Anyone used a Garmin product for walking/hiking?

essex-commuter

Just come back from a wonderful weekend walking in North Wales and decided I want a GPS unit that I can use for navigation (with a map and compass as back-up). Basically I want to create a route on the PC and upload it to the unit to follow, as I frequently do on the bike.

I was just about to bite the bullet and buy a dedicated Garmin walking GPS when I had an idea to try my Garmin Edge 800 for walking.

I downloaded an open source map of GB (very good!) and installed it on a micro SD card and swapped with my City Navigator. I created a 5 mile route near home and tried it yesterday afternoon. It worked amazingly well, all I had to do was turn of the auto-stop feature.

I would like a bigger screen so I’m thinking of killing two birds with one stone and upgrading to an Edge 1000 which will also give me Bluetooth and Wi-Fi capability. I have a generic battery extender that I could use if I deplete the battery which I’m guessing lasts about 8 hours.

Am I missing something, does it sound a decent plan?

meanredspider

Perfectly good plan - recognising the limitation of the device (like resolution and battery life).

essex-commuter

meanredspider wrote:

Perfectly good plan - recognising the limitation of the device (like resolution and battery life).

Cheers.

The resolution was OK with my 800, I presume the 1000 is equal or better?

What are the real life findings on battery life? Is 8 hours a bit wishful thinking (assuming back light on for 10 seconds occasionally)

rower63

I have a Garmin eTrex 30x, which basically does the same as the bike versions, but with a few more hiking-relevant features, such as the ability to create waypoints and use them for routing etc.

The biggest difference is battery life, though. It lasts much longer, and uses 2 AA batteries rather than needing to be recharged. So to keep it going for several days without access to a charging-up source all you need is a stock of spare AAs.

Dog Breath

Garmin Oregon or Montana are the ones you want.

tenohfive

This doesn't answer your original question but may be worth considering anyway:

I've been using smartphones with Viewranger for years. Cheap OS mapping (1:50,000 all UK national parks for £10-15), can store OpenCycleMaps etc offline (if you download ahead) or download them on the fly if you've got signal. For routes you can import .gpx etc. There is a catalogue of others routes but I've never really dipped into it.

If you can't get 8 hours battery life on your smartphone then something isn't right, even a Moto E 4G (£35 new) will manage a couple of days wild camping without needing a recharge, and li-ion battery packs are cheap, light and readily available as a backup.

I've been using this approach for years (I was sold when I saw an article about Mountain Rescue using smartphones with VR years ago, before battery life really improved) and have tested it in several countries without issue.

meanredspider

essex-commuter wrote:

meanredspider wrote:

Perfectly good plan - recognising the limitation of the device (like resolution and battery life).

Cheers.

The resolution was OK with my 800, I presume the 1000 is equal or better?

What are the real life findings on battery life? Is 8 hours a bit wishful thinking (assuming back light on for 10 seconds occasionally)

8 hours is probably achievable with Garmin 1000 with features switched down. I don't know if the 1000 has trackback capability but I found it helpful when hiking in the Scottish hills with my Forerunner 305 knowing that you can always come back the way you've come.

fenix

https://hikingguy.com/hiking-gear/garmi ... iking-gps/

I use my fenix3 for running, biking, swimming and a bit of hiking. Not got round to putting tracks to follow on it for hiking, but it works for cycling well enough.

super_davo

I've used a few solutions over the years, from a Garmin eTrex, to a Forerunner 305 to an Edge 800 and now for going in the hills I use Viewranger on my Moto X play.
Really good app, the addition of basemaps makes it way superior to the older non mapping Garmins. You can use free OSM maps so low cost. It's very light on battery which would be the main reason to use the Edge (to keep your phone as a phone). Moto X play is fairly solid with a good battery and if not fully waterproof, not going to grumble in drizzle.
Edge has compromises as it's too low res and hard to follow and you need different OSM maps vs your road ones which is a faff.
I think of it similar to the arguments about phone vs Garmin for a bike computer. If I went in the hills all day most weeks I'd get a Fenix 3. If it's just occasional, then a phone does an OK job. The bike GPS can also do a OK job, just in my experience has a few more compromises when compared to the phone.

wongataa

I use a Garmin GPSmap64 for walking. It runs of AA batteries and will last for many many hours and getting new batteries is easy,. I have put OSM maps on it as well. As it is designed to be hand-held it works better in the hand than an Edge device and there are accessories to clip it bags etc. You can mount it to a bike but it is a bit ungainly on the handlebars!

essex-commuter

Thanks for all the comments guys. Prior to going down the Edge 1000 route I did try or consider nearly all of the above. GPSmap64 was on my favourites list and I had tried various apps on the phone.

I think I would prefer leaving my 'delicate' phone tucked away in my rucksack. A dedicated unit would have been great but I'm not one for having loads of gadgets, that's why I was trying to buy one unit to cover two jobs. Seeing as I would like a bigger screen on the bike GPS and Wi-Fi/BT is an added bonus I'm still thinking Edge 1000.

Just wanted to make sure there wasn't a major downside that I hadn't considered.

tangled_metal

Satmap 12 GPS unit can come with bike mount. It's better that GPS64MAP and a little slimmer I think. Doesn't have a touchscreen but that's a design choice based on a decision by the company founders/ original unit designers. They're formerly designers of military GPS hardware.

This unit is excellent for hiking, as in probably the best unit on the market. However like edge 1000 bike GPS it's designed to be great, indeed the best in the market, for one use. Any other use and it's a compromise.

Which activity do you do most of? Get the unit that's best for that and live with the compromise for your secondary activity. Or buy both! Come on! Admit it, you can never have enough gadgets.

essex-commuter

Tangled Metal wrote:

Which activity do you do most of? Get the unit that's best for that and live with the compromise for your secondary activity. Or buy both! Come on! Admit it, you can never have enough gadgets.

Cycling the most for sure. But since I gave up running (got GPS watch for that too!) back in February I've really been enjoying getting out walking on the paths and bridleways around where I live and getting away in the mountains for the odd weekend. I've done the mountain bike thing in the past, injured myself too many times and can't be doing with that now I'm in my very late 40's! My age is probably the reasons gadgets are starting to annoy me.

tangled_metal

Sounds like edge 1000 it is then. Enjoy your riding with the best unit for that and live with the compromise for your walking.

Personally I don't use GPS units when walking. Did that once but kind of realised I was good enough with map and compass to not need it. Old school if you like. Mind you these days I've walked so much around me I tend not to need maps at all. In the lakes I never carry a map. I can picture most routes like a Google earth fly by. Plus I kind of remember maps with just one study before setting off.

On the roads I am not so confident, I need maps for that until I learn an area or route that is.

Enjoy your walking, it's good activity and being load bearing it'll help with maintaining bone density for keen cyclists I believe. Used to walk long distances but now it's 3 miles since my 3 year old can't manage much more. It's enough though to clear your head after a bad week.

fenix

Tangled Metal wrote:

In the lakes I never carry a map. I can picture most routes like a Google earth fly by. Plus I kind of remember maps with just one study before setting off.

.

Skillz !

essex-commuter

Fenix wrote:

Tangled Metal wrote:

In the lakes I never carry a map. I can picture most routes like a Google earth fly by. Plus I kind of remember maps with just one study before setting off.

.

Skillz !

Certainly is. I still walk out of my house and go the wrong way.

wongataa

Tangled Metal wrote:

Satmap 12 GPS unit can come with bike mount. It's better that GPS64MAP and a little slimmer I think. Doesn't have a touchscreen but that's a design choice based on a decision by the company founders/ original unit designers. They're formerly designers of military GPS hardware.

The GPSMap series don't have touchscreens either. They are completely controlled by buttons.

bendertherobot

Fenix wrote:

https://hikingguy.com/hiking-gear/garmin-fenix-3-review-hiking-gps/

I use my fenix3 for running, biking, swimming and a bit of hiking. Not got round to putting tracks to follow on it for hiking, but it works for cycling well enough.

I've been reading up on the Fenix, and will get one later today, and the reviews suggest that the breadcrumb trail is very good for hiking. There's a longish review on Wiggle worth reading. Top battery life as well.

tangled_metal

wongataa wrote:

Tangled Metal wrote:

Satmap 12 GPS unit can come with bike mount. It's better that GPS64MAP and a little slimmer I think. Doesn't have a touchscreen but that's a design choice based on a decision by the company founders/ original unit designers. They're formerly designers of military GPS hardware.

The GPSMap series don't have touchscreens either. They are completely controlled by buttons.

I know. The satmap12 is better and slimmer than GPS64MAP. The Satmap12 doesn't have a touchscreen. Sorry if not clear but I was only talking about the satmap model, sentences/grammar was misleading I think.

Others suggested GPS64MAP model, whilst decent, it's a bit chunky and has a lot smaller screen. I'd not want to use it on a bike personally. I believe the antenna in the GPS64MAP is a good one though. Everything has it's strengths and weaknesses. No design/engineering team sets out to make a bad product afterall. Pride in your work and all that.

tgotb

OruxMaps on my waterproof Android phone. I've been using it for walking, fell running, off piste skiing etc for years. Also works on Android tablets, which is quite useful for route planning. Higher screen resolution than most dedicated devices; on cycle tours I often use the phone as the primary navigation tool and the Garmin as backup.

I use a tool called "Mobile Atlas Creator" to generate maps from online sources, though other tools are probably available.

As you've already said, in most situations you should also carry a map and compass (and know how to use them), and you should always be able to determine your location without relying on the GPS. It's probably heresy to say so, but I suspect the phone/human combination is generally more reliable than the map/compass/human combination (they just fail in different ways!)

tangled_metal

Not if I'm the human. Seriously don't get mobile phone maps. The apps just aren't as user friendly as paper or preferably plastic maps. I can get.a.plastic map out, study it and be on the way before I get even the right part of the mobile map up on the phone. Even cached or saved mapping tiles seem to default to my home address then take ages to find my current location. Trees or steep valleys add another dimension. Proper, hiking GPS units are better than phone GPS units but they still fail in trees and steep valleys.

That is just my experience. Of course some people have problems reading maps. To them phones or GPS units are perhaps the answer, although I think the real answer is to learn how to read a map properly.

tenohfive

Tangled Metal wrote:

Not if I'm the human. Seriously don't get mobile phone maps. The apps just aren't as user friendly as paper or preferably plastic maps. I can get.a.plastic map out, study it and be on the way before I get even the right part of the mobile map up on the phone. Even cached or saved mapping tiles seem to default to my home address then take ages to find my current location. Trees or steep valleys add another dimension. Proper, hiking GPS units are better than phone GPS units but they still fail in trees and steep valleys.

That is just my experience. Of course some people have problems reading maps. To them phones or GPS units are perhaps the answer, although I think the real answer is to learn how to read a map properly.

I don't want to seem argumentative but there's two points I really disagree with.

Firstly, the suggestion that if someone can't read a map a GPS is the answer. Forgive the lecture, but if you can't read a paper map then you can't read a GPS map either. You can't pick a sensible route allowing for terrain, elevation, landscape obstacles...and that sort of attitude can be positively dangerous in even certain tourist trap parts of the UK. It's like saying,
"I've got to drive home, I'm too drunk to walk."

Secondly, and this is more subjective - but I routinely go out with two maps. One is the OS map for the area I'm walking in. The other is an OS map on my phone. They're identical. I'm running a cheap-as-chips phone and it'll still load instantly. I can read a paper map quite happily but my phone is a damn sight easier to get in and out of my pocket. If I want to quickly consult the map I'll usually go for my phone - I won't hit the GPS button or wait the 5 seconds for it to locate me, I'll just use it like a map that's more weather resistant.
Perhaps that's a preference thing - I'll happily take an e-reader over a real book for example - or perhaps I'm just using the better hardware and software (I doubt it for the former though.)

apreading

tenohfive - while I agree with much of what you say, someone lacking in skills can get by without them by replying on a GPS instead - they dont need toknow triangulation to work out their position from landmarks, dont need to know what many symbols mean (like church with spire etc) and dont need to know how to use a compass. Your points about planning the best route requiring an understanding of the maps themselves and the terrain does hold though.

tangled_metal

Also without being argumentative your first point implies to me that you misread my last paragraph. Let me copy it out and highlight tree bits where I've said what you have, that learning to read a map is the real answer.

That is just my experience. Of course some people have problems reading maps. To them phones or GPS units are perhaps the answer, although I think the real answer is to learn how to read a map properly.

Second point about phones and phone based mapping I disagree with. I don't have a cheapo phone that I carry in my pocket. My phone was a top spec phone when I got out and I have always had a.protective streak over it. That means it's in a sealed bag stashed safely in my rucksack. My map is stashed in an outside pocket of my rucksack so I can easily get it out. It's got a large field of view such that I can see near and far features in the one view. I use either weather resistant maps or Harvey's plastic maps. Tough as and waterproof. My phone definitely isn't.

Of course traditional map or electronic map is just a tool available to you. Use the tool you're comfortable with. I do and that's the os or Harvey's maps with a water resistant surface. However if I decided that I wanted an electronic mapping it would be a dedicated GPS unit not my phone. Again personal choice and not worth arguing over.

PS if you can explain how to get cheap os maps onto your phone such that you don't need to have internet to view them. I've got a real mental block over this. It all seems very intuitive and I understand it but so far I've only got a few open source, free maps loaded on my phone but Viewranger still seems to want internet connection. Being stupid somewhere I've got no doubt but hey it explains why I'm not using my phone for mapping (whether back up or main option).

wongataa

Tangled Metal wrote:

PS if you can explain how to get cheap os maps onto your phone such that you don't need to have internet to view them. I've got a real mental block over this. It all seems very intuitive and I understand it but so far I've only got a few open source, free maps loaded on my phone but Viewranger still seems to want internet connection. Being stupid somewhere I've got no doubt but hey it explains why I'm not using my phone for mapping (whether back up or main option).

Cheap/free Openstreetmap based mapping apps are easily available and many of them allow you to download map areas for offline use. If you want actual OS maps then you are going to have to pay. The OS has their own app. If you buy a new OS paper map you an download the same map to your phone for free using the code supplied with the paper map.

essex-commuter

Also OS do a full GB 1:25000 online map subscription for £20 per year that you can download and use offline with their app. They have a 7 day premium trial as well.

I got my Edge 1000 last night, still playing with it but quite impressed so far.