit.

The other problem I've now noticed is that I'm running OS X 10.3.9 on my iBook and it looks like most of the software I'd like to use requires 10.4 or higher. So at minimum I'll need an OS upgrade, which probably means a new computer too since mine is getting up there in age.


----------



## GEOMAN (May 30, 2006)

slocaus said:


> From this comparison, you will have to buy the SD card for the Vista, included with the 60CSx. And the Vista does not have the tide table that the 60CSx includes.
> 
> I have had a 60CSx for a couple years, and it does all you ask and more. It looks like the Vista HCx does it all too. I think size is the deciding factor. Have fun choosing.


I've had both of them. They are so close in performance I couldn't discern a difference. The biggest difference is in "use". The 60CSx is easier to use (navigate menus, etc.) but, frankly, it is much larger than the Vista HCx and mounting the 60CSx on your bar can be a little disconcerting. It sticks out like a bull's horn. Considering the approx $150 price differential and the Vista seems better suited to most cyclists, IMHO.


----------



## skunkty14 (Jan 7, 2005)

GEOMAN said:


> I've had both of them. They are so close in performance I couldn't discern a difference. The biggest difference is in "use". The 60CSx is easier to use (navigate menus, etc.) but, frankly, it is much larger than the Vista HCx and mounting the 60CSx on your bar can be a little disconcerting. It sticks out like a bull's horn. Considering the approx $150 price differential and the Vista seems better suited to most cyclists, IMHO.


Thanks for the info GEOMAN, I was hoping you'd chime in. Based on your reply, other than ease of naviagation, are there any other major adavantages to the 60CSx vs. the Vista? Bulkiness of the unit doesn't matter too much to me since I believe this unit will spent most of it's time in my pack to safe guard it from crashes.


----------



## GEOMAN (May 30, 2006)

skunkty14 said:


> Thanks for the info GEOMAN, I was hoping you'd chime in. Based on your reply, other than ease of naviagation, are there any other major adavantages to the 60CSx vs. the Vista? Bulkiness of the unit doesn't matter too much to me since I believe this unit will spent most of it's time in my pack to safe guard it from crashes.


Well, I LOVE the 60CSx. It is very easy to use and, frankly, it feels better in the hand to me. The 60CSx has a quad-helix antenna that is supposed to be superior than the Vista's but I couldn't discern a difference in satellite reception (my field testing was done at 7,000 feet in sunny and dry New Mexico).

If one isn't going to bar mount and isn't too worried about price, I would be most happy with the 60CSx.

Enjoy!


----------



## BigLarry (Jul 30, 2004)

I've used the eTrex Vista for years, and have moved to the 60CSx for the last year.

The only major difference is size and button layout. The software and features are nearly identical. I now prefer the 60CSx simply for the bigger screen and nicer buttons. It doesn't have any more pixel resolution than the Vista HCx, but it's just easier to read for poor eyes. It used to be the 60CSx had better reception, but the newer Vista HCx is now getting about the same with it's high sensitivity receiver. 

The eTrex line is a bit more rugged and compact. It's got rubberized sides, and my Vista has going bouncing down the trail or road countless times with no damage. My 60CSx broke some buttons while in my pack during an endo, but has done fine for the last year on the bars. 

Another friend had the protruding antennae on his 60CSx break twice on him during crashes and traded to the eTrex Vista series which has done him well for over a year now, even in major crashes. Both of them were put on the handlebars.


----------



## 40hills (Apr 24, 2006)

*"Real time" topo maps?*

Can both units display a topo map and show your route on it as you go (as opposed to simply downloading your route into a topo map application after your ride)? I have a local trail I want to map and possibly add singletrack to... being able to see where the hills go would help in planning the trail. Also, when riding some place like Pisgah in NC it would be great to be able to select routes using the topo.


----------



## Krein (Jul 3, 2004)

40hills said:


> Can both units display a topo map and show your route on it as you go (as opposed to simply downloading your route into a topo map application after your ride)? I have a local trail I want to map and possibly add singletrack to... being able to see where the hills go would help in planning the trail. Also, when riding some place like Pisgah in NC it would be great to be able to select routes using the topo.


Both units have the same display capability as far as what maps they can show. Using the new Topo 2008 DVD you can get 100 ft contours to show up on either GPS. Of course you can upload any GPS track you want to be displayed as well.

If you live in CO, UT, WY or MT you can get 40 foot contours using these free mapsource uploads:

http://www.miscjunk.org/mj/mp_main.html

I've also used both units. After thousands of miles with my 60CS I've now been using mainly a Vista unit. The buttons are not as convenient, but I so far prefer the smaller profile and better handlebar mount system.


----------



## BigLarry (Jul 30, 2004)

40hills said:


> Can both units display a topo map and show your route on it as you go (as opposed to simply downloading your route into a topo map application after your ride)? I have a local trail I want to map and possibly add singletrack to... being able to see where the hills go would help in planning the trail. Also, when riding some place like Pisgah in NC it would be great to be able to select routes using the topo.


Selecting trails is best done on a nice big high resolution computer screen at home before you leave. The topo software can display on your computer, and download fine to either GPS.

You can show a "track" of where you've gone on a trail in relation to the surrounding terrain. You can see this running track on your GPS topo map, as well and on your computer when you upload the track when you get home.


----------



## Crashtdp (Mar 7, 2004)

*Garmin Colorado*

Have you checked out the new Garmin Colorado? Comes loaded with topo maps, does 3d views of the terrain, i'm looking into getting one of these to replace my stolen vista


----------



## BigLarry (Jul 30, 2004)

Crashtdp said:


> Have you checked out the new Garmin Colorado? Comes loaded with topo maps, does 3d views of the terrain, i'm looking into getting one of these to replace my stolen vista


There's been a big thread on the Colorado. Looks like a nice evolution but it still has a lot of software glitches and missing features which can be undated in firmware as they're fixed. As for hardware, the screen is very hard to see in the sun, the rocker wheel is slow to use for input of letters and numbers, and the slide-on battery cover can leak water. It needs some work before it will become fully Garmin-ready. Wait a year or so on it.


----------



## ToddM (Feb 3, 2004)

I've played with a colorado for awhile, and I agree with BigLarry completely in that it's not ready yet. You have no trackback feature or any other way to reverse navigate a trail such as an out and back trail or if you want to do a loop both ways, no waypoint averaging, the battery life is really poor, the screen is very hard to see outside on a bike, the backlight is very dim, there are waterproof issues, it will only show one track at a time on the map, it will show realtime HR and Cadence with the sensor, but does not give any real data as far as averages, min, max etc. and the list goes on.

Worse yet is while the 60 series had new firmware updates almost weekly when it came out, it's been almost two months since the last colorado update, and they did just release a new beta firmware update that addresses none of those issues, they fixed bugs, but added no new/missing features requested. That says to me that garmin is not interested in adding requested features only fixing bugs. Currently the unit is loved by geocachers but in my opinion is unacceptable for navigation, field work, or use on the bike. In fact my recommendation to my friend who purchased one was to wait for another firmware update, and if those things are not addressed dump the unit and get a 60/76/etrex series that you can actually use for navigation and field work.


----------

