Garmin Colorado and backcountry navigation

After spending some time on the trail with the Garmin Colorado 300, I've decided against recommending it for backcountry navigation. Barring some major firmware changes, it's beginning to appear that the Colorado is designed more for geocachers than for hikers, mountain bikers, and the like.  There may be more issues, but here are two that caught my eye.

Can't reposition waypoints

When planning a trip, I use mapping software (with topo maps and sometimes aerial photos) to plot out the trek. I'll create waypoints for trailheads, trail junctions and features I don't want to miss. These waypoints, created on my computer, can be off by as much as several hundred feet in the field. So when I get to the junction, etc., I like to use the 60CSx's "reposition waypoint" feature to mark the correct location. That way, when I get home, I have an accurate collection of waypoints for future reference or for sharing. Unfortunately, this feature was left off the Colorado, though it should be easy for Garmin to add.

UPDATE: This feature has been added to the latest beta firmware release.

Viewing multiple tracks

I also like to load tracks representing trails, to follow as I bike or hike. When you download these from a site such as MotionBased (soon to be Garmin Connect), you may have to use several to get coverage of the entire route you are planing to take. But unlike previous Garmin handhelds, the Colorado can only display one track at a time.

Perhaps these are "power user" issues that won't matter to you. But if they do, beware. An older Garmin handheld may be a better choice for backcountry use than the Colorado.

Comments

[g.o.cashers]

Add this geocacher to the list of people who would like to see these features as well!

I think that there is a more general issue and you've really just hit the tip of an iceburg. I'd like to get a position from Garmin about whether the CO is going to have feature parity with the 60csx. Did they design it as a replacement for the 60csx or for a different market place?

There are many features missing from the Colorado (see my Issues List) that the 60csx and 60cs have. I've asked Garmin to provide some insight into whether they plan to add these features the CO or not so people can make decision about which unit is right for them.

GO$Rs

[Rich Owings]

Yeah, it's really unclear, isn't it? For now, I'm officially recommending this unit for geocachers, but not for hikers and mountain bikers. I would love to be able to change that at some point.

[Jack]

When you say that the CO is not recommended for bicycling, are you only talking about off-road cycling? Does anyone have any comments on using the CO for on-road bicycle touring?

[Rich Owings]

Jack,

You make an excellent point. I haven't used the Colorado with City Navigator maps, but from what I understand it should work fine. So yes, I'll amend my comment to say off-road biking.

[Rich Owings]

Jack,

One other problem for the Colorado for bikers may be the mount. I hope to have a post up on this soon. Hopefully right after a ride tomorrow.

[David]

I agree with GO$Rs. I'd like to hear from Garmin about whether or not they plan to add the "missing" features like Reposition Waypoint.

Come to think of it, last I handled a Colorado a few months ago, I don't think it could average coordinates either. Both features I use often when geocaching, hiking, etc.

Rich, any chance of trying to pry an answer from them on your readers' behalf?

The Colorado series has a wonderful user interface, but I don't see many power users stepping up to the hefty pricetag while they still get more important functionality from a 60Cx/CSx.

[g.o.cashers]

Based on this and some other discussions I've had recently I going to put together a 60csx to Colorado comparison page. A lot of the Colorado shortfalls are documented in my wiki (linked through my username) but I think a dedicated wiki page might be help in getting Garmin to make a statement about what they are going to do.

GO$Rs

[Rich Owings]

GO$Rs, that would be great. You've done a wonderful job on the FAQ and issues list. To you and David...I'll do my part and see what I can get out of Garmin.

[g.o.cashers]

Here's the first stab at my Colorado vs. 60csx page.

http://garmincolorado.wikispaces.com/Colorado+vs+60csx

If anyone has feedback on the items with ?'s or other omissions/errors please let me know.

GO$Rs (Scott)

[Manatee]

I have used the Colorado on my road bike (bicycle, that is). It was useless for me until the last patch, when Garmin got the street name display working. The next feature they need to "restore" to make it useful for me is the "Guidance Text", which the 60/76 and Legend/Vista have. That displays the name of the next cross street that you are approaching. I depend on that feature when looking for the next turn on my cue sheet.

I've used it with the heart monitor and cadence sensor (from my 305) enough to know that it works, and the values are accurate. I still need to upload a saved track and see if it includes that data.

I use my hand-held GPSrs for hiking, and features like trackback and plotting a route on-the-fly are very important to me. I can't imagine how they left this stuff out of the Colorado!

The cynic in me says they dumped this product on the market way before it was ready, and now don't want to acknowledge their error. It seems like they got caught up in a few new and novel features -- the input control, Whereigo -- and forgot about their core GPS mission.

As I've said elsewhere (and others have said here), I really want Garmin to publish -- in clear, specific terms -- what their intent was/is for the Colorado models. Is it meant to match the features of the 60/76? I'd like to see them publish a chart like GO$Rs did, so people can see what they are and aren't getting in each unit. My gut says they don't want it to be so clear to people.

[Manatee]

Regarding the bike mount: For road cycling, the Colorado mount is excellent. Simple, low profile, and much more secure than the mount for the 60, which acts like a spring and can launch the unit out on bumps. I don't know if the Colorado mount would hold up very well for rough mountain biking, though. Someone else will have to comment on that.

[Rich Owings]

Great job Scott! I sent a note to a contact today asking about Garmin's intentions to introduce more functionality into the Colorado. No response yet though.

[Rich Owings]

Manatee,

Thanks for chiming in, especially on the mount. I'll have a mount review posted soon from a mountain biker's perspective (hint -- it ain't pretty!).

[Rich Owings]

Well, I asked Garmin about features like reposition waypoint and display of multiple tracks, and about feature parity with the 60CSx in general, and here is the brief response I received...

"I’ve passed along the features you mention here, and our lead engineer on the Colorado tells me that these three things are on our list of customer suggestions, which are always considered for future revisions."

[g.o.cashers]

Rich,

The repositioning waypoint feature has been added by Garmin in the 2.51 beta software released this afternoon. I guess they are listening to you!

No multi-track support yet though.

GO$Rs

[Rich Owings]

I'll take that and hope they add the other later.

Just downloaded it at http://www8.garmin.com/support/download_details.jsp?id=3889

(thanks to you and Groundspeak for the tips)