Garmin

                Edge 705                                        Oregon 450t

We've both used various Garmin GPS's for a while.

The Edge 705 is a fantastic little unit, but it's really designed for fitness use, and it's mapping is pretty slow and low-res (especially in big cities), and information painful to key in.  It's also pretty slow to calculate routes, and it's turn by turn navigation is quite hard to follow.  That said, considering it's size and what it's really designed for, it's an amazing little unit.

Having already used the Edge (that normally lives on my road bike) for the previous Paris trip - I decided I'd get a different one for touring and general use.

A bit of research later, and I ended up with a second-hand Oregon 450t from ebay.
It has a bigger, higher res screen (albeit disappointingly dim - apparently due to the touchscreen).  A touchscreen makes inputting data and general use a breeze, and its quite a bit faster to use and redraw maps.

John took his Edge 705 so we had a good comparison on the road.



Why Garmin?


I actually don't really like Garmin UI's, so it's ironic that I've got three Garmin GPS's.  The fact is, they just do what they do pretty well and reliably, and are well supported.  The more specific the device the better they seem to be.  I tried one in my car though and hated it - TomTom have the whole car system down much better than Garmin so that was what got bought for the car.  If TomTom did bike, outdoor and aviation GPS I'd have a serious look - but for now they don't and Garmin pretty much lead the field in all three.

What we like about them.

• As above, they do what they do well.
• When the auto-routing works it's a dream.  never need to look at the screen unless it beeps warning you a direction change is coming.  It gives you a summary of the route, how far to destination/travelled, lots of other custom info, and you can zoom in/out to see where you're being taken.
• The 'Find Nearest ...' feature is worth the money alone when tired and needing to find an alternate destination, campsite, or hotel.  It saved us on many occasions.
• They save having to buy and carry a lot of maps.  Although the Garmin mapping is expensive, it works out relatively good value compared to all the detailed maps you'd have to buy.  

What we don't like.

• The maps are a rip off.  Every time you buy a new device you have to buy a new set of maps for it unless you order them on SD card which takes time to arrive and means if you lose it your stuffed. This is a total rip off as their maps are expensive anyway.  The basemaps with the device are very basic and you cant do guided road navigation with them.
• There's no obvious easy way to see elevations on the Garmin maps, so you don't have the clear alarms when you're about to route up a huge hill/incline (which we did many times).  Cycle paths and other tracks aren't always clearly marked on either.  this makes planning a bit harder.
• you cant unfold and see a wide area like you can on a paper map, but that's the same with all GPS's.  You'd also be stuck if it broke and you were relying on it - but at the end of the day there are roadsigns and you can always buy a map.  We were in a Western country so it's not like we were going to get dangerously lost.
• Considering both models have cycle-specific routing, the algorithms seem to have been programmed pretty badly.  The Oregon has a terrain database built in, yet the Garmin will often send you up and down huge hills rather than go round them, just because it thinks the road is 0.1 mile shorter.  Great logic- - make a cyclist shlep up a ridiculously steep hill as they watch the road they were already on stay along the level below them, before you come back down the hill and join back onto the road you were already on.  The edge and the Oregon also autoroute differently - sometimes one's result is better than the others, its a bit of roulette.

Weirdnesses

• Sometimes the routing logic above...
• When you load a pre-calculated route onto the device (using PC/web software), it can't give you turn by turn directions - meaning you have to stare at the screen a lot to make sure you're on the track and you can see when turns are coming up.  Not great having your head down in a GPS in any situation, not least on a bike on roads and when junctions approach.  Often we dropped the pre-planned tracks and just let the Garmin's autoroute to the same places to get round this problem.  Good if it works, not so good if it doesn't, and you miss the carefully picked cycle routes you'd meticulously planned on the computer in the luxury of your living room!

Why don't Garmin fix X Y Z

• The Edge doesn't start recording unless you tell it to, even if you're moving.  This is discussed all over the web and Garmin should add it as an option.  The amount of data we've missed on our trips by forgetting to start the Edge recording is crazy.  Why on earth would you want a GPS to not log by default.  The Oregon and most other Garmin's record whenever they're moving, which makes obvious sense.
• Garmin name all their purchased maps the same.  This means you can only ever have two maps installed - one on the device and one on a memory card.  Any more and the files would overwrite each other.  This is possibly the craziest, most outdated thing I've ever come across.  With huge memory cards you could hold all the maps you wanted on one card, and just activate them on the device when required.  But the Garmin way, you have to cary any alternative maps on separate memory cards.  I learnt this the hard way when I bought Europe a few countries at a time, and then realised I couldn't install them all at once. This time I just bought the whole of Europe and ate the cost, but it really is stupid, and adds to the list of feedback to be sent to Garmin.

Edge v Oregon

• Edge smaller, lower-res screen, but brighter and higher contrast
• Oregon bigger, higher-res screen, but dim - especially in bright ambient light
• Oregon is faster, and easier input, yet sometimes it bailed on calculating long routes that the Edge (eventually) managed.
• Edge is smaller and has real, soft buttons on the outer case, which are better when riding as you can make selections without looking at the unit.
• Oregons touchscreen is better for general use, but when riding is more fiddly.
• Oregon is a bit more bulky.
• Edge obviously has all the more cycle fitness functions.
• Both are proven waterproof in the field
• Oregon has advantage of AA batteries so you can take spares and a charger.  NiMH give long-ish (2 day) life.  Edge can only be recharged on internal batteries, which when camping often means leaving it out unattended over night while it charges.
• They can send each other routes info wirelessly, once you've found the option buried in the Edge menu.

Conclusion

At the end of the trip I decided to stick with the Oregon for touring, as for me the pros outweighed the cons.  The Edge will possibly go on ebay as I can live without it on the road bike.