GPS advice Etrex touch

[Ed1]

Hi all,

I've managed to smash up my GPS after a bit of a tumble. It was the Etrex 20 which I liked, simple to use, takes AA batteries with a good battery life.
So I've been looking to replace it and seen the new Etrex's with touch screens.

Has anyone got one and what do you think?

Thanks in advance,

Ed

[LSJ]

I have the 35 model.. I fancy it. I also use it as a bike computer (all the guys laugh at me, because it's much fatter than the dedicated bike one from Garmin). I have no worries, the touch feature is a no go with gloves on though, only drawback as I see it.

It pretty good as a bike computer, I can get all the things I want except from watt (can't afford it anyway). But HR and cadence and what else you can think off that is fitness related to bike. I use it for hiking to, and bike packing. I use it for sea kayaking also. I live in a flat country (Denmark). But I see some altitude features that could be useful (ascent and descent in all different configuration)

Battery consumption is on part with similar devices, I can run a full day (12 hours) on normal Duracell non rechargeable batteries.

Navigation is OK too, I can plan the next days route in the at night on the device it self, not to cumbersome. Depending on the maps you load into it it has never let me down with route guidance (I don't use it to often thpugh).

Software wise it has AL the bugs that Garmin is known for (it amazes me that such a big player on GPS, have so bad SW for planning routes and mapping SW in general).

Any questions shoot, and I'll try to answer them...

Lars

[Ed1]

Thanks for the info Lars,

Using it with gloves was one of the thing that I wondered about. I always wear gloves when biking so if the touch UI doesn't work with gloves then it would be a nightmare to use.

I'm guessing that it would be like the iPhone then and even harder to use when it's got a bit of rain on the screen (gloves on or off)?

Thanks again,

Ed

[fatbikephil]

Looking at the specs, the thing that struck me about the etrex touch was the lack of screen res when compared to the etrex. In fact I reckon its a dakota in a different case as all of the specs match the Dakota, albeit with a few more features, but without the Dakotas battery life (which is similar to a normal etrex). Based on what Lars says I'd be unconvinced as its the bugs and terminally slow screen update that is making me fed up of my dakota. Touch screen is a PIA as when it gets wet or muddy as when you try to wipe it clear you end up moving the map about or zooming in or out.... I wish Garmin would do an etrex wth a bigger non-touch screen.

[LSJ]

I don't find the map update slow on the touch. Can't make a comparison to the Dakota though. I normally don't ride with gloves in the summer so it is not that a big issue for me. And when I bikepack I use the map and nowt else ( I get to focused on the data and forget to enjoy the trip), although at stops I look at the datafields on how long I have traveled climbed and all...

When training on either MTB or the roadie I have a screen with 10 datafields which is more than enough for my level of training, and never use the map for navigation. ( I have speed, distance, avg speed. Heart rate, avg heart rate. Cadence. Time traveled. Time last lap (I have set mine to 1 km). The last two I vary a bit (normally time of day for when I commute, and average cadence).

[Ed1]

Cheers for the input both,

I've gone down the safe route and stuck with what I've already had. It's ok for my needs , it'll be nice to have a bigger screen and touch but I don't fancy the trade off.

I generally navigate with the map at around 200-500mtr resolution with talky toaster maps and haven't really experienced any problems/crashes.
Fingers crossed that stays the same.

Ed