Results 1 to 4 of 4
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 41ants's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    591

    ... and if we just ... Looking for a great mtn & road gps better than edge 500

    I have spent a couple of days lurking around this subforum here trying to figure out what move I should make with regards to my current needs and gps unit. I currently have a Garmin Edge 500 with hrm/cadence/speed and the latest firmware update.

    I ride a mix of road and trails, but the trails down where I live (FL) are very tight. Several sections of the trails almost adjacent to each other.. I am reading the edge500 is probably not the best gps for this type of scenario. I have noticed that my riding partners edge 305 is typically showing our rides are approximately 1.2 - 2 miles longer than what my edge reports. This variance is normally over a 18 mile ride that we do together. However, I have not ridden with him since I updated my firmware and changed the gps settings to update every second.

    So, I mainly use my edge 500 to track my rides, analyze my segments from previous rides, and to share ride data. The platform that I use for this is Ride With GPS premium and sometimes strava. I prefer ridewithgps for uploading cue sheets and anlayzing my own rides, but strava is entertaining and humbling at the same time..

    So, I basically want something that is going to be consistently more accurate for analyzing my ride data. Looking at the Oregon 450t and eTrex30.. Also, considering trying to find a dirt cheap used 305 for the mtn bike and keeping the edge500 for the road.? I guess I am at a bit of a loss, as far as what move to make if any.

  2. #2
    Rep Power: Infinity
    Reputation: NateHawk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    11,197
    Sampling interval makes a huge difference. Compare with him on a ride sometime now that you have the new firmware. There are other models with useful features for mountain biking but sampling interval won't be one of them anymore.

    Also, don't waste your money on a Garmin with maps included. Unless you find one for the same price or cheaper than a model without, it is not worth it with the free maps on the market.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 41ants's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    591
    The 450T is actually cheaper right now at REI than the 450. I guess my concern is that I still want to be able to have some of the same information displayed when riding: Distance, Laps, HR, Speed, Cadence. So, if I went with a 450/450t or an eTrex30, do they display the same metrics as a cycling based gps.

  4. #4
    Rep Power: Infinity
    Reputation: NateHawk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    11,197
    Quote Originally Posted by 41ants View Post
    The 450T is actually cheaper right now at REI than the 450. I guess my concern is that I still want to be able to have some of the same information displayed when riding: Distance, Laps, HR, Speed, Cadence. So, if I went with a 450/450t or an eTrex30, do they display the same metrics as a cycling based gps.
    more or less. The Oregons at least have a lot of different dashboards that not only change what fields are displayed, but also give you additional functionality (like a start/stop and lap/reset button). I don't know how the etrex handles dashboards. I know it has them, but with the smaller screen, I am unsure about the other stuff. each field is customizable, too (at least on the Oregons). both would be compatible with ANT+ sensors, too, so you could get HR, CAD, and use a speed sensor. They are not compatible with power, however. Fields related to power will only be available on the Edge models and a couple of the Forerunners. Laps will work differently on these models than on the Edge/Forerunner series. There is no auto lap. You have to manually press the lap button, which IMO limits its usefulness on the bike.

    The etrex would probably work better internationally because it is also compatible with the Russian GLONASS system. I have used my Oregon in Costa Rica and it did fine (and an older GPSMAP 76CSx in Hawaii which worked fine), but not sure about the reliability of GPS in Europe/Asia/Africa. I think some countries try to limit GPS signal quality. As I understand it, GLONASS is a little less accurate, but acquisition time is a little quicker so it can also help in places where reception is traditionally more limited like in canyons and such where you are limited to a reduced view of the sky (and having a combination of GPS + GLONASS satellites in view might help).

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •