I'm just starting to do hiking on some tracks in Western Australia such as the Bibbulmun Track and would like to take a GPS as backup in case we get lost. Any suggestions on what unit would be best to get, and more importantly, what maps are available that will work in the bush.

I've been considering the Garmin Colorado 300 or a Magellan Triton unit.

Thanks
Brian

Hi
Out of these two I would go the Garmin, though personally wouldnt get the Colorado...Oregon is better. If you want something more traditional get a 60cx or 60csx.

Advangtage of Garmin is that the mapping is more likely to suit your needs. I know for a fact that the free OSM maps for Garmin have the entire Bibbulman track on it and also the Cape to Cape Track (as I supplied the data ..via Treadly) . OSM is a work in progress and some areas are mapped better than others...so you will find gaps but its certainy a good start. There is also free 250K mapping (Shonkymaps) that may fill in some other gaps.

Several commercial map sets are available (Garmin Topo and OzTopo) but not sure how good they are with respect to walking tracks - overall they certainly have more roads and tracks (i.e the complete data set) but mapping in specific areas of some of the more minor tracks is out out of date and/or doesnt represent complete coverage so may cause frustration - probably OK coupled with up to date paper map though.

Other plan would be to go down the raster map path...e.g. via OziExplorerCe or TwoNav. Different GPS required for this though.

Cheers
Greg

__________________
“I was horror–struck to find my poor overseer lying on the ground, weltering in his blood and in the last agonies of death” E Eyre 29 April 1841

I have been very pleased with the OzTopo mapset on my Garmin 60Cx for bushwalking in Victoria.
OzTopo covers all of Australia, so should be good for what you want.
This year I bought a TwoNav Aventura & put the MapTrax 25k set of Vic Maps on it.
Not sure what maps suit your area for the Aventura.

I will sometimes have both units turned on in my radio chest harness, & find the recorded tracks appear to be very accurate when downloaded to a PC with OziExplorer software.
Eg. last Sunday night/Monday AM we were out in rugged terain (& at times foggy conditions) searching for a woman lost east of the Lake Mt summit ridge.

__________________
regards Michael

yacht racing at RMYS
Lake Mountain Ski Patrol
bush walking anywhere in Vic

Thanks for the info, very useful. Garmin suggested that their Graphic Maps would be suitable for hiking. Have you had any info regarding them?

There is no such thing as a "best" GPS, as it depends on your personal needs and priorities.

If the GPS is really just a "backup in case you get lost" then IMHO a Colorado/Oregon is bigger/heavier than you need. I'll tell you why I chose the Garmin Etrex Legend, and you judge if your needs are similar.

My application is bushwalking and MTB riding in remote areas around ACT. I always carry paper maps(s), and still prefer to look at a "real" map to see the "big picture" of where I am, what the general terrain looks like, if there are points of interest in the area, and so on. Unless you want to carry a laptop, no handheld GPS screen is even remotely big enough to substitute for a "real" map. The GPS is used mainly to tell me quickly where I am on the paper map, as well as a backup should I become lost. For me then, the priorities were:

Small size and weight. The Etrex wins here, being significantly smaller and lighter than the Colarado/Oregon. The Etrex fits easily in a top pocket, and you don't even notice it is there.

Physically rugged. Again, the Etrex wins, because it does not have a delicate touchscreen. The Etrex LCD screen sits behind a transparent protective window.

Battery life. Etrex wins, with 25 hours vs. 16 hrs for the Oregon.

Screen readability under all conditions. From my reading, the Oregon screen is difficult to read in conditions of bright sunlight, whereas the Etrex (and MAP60 series) are easily readable in even the brightest sunlight. I have not personally had the Colarado/Oregon side-by-side with the Etrex/60Cx, but a recurring theme in user reviews is that the Oregon is difficult to read in daylight conditions. My eyesight is not that good these days, so this was a high priority, and I am very satisfied with the readability of the Etrex.

The larger screen of the Colarado/Oregon would have been nice, all else equal, but for my needs the other advantages of the Etrex made it the winner.

Hope this helps. I am NOT saying that the Etrex is the better choice in general, just that it suits my particular needs well.

Yep Ok - we didnt mention you can also view raster images on Oregons, Colorados and Dakotas. Two forms - "custom maps"..which you can create yourself (eg scan an existing paper map or convert available digital maps/air photos) and then there is Garmins "Birdseye".

I have tried customs maps (in the form of airphotos) on my Oregon but wasnt overly impressed with redraw speed etc - was a bit slow and clunky - there are also limitations on file size/resolution and the number of files you can have loaded. May or may not suit your needs - difficult to say - if you really want to use raster images there are better options than an Oregon etc.

Garmins "Birdseye" is a commercial product that builds on the custom maps option (with repect to quality and number of images you can load..no normal topo maps though). Being satellite/airphotos not sure how universally suitable it would be for bushwalking (ie seeing tracks..Ok for no track areas though). Resolution of avialable images varies as well so may not be that flash in some locations.

more info here

http://garminoregon.wikispaces.com/Custom+Maps

http://garminoregon.wikispaces.com/BirdsEye

My comments are pretty generalised...I have an Oregon but dont use it for hiking that often or the custom maps/birdseye images, hopefully someone who actually uses for the purpose you intend can pass comment here for you.

Cheers
Greg

__________________
“I was horror–struck to find my poor overseer lying on the ground, weltering in his blood and in the last agonies of death” E Eyre 29 April 1841

I reckon the best thing to do is plan your route at home using paper maps and/or computer maps, then transfer your route to your GPS. I have a 60CSx and a 550, I mainly use the Oregon 550.
The 550 is more user friendly for loading maps, and can take raster maps if required. On the GPS I have Shonky Maps, Contour maps, the normal OSM map and the OpenMTB map. For the majority of the time I only have the OpenMTB map switched on, since it shows minor trails more clearly and makes the issue of screen brightness a non-issue. As well as having your route on the GPS, you should also have a few "Plan B" routes so that if you have a problem you can get to safety/home quickly. Additionally I carry a printed map (printed from OSM) and a compass. You can't rely too much on maps from the Department of Environment and Conservation as most of them are based on data 40 years old. Always carry a spare set of batteries, I use rechargeables.
The other thing is to learn how to edit OSM so that you can add your knowledge to the overall pool, and fix errors instead of complaining about them. I will often use the Nearmaps background to trace in any tracks in advance of going for a hike in the area, as a few tracks on the map is better than none. OSM can always use extra fill data such as the location of bridges, creeks, camping areas and so forth as well.

Touch screens are tougher than you think - they are by no means "delicate". Possibly not as tough as other options and you do have to treat them with respect but I have never found a problem with them ~7 years use various makes models.

Cheers
Greg

__________________
“I was horror–struck to find my poor overseer lying on the ground, weltering in his blood and in the last agonies of death” E Eyre 29 April 1841

Not sure if I agree with qwerty reversed about some of the Oregon comments. I bushwalk with my Oregon 300. It is great in sun - one of its selling points actually. It is the foggy days that sometimes the backlight is a little lacking. The touch screen is great for me.
I also take compass, paper maps (1:25,000) and with a printout of the area I walk blown up with distance grids and lat long grids from Festys maps using Oziexplorer.

Size (WxHxD)

eTrex Legend HCx - 5.6 x 10.7 x 3.0 cm
Oregon - 5.8 x 11.4 x 3.5 cm

Difference - 0.2 x 0.7 x 0.5 cm

Weight

eTrex Legend HCx - 156g
Oregon - 193g

Difference - 37 grams

Havent included Colorado - discontinued model AFAIK.

__________________
“I was horror–struck to find my poor overseer lying on the ground, weltering in his blood and in the last agonies of death” E Eyre 29 April 1841

Agree with much of Treadly's and others' comments here (eg: keep paper maps and compass handy, remember "The Six Ps*", etc.etc.).

I currently use a Garmin GPSmap 60CSx for everything and have never had a problem (except of my own making), and in the bush use mainly Shonky Full Topo plus Shonky Transparent Contours (and others).

I sometimes (sparingly) manually trace the path if it isn't on a map.

*Proper Preparation Prevents #iss Poor Performance.

In retrospect, it would be more accurate to say the Etrex is slightly smaller and lighter. I have to agree with you that there is not much in it.

What the Oregon gives you is a bigger screen, and I admit to being torn on how useful that is to me. Yes, I would love that bigger screen BUT I also own a Nuvi with 4.3 inch screen which is significantly larger and more pixels than the Oregon, yet in reality I still find it is far too small to substitute as a "real" map. Frankly, it drives me nuts zooming and panning the handhelds in a futile attempt to make them substitute as a real map. For me, the main purpose of a handheld GPS is to give me an absolute grid reference which I then transfer to my "real" paper map ....

I suspect that if I owned an Oregon I would quite like it, and maybe the bigger screen would have me looking at my "real" map less often, but for me it will never replace it.

I have to agree with this comment. No problems for me viewing my Oregon 300 in sunlight. In-fact I think the screen is easier to see in the sun than it is in shady conditions.

Hi
I dont think anyone, at any point suggested a gps should replace other forms of navigation (eg paper map/compass). Think this was discussed elsewhere recently. They are both tools to be used for navigation and neither is mutually exclusive for all circumstances. Use what combination suits. A GPS is more than adequate in some circumstances, in other cases it should only be used as you suggest, with paper version being primary tool. Best course of action is to have one or the other as back up everytime you head bush.

Anyway, if all you need a gps for is to confirm your position (by way of coordinates) and nothing else, both the Etrex Legend and Oregon are overkill. Bottom of the range Etrex H will do that easily.

Cheers
Greg
PS nothing wrong with your suggestion of Extrex Legend by the way...trouble these days is there are too many gps units to choose from.

__________________
“I was horror–struck to find my poor overseer lying on the ground, weltering in his blood and in the last agonies of death” E Eyre 29 April 1841

First of all, the only advantage I see with the Vista HCx or Legend HCx is the lack of shaded relief capability, meaning it appears easier to read in direct sunlight.

I wouldn't buy an eTrex over the Oregon, if we are talking about Garmin GPS of course.

Colorado 300 have been discontinued (in AU) and the GPSMap 60Cx and 60CSx are about to be replaced by the GPSMap 62 series. However I do have a Colorado 300 in stock if you REALLY desperately want one

The larger screen of the Oregon and Dakota is a massive reason to buy over the eTrex.

Don't forget to consider the TwoNav products as well.

Bibbulman track is in fact on the Geoscience 1:250K raster-map thus is also on the Shonkymaps and the Twonav GPS.

If you want the smallest then it would have to be the TwoNav Sportiva.

But having played with the 3.5" screen Twonav Aventura, that's my favorite.

I can now supply the Dakota 10 at $249; makes it a very competitive model.

Magellan Triton are about to be replaced by the newer eXplorist series, due out in about 2 months time.

Personally I would not consider the Triton except for the fact their Topo maps are excellent.

If you are after a Garmin anyways, and want to consider Garmin Topo Australia, then wait until the new release becomes available very soon as the map data has been extensively improved, which i will show screen shots over the next day or two. From what I have seen it is exactly the same as Oztopo for detail.

__________________
The sun rises and sets, the moon wax and wanes, oceans ebb and rise, warmth of spring and the coolness of autumn and my heart beats as if I belong to them all.
www.gpsaustralia.net