# New Garmin Extrex Vista HCX



## testtech (Jan 2, 2005)

I just finished my 1st ride. I purchased this because my Etrex Legend gets lost in the trees. The HCx , with its high sensitivity receiver, does not. The electronic compass is a useful feature for getting on course after stopping since it always points toward the route direction. The color screen renders mapped topo features easier to distinguish than the black and white display on the Legend. Data transfers are substantially faster. The start-up is far faster. It is even faster than my Edge GPS. If you are interested in a mapping GPS to take on a bike, this is a good bet.


----------



## Zero_Enigma (Dec 14, 2006)

Hmm.. they say the Legend HCx is high sensitivity on Garmins site ( https://buy.garmin.com/shop/shop.do?cID=145&pID=8701 ) yet it does not state if it's SiRF technology or if they just tweaked the old sensors.


----------



## testtech (Jan 2, 2005)

It is not SiRF. It is another chip. I have used this side-by-side with a SiRF unit (an Edge ). They performed identically in the trees. The Etrex starts faster. At this point, I don't see that the chip brand matters here.


----------



## Speedub.Nate (Dec 31, 2003)

I've been watching this one, and following the initial user reviews over on the groundspeak forums. I've held off on the Edge, waiting for a mapping unit.

I'm curious what bike friendly features the Vista is lacking?

Cadence, for one. For me, not important.

Another is the wheel sensor. I've read that the Vista HCX is under-reporting mileage in some tree covered situations, by a significant amount. This error disappears when the track is uploaded to GPS mapping software, of course, and the track itself is reportedly accurate.

What about bike-specific data? Average speed, time in route, elevation gain all seem to be present. Anything missing?


----------



## crisillo (Jul 3, 2004)

cool.. I didn't know they were out already... nice! the Vista HCx seems to have all the features from my 60 CSx, but in a smaller package :thumbsup: (I loved the size of my old Legend)


----------



## alizbee (Aug 25, 2005)

I have had my Vista HCx for a few days now, and I really like it. It's my first mapping GPS, so I can't compare it to other models, but compared to my Edge it does lock onto Sats faster. I used it over the weekend to navigate a pre-planned route, and it was very fun.


----------



## testtech (Jan 2, 2005)

Speedub: There are not really any "Bike specific" features". This is a small mapping GPS that mounts conveniently on your bars. That said, it provides all the info you mentioned (except cadence). I did a ride with 205 and 305 edges and the HCx. Also, I had a polar bike computer, which provides a barometric altimeter, as do the 305 and the HCX. All three provided comparable mileage under dense foliage over a 16 mile ride. Total ascent ranged from 1800 to 2200. The polar had 2200, the HCx was at 2000. Your guess as to which might be most accurate for ascent.


----------



## slocaus (Jul 21, 2005)

testtech said:


> Total ascent ranged from 1800 to 2200. The polar had 2200, the HCx was at 2000. Your guess as to which might be most accurate for ascent.


I'll put my money on the Garmin HCX with GPS and barometric altimeter. My old Polar Bike Computer HRM was barometric altimeter only, and had more error due to normal pressure changes during the day. The Garmin uses GPS positon and then corrects via the barometric altimeter, if I understand the technology correctly (disclaimer - I may not).

When I first got my 305, I used it alongside the Polar for comparison of the two software data results. I then uploaded the track to MotionBased and let it correct the elevations. The Garmin was consistently more accurate in its reading than the Polar by 10-20%.

YMMV


----------



## Speedub.Nate (Dec 31, 2003)

slocaus said:


> I'll put my money on the Garmin HCX with GPS and barometric altimeter.


I dunno... the 305, from what I've seen (ride reports, race course descriptions, comparisons with other data) seems to grossly overexaggerate elevation accumulation -- and that device combines GPS with a barometric sensor, as well.

However, even using precisely surveyed data points, there is still going to be variation between any two devices given the method of calculation. Every rock the trail our tires roll over offers potential elevation gain, and it's up to the programmer / engineer to decide what is discarded as "noise" and what is counted.


----------



## slocaus (Jul 21, 2005)

Speedub.Nate said:


> I dunno... the 305, from what I've seen (ride reports, race course descriptions, comparisons with other data) seems to grossly over exaggerate elevation accumulation -- and that device combines GPS with a barometric sensor, as well.
> 
> However, even using precisely surveyed data points, there is still going to be variation between any two devices given the method of calculation. Every rock the trail our tires roll over offers potential elevation gain, and it's up to the programmer / engineer to decide what is discarded as "noise" and what is counted.


I was betting on the 305 (GPS+Baro) over the Polar (Baro only).

Good points. Also there are variations in barometric pressure throughout the day, so even sitting at rest, a GPS with barometric altimeter will show vertical drift.

Part of the "gross over exaggeration" that you mention is the slight ups and downs of any ride being accumulated. We tend to think of high point and a low point and the elevation difference between them. Likely only a helicopter carrying a GPS will get that reading. Any land based vehicle will show ups and downs. I thought my readings were very wrong until I understood that reality. Some of the mapping software I use allows "smoothing" to alleviate this phenomenon.

MotionBased has the MB Gravity smoothing, for what it is worth. MB Gravity uses known survey points based on the lat/long data points that a GPS lays down in the track. Here is an example of how even a known flat event can show elevation changes. This link is someones' track run for 5 miles, showing +92 / -92 feet of elevation change. 
http://trail.motionbased.com/trail/activity/3505385

I also know on my dawn training rides from home (213 feet) to Avila Beach (10 feet), my 305 will show me very wet (-8 feet) while I am only sweaty damp, eating a banana 100 yards from the ocean  This ride usually starts under a clear sky and goes into a thick marine layer at the halfway point, and then back to much warmer clear sky 1 1/2 hours later.

Direct comparisons with my 60CSx and 305 will give almost identical elevations, while the GPS accuracy of the 305 is +/- 26 feet, and the 60CSx is +/- 12 feet, due to the differences between the 305 patch antenna vs the 60CSx helix antenna.

Here is a laymans primer on GPS elevation accuracy.
http://www.ja-gps.com.au/whatisgps.html#anchor6367142



> 1. GPS primarily indicates a surface (horizontal) position based on a mathematical model representing the earth's near-spherical surface. Height or elevation is a different kettle of fish.
> 
> GPS can give a distance from the centre of the earth, and then by using the radius of the surface model (see above), give you an elevation from the surface model. Let's call this the mathematical elevation. Then you have to ask, does this represent a height above sea level? The answer is no. It may do so in places, but only by accident.
> 
> ...


My understanding from all my reading is that the survey quality GPSr is much more accurate in location and elevation, but $20,000 or so and probably will not fit on the bike handlebars to be visible.


----------



## GEOMAN (May 30, 2006)

crisillo said:


> cool.. I didn't know they were out already... nice! the Vista HCx seems to have all the features from my 60 CSx, but in a smaller package :thumbsup: (I loved the size of my old Legend)


We just got in a shipment. They are hard to get...


----------



## Yakfish (Apr 30, 2006)

Just ordered the Vista HCx from Jay the Geoman:thumbsup: Great guy to chat with and I am very much looking forward to learning to do some route mapping.


----------



## Hawseman (Jun 1, 2007)

Yakfish said:


> Just ordered the Vista HCx from Jay the Geoman:thumbsup: Great guy to chat with and I am very much looking forward to learning to do some route mapping.


A good price too.....

Geoman, do you carry any accessories for the Etrex? thinking mostly of the carrying case and topo 2008.


----------



## slocaus (Jul 21, 2005)

If you have a current Garmin Topo, you can update to Topo 2008 and get a $30.00 rebate.
http://www8.garmin.com/whatsNew/currentpromotions/pdfs/topo_rebate.pdf


----------



## Guest (Aug 22, 2007)

*Just Replaced a Vista Cx with a Vista HCx*

Early this summer I tried geo caching with my Vista Cx, but here in the wooded trails of West Virginia, I could never keep satellite reception; so the Cx is virtually unused.

Today I received my new Vista HCx from Geoman. Wow! Inside my house, it locked on to satellites immediately, and never lost them. Can't wait to go hiking with it as soon as my broken arm (bike accident) is healed. I went out on the porch to compare both units, and I had completely set up the HCx in the time it took the Cx to load satellites. They look about the same except for the absence of the garmin logo on the front of the HCx.

I also use an Edge 305 (also from Geoman) to track my cycling stats, and a Forerunner 305 for running and hiking. Since I had cardiac bypass in 2000, it is crucial that I monitor heart rate, and both these units do a great job of that. Now with the Edge for training and the Vista HCx for mapping both mounted on my bike, I should be set!

Geoman -- why can't everyone get products to customers as fast as you can?


----------



## Guest (Aug 22, 2007)

*Just Replaced a Vista Cx with a Vista HCx*

Sorry -- double post


----------



## GEOMAN (May 30, 2006)

bootchman said:


> Early this summer I tried geo caching with my Vista Cx, but here in the wooded trails of West Virginia, I could never keep satellite reception; so the Cx is virtually unused.
> 
> Today I received my new Vista HCx from Geoman. Wow! Inside my house, it locked on to satellites immediately, and never lost them. Can't wait to go hiking with it as soon as my broken arm (bike accident) is healed. I went out on the porch to compare both units, and I had completely set up the HCx in the time it took the Cx to load satellites. They look about the same except for the absence of the garmin logo on the front of the HCx.
> 
> ...


The difference between us and the "big guys" is service. We sincerely try to astonish.

Thanks for the support.


----------



## roadiegonebad (Jan 31, 2004)

what did you do with the Cx?


----------



## Guest (Aug 23, 2007)

double again -- sorry


----------



## Guest (Aug 23, 2007)

I put the Cx in my desk drawer. It is fine out in the open, but you can't stay "out in the open" for long here where I live.


----------



## socalenduro (Nov 1, 2006)

I just got a Vista HCx from GeoMan too. All I can say is WOW.

When you download routes ala GXP files does it only move the waypoints? I saved them from www.geoladders.com and once i got them uploaded to the GPS unit all i had was waypoints. Is that normal?


----------



## rm25x (Apr 2, 2005)

So if I want to get a GPS for my bike, would the 305 with the $75 rebate or the Vista HCx be a better choice? I do not plan on really using the cadence, maybe the heart rate just because it comes with the 305. Whats needed to mount the HCx to my stem? Main reason for wanting the gps is to track where the car is when we go exploring, keep track of distance rode, mark things we find exploring we would like to come back to, etc. Thanks.


----------



## GEOMAN (May 30, 2006)

rm25x said:


> So if I want to get a GPS for my bike, would the 305 with the $75 rebate or the Vista HCx be a better choice? I do not plan on really using the cadence, maybe the heart rate just because it comes with the 305. Whats needed to mount the HCx to my stem? Main reason for wanting the gps is to track where the car is when we go exploring, keep track of distance rode, mark things we find exploring we would like to come back to, etc. Thanks.


Therein lies the problem. They both serve different purposes but the easiest way to explain is to remember that the Edge is NOT a mapping GPS. It is a GPS enhanced training computer. Some of us (like me) run both the Edge 305 and the Vista HCx.

The Vista HCx has a handlebar mount (not stem but bar only).

Based on the "reasons" you outlined, the Vista HCx would be the best bet initially, IMHO.

The pic I've attached shows my bar with the Edge 305 and a 60CSx. The Vista is a bit smaller with, essentially, the same attributes as the 60CSx so I'm migrating that direction and have just now acquired a Vista HCx for testing.


----------



## rm25x (Apr 2, 2005)

Wow thanks for the reply, and the pic helps a lot. I like the idea of the color display, plus I ride ATV's and can use the GPS for that as well. I like how the 305 attaches to the stem though. Would have to see what I can come up with for a stem mount for the HCx I guess.


----------



## GEOMAN (May 30, 2006)

I just took this pic with the updated GPS - an eTrex Vista HCx... Enjoy!


----------



## rm25x (Apr 2, 2005)

wow thanks, now thats service!


----------



## roadiegonebad (Jan 31, 2004)

GEOMAN said:


> Therein lies the problem. They both serve different purposes but the easiest way to explain is to remember that the Edge is NOT a mapping GPS. It is a GPS enhanced training computer. Some of us (like me) run both the Edge 305 and the Vista HCx.
> 
> The Vista HCx has a handlebar mount (not stem but bar only).
> 
> ...


I'd be interested in your thoughts comparing the HCx and 60CSx... thinking of upgrading an eTrex and the obvious choices are those 2


----------



## djphaneuf (May 7, 2007)

I have never used a GPS device so excuse my ignorance. Like someone earlier in the thread I am torn between the Edge and the Vista. I understand from Geoman that they serve two different applications (training computer versus mapping GPS), but wonder how long it will be before someone puts both of these functions into one unit. I am guessing that the training computer would be more useful for me than the mapping function since I do not go on rides where I need a GPS to figure out the route. I also suppose that since I am not too worried about tracking my heart rate or cadence that the 305 does not offer much over the 205 except for the improved altitude determination. 

Does my evaluation of my needs sound correct or am I missing something?


----------



## rm25x (Apr 2, 2005)

Same goes for me, I could use a 305 and I am sure it would do all I wanted, but the HCx I could use for other hobbies as well, since its a full out GPS. I also like the color display, and I believe you can do the road maps on it too for city exploring or for driving directions to that new trail head you want to hit.


----------



## slocaus (Jul 21, 2005)

Just think carefully about the "savings" of getting a 205 vs the rebate on the 305 and get the barometric altimeter.

Edge 305 + HR + Cadence here for $269 - $75 rebate = $194! Beat that! 
Get the 305 with Cadence only for $237.00 minus $75.00 rebate = $162.00!
Get the 305 with Heart Rate only for $237.00 minus $75.00 rebate = $162.00!

Read all the praise for GeoMan on this forum. I'm a multi purchase satisfied customer. So is this receipient of Astonishing Service.

@ *rm25x* You will end up with one of each like I did, and as GeoMan has pictured. I use the 60CSx more getting to trailheads, but on the bike for finding hidden trails. The Edge 305 goes on one of three bikes for every single ride I do. :thumbsup:


----------



## djphaneuf (May 7, 2007)

*cadence or hr on mountain bike*

I am not sure what purpose either cadence or heart rate monitoring serve on my mountain bike since my terrain and riding style is constantly changing. My cadence changes quite a bit and I am sure my heartbeat does. Also do not want to wear any sensors or add more stuff to my bike. Maybe you can help me understand why I would want this stuff.

Thx,

Dave


----------



## slocaus (Jul 21, 2005)

djphaneuf said:


> I am not sure what purpose either cadence or heart rate monitoring serve on my mountain bike since my terrain and riding style is constantly changing. My cadence changes quite a bit and I am sure my heartbeat does. Also do not want to wear any sensors or add more stuff to my bike. Maybe you can help me understand why I would want this stuff.
> 
> Thx,
> 
> Dave


If you don't think you need HR or cadence, you do not. HR is a good training tool for serious athletes to monitor fitness level and not overtrain. This post is why I use an HR enhanced GPS, and the link in my sig explains more of why I use one. I'm not out to convince anyone that they need one, if you want HR data, you know why. Cadence monitor is a personal choice, and I only use it on a road bike.

The 305 with rebate is probably cheaper than the 205 with no available rebate, for your use. Or get the Vista to track your rides. Either one will work for you it seems.


----------



## djphaneuf (May 7, 2007)

Slocaus,

My questions are really asked out of ignorance (not looking for a debate like some on the forums). I truly struggle with this decision because I do not know much about the devices and how to best apply them. I am mostly out for recreation and exercise (have lost about 15 pounds since I started) and based on Geoman's post figure that the Edge may be a good motivator to lose more. Have found the 205 on line for approx $115 and looks like the 305 would cost another $50 for functions that I am not sure I would use (along with better altitude indication). I suppose the mapping function of the Vista just looks cool but I do not really know how I would use it. Just figured I could rely on your and others experience to help make a decision.

By the way, read your link and it was truly inspiring. I have felt some funny things while doing long climbs but not sure I would recognize it as a heart problem versus the normal feedback from the stress of such climbs. Was your pain a deep one in the center of the chest (I have heard described like a poker in the chest) or something else? Just trying to figure out when pain becomes danger. Since this topic is off thread, you can send me a personal message or just send to my email [email protected] if you have the time/desire to educate me in this area as well.

Thanks Again,

Dave


----------



## Guest (Aug 27, 2007)

Dave,

In August, 2000, I had triple cardiac bypass at the age of 53. I had 98% blockage in the LAD right at the heart. The symptom I had was a heavy pressure pushing on the center of my chest, eventually at the slightest exertion. I had been fairly active up to that time. Total recovery from the surgery took nearly 2 years.

Now, cycling is the major source of my fitness program. I ride hard for someone my age, even riding with my 25 year old son occasionally. But I ride with the confidence of the guidance of a good cardiologist, and I don't ever go out without my HRM. That's the main reason I chose a 305 over the 205.

My advice to you is; if you are concerned that the discomfort you experience after a long climb is more than just the normal bio feedback, please get checked by a good cardiologist. Peace of mind is much greater than worry, and you will probably enjoy cycling much more.


----------



## slocaus (Jul 21, 2005)

djphaneuf said:


> Slocaus,
> 
> My questions are really asked out of ignorance (not looking for a debate like some on the forums). I truly struggle with this decision because I do not know much about the devices and how to best apply them. I am mostly out for recreation and exercise (have lost about 15 pounds since I started) and based on Geoman's post figure that the Edge may be a good motivator to lose more. Have found the 205 on line for approx $115 and looks like the 305 would cost another $50 for functions that I am not sure I would use (along with better altitude indication). I suppose the mapping function of the Vista just looks cool but I do not really know how I would use it. Just figured I could rely on your and others experience to help make a decision.
> 
> ...


Hi Dave,

Sorry to sound argumentative as well. I know you stated you were a GPS noob, but I assumed that you had some understanding of training for fitness / weight loss / cardiovascular benefits when I stated that you would know if you needed it.

So, here is a page about using an HRM for training on a bike. Aimed at the serious racer / triathlete, but useful as an aid in deciding if an HRM would be helpful to you.

Here is another page for runners, but nice simple layman's terms. Basically, you get your Max HR, and then for maximum calorie burning, keep your HR at 60-70% of Max HR; for cardiovascular improvements, keep your HR at 70-80% of Max HR.

Thanks for the comment on my heart issues and recovery. I was lucky, and did not have a heart attack (myocardial infarction) thanks to my bike riding. Like *bootchman*, slight pressure on my chest was all I had, like a cat lying on me. Over about three weeks, it went from stopping when I stopped riding, to requiring six hours plus to subside. That is when I went to my general practitioner, and he sent me to the cardiologist for a stress echo cardiogram. Ten days later I was in the cardiac catheterization lab. I was out of the hospital in 24 hours, with limited exercise for two days. Seven days later I was riding with a heart 25 years younger, and a new lease on life. :thumbsup:

I had two branches of my LAD blocked 98 & 99%, and they were able to open them with angioplasty, and insert stents. I have the X-Ray photos of before and after the artery was opened, and it is astonishing to think that I was able to ride as much as I did; the improvement in cardiac blood flow in the after photo is mind blowing! These photos are framed and sit on my dresser where I see them every morning and remember how close I was to being dead. 

Now I ride with an HRM on every time out, I track my data on the computer daily, and I provide printouts to my cardiologist to allay his feeling that I am a certified wacko, pedaling a bicycle up these central California coastal mountains. Little does he know...... 

As *bootchman* states, consult a cardiologist if you have any concerns about your heart! Bottom line, as GeoMan states, a training GPS is a fantastic motivator. Get what your budget allows and ride, ride, ride! 

I choose to keep this in the forum for the benefit of anyone else who my read it with the same questions. It is about a training GPS and an MTB, not off topic at all.


----------



## GEOMAN (May 30, 2006)

slocaus said:


> Just think carefully about the "savings" of getting a 205 vs the rebate on the 305 and get the barometric altimeter.
> 
> Edge 305 + HR + Cadence here for $269 - $75 rebate = $194! Beat that!
> Get the 305 with Cadence only for $237.00 minus $75.00 rebate = $162.00!
> ...


Thanks for the support. It is MUCH appreciated.


----------



## slocaus (Jul 21, 2005)

GEOMAN said:


> Thanks for the support. It is MUCH appreciated.


You *earned* it, with your service, support, and willingness to make the customer happy, and great product at a fair price.

I give nothing away that is not well deserved.  :thumbsup:


----------



## BrandonMiller (Mar 29, 2006)

djphaneuf said:


> ..but wonder how long it will be before someone puts both of these functions into one unit.


see the 605/705 posts..


----------



## hmto (Jun 13, 2006)

*HCX Feature*

as a noob and looking to purchase one for MTBing plus other usage, could anyone tell me if the new HCx has the feature from the 305 which allows you to race a virtual partner and or running comparison times to your previous rides over the same course?


----------



## GEOMAN (May 30, 2006)

hmto said:


> as a noob and looking to purchase one for MTBing plus other usage, could anyone tell me if the new HCx has the feature from the 305 which allows you to race a virtual partner and or running comparison times to your previous rides over the same course?


Nope, the HCx is a "true" GPS whereas the Edge 305 is a "GPS enhanced" training computer... The feature you describe is a training feature.

The 305 has a $75 rebate right now.

Do the math, it's pretty cheap to buy them both right now.


----------



## slocaus (Jul 21, 2005)

No. It is a mapping GPS, not a training GPS. 
https://buy.garmin.com/shop/shop.do?cID=145&pID=8701
https://buy.garmin.com/shop/shop.do?cID=160&pID=331

The 605/705 coming in late 2007 to early 2008 will combine the features at a price of $500.00 +/- $50.00. There are two or three recent threads in this forum for your information on those models.


----------



## Guest (Sep 2, 2007)

It is nice to use the 305 and CHx in tandem. The 305 gives you real time and uploadable feed back on training statistics, including the virtual partner; while at the same time the CHx allows you to see where you are actually moving on the map. When you are done riding, you can leave the 305 on your bike, and take the CHx with you in the car, hiking, geocaching or anywhere you want, to follow a course, be led turn by turn to an address or other point of interest, or just leave a track showing where you've been. Both units allow you to see where you've been when you load it into your computer.

Even with the approaching release of the 605/705, I will probably continue to use the 2 devices because of the increased flexibility they give together or separately depending on the activity -- besides which, with the rebate, the two are less expensive than the one.
They are both excellent units in their own right!!


----------



## vyper005 (Jul 30, 2007)

I know its been a few months now...How does everyone still like their HCX ?? Just curious because I might pick one up...


----------



## testtech (Jan 2, 2005)

I'd wait for the 605/705, if you have the extra money to spend. It will have a more bike specific functions in a better form factor. I intend to replace my HCX when the new model is available.


----------



## slocaus (Jul 21, 2005)

I'd get the Colorado 400t, with more features than 605/705 and the HCx. It will be saaaaaweeeeeeet. :thumbsup:


----------



## GEOMAN (May 30, 2006)

slocaus said:


> I'd get the Colorado 400t, with more features than 605/705 and the HCx. It will be saaaaaweeeeeeet. :thumbsup:


It will be TERRIFIC!!!


----------



## slocaus (Jul 21, 2005)

GEOMAN said:


> It will be TERRIFIC!!!


Ok, finally!  I've been waiting for you to weigh in on the Colorado. Tell us what you know, when do you expect it, how much moola?


----------



## GEOMAN (May 30, 2006)

slocaus said:


> Ok, finally!  I've been waiting for you to weigh in on the Colorado. Tell us what you know, when do you expect it, how much moola?


LOL!

I just got called to dinner!

More later...

:thumbsup:


----------



## Fwilpum (Jun 25, 2007)

Is it later yet????


----------



## GEOMAN (May 30, 2006)

Sorry!

There's a pretty good thread over here on MTBR that gives much detail:

http://forums.mtbr.com/showthread.php?t=370590

Check it out.

Thanks!


----------



## GFisher2001 (Mar 16, 2006)

Is there anyway around having to pay the $100+ for the North American Road Map (City Navigator/NT)? 

Perhaps the 2007 or 2006 version of the map for cheaper?

Any info would be great.


----------

