Garmin Edge Touring Plus vs Garmin Dakota 20?

[jonathanuk]

I currently use a Dakota 20 as my cycling GPS, I use it to take notes on mountain bike routes, mark forest trail gate locations, follow planned routes and the like, but the main use is to get the GPX trace which I upload to share my ride data with friends.

Recently I have been wondering about the Edge cycling computers, they look nice but would they give me anything I don't already have in the Dakota 20? The Edge 1000 and 810 seem to have far more than I would ever use, I don't have a smart phone so would not be transmitting location data or displaying ghost trainer info, although receiving live weather updates would be good I'm usually confident I know what's going to happen for the few hours I'm out on the bike. I'm just not sure if it's worth the price tag even for the Edge Touring Plus, as the more I look at it the more it just seems to be a differently packaged Dakota 20, with a few disadvantages - no simple AA battery replacement, probably no good for any purpose but cycling (Dakota can be used for hiking, boating, car GPS, even flying), and I read in some reviews that the interface is clunky.

Has anyone done a thorough side-by-side ride comparison of the Dakota 20 and Edge Touring Plus?

Currently I use a small dedicated cycling computer (no GPS, just a speed sensor) and have the Dakota along with me for the GPX recording and on-screen mapping, which can prove very useful at times to quickly know where I am in a maze of forest tracks. The cycling computer gives me the most reliable ride data, there is usually a slight discrepancy in terms of distance, perhaps due to slightly inaccurate height detection by the GPS. This discrepancy worries me that if I relied solely on a GPS then I would not be getting 100% accurate data, I would want a wheel speed sensor as well to correct the GPS inaccuracy and I don't know if the Edge Touring Plus has that facility (I know it has ANT+ but I haven't yet seen a companion wheel speed sensor for this model).

Thank you for any help or advice.

An alternative for me could be one of the Cateye GPS cycling computers, they have a wheel sensor and display basic information, no mapping function, I could still take my Dakota along with me or a paper map, even my camera which can log a GPX file and GPS data for photos taken. So many options!

[AlanW]

I have a Garmin Edge Touring (GET) Plus and while I dont have a Dakota 20 to compare it against, I do have a Oregon 450. I have used the Oregon for about five years and have three sets of maps loaded on to it or should I say the Micro SD card, Ordanance Survey Maps, Open Street Maps and City Navigator. Depending on what I am doing I then select whatever map best suits that application.

The only factor that lets the Oregon down is the fact that it doesn't do turn by turn navigation, which to be fair isn't such a big deal, but a nice to have feature. I have ridden many Audaxes plus LEJoG in 2010 just by following the outline overlay on the map and not had any issues at all. Other than occasionally not paying attention and consequently heading of in the wrong direction.....doh!!

Like you I had looked at the GET and wondered how it would be better than the Oregon, other than the turn by turn function. Cutting a long story short, but I won a GET back at the beginning part of the year and to be honest I love. To the point that the Oregon hasn't seen the light of day ever since, other than for walking. That said, the GET isnt without its issues, the auto routing is utter garbage, and any form of navigation using the device is simply asking for trouble! However, load in a .GPX file and then 9 times out of 10 it will perform without any problems at all. BUT, its probably best to load Open Street Maps onto the SD card as well and choose that mapping over the OEM cycle specific mapping. The OEM mapping will always default you to cycle routes/tracks/lanes rather than the most direct route.

The only downside (and its not really a downside) is the inability to replace the battery on the road like you can with the Dakota and the Oregon. A simply fix is to purchase a tiny pocket charger. I have two chargers, one that needs to be charged via USB port on the PC and will do three of four full charges on the GET and one that cost less than a fiver that takes a couple of AA batteries and will do maybe a couple of full charges. The beauty of the latter one is that you can then buy more AA batteries while out if you get proper stuck. Both charges will also do your phone, so win, win.

So overall, very pleased with the GET Plus and would recommend it to anyone, providing that you are aware of the navigation issues or should I say lack of navigation! The only difference between the Plus and the normal GET is that the Plus can read a HR monitor but no other ANT+ device and it has a barometer, which is grossly inaccurate anyway so pretty much a waste of time IMHO

I am also confused why you think that you dont get 100% accurate data from a GPS?? Having run a normal cordless Cateye computer back to back with all three of my current GPS units, an Edge 500, an Edge Touring Plus and a Oregon 450 I can confirm no difference what so ever in speed or distant.

[sjs]

The only factor that lets the Oregon down is the fact that it doesn't do turn by turn navigation, which to be fair isn't such a big deal, but a nice to have feature. I have ridden many Audaxes plus LEJoG in 2010 just by following the outline overlay on the map and not had any issues at all. Other than occasionally not paying attention and consequently heading of in the wrong direction.....doh!!

Alan, when you say the Oregon doesn't do turn by turn navigation, do you mean when following a track? It does when navigating a route, but in my opinion there are various downsides to routing which mean that I now just follow the pink track line on the map. Does the GET behave differently? I must say it was a surprise to me that my Oregon is worse in that respect than the old serial-only, mapless EtrexH which I used to use.

[AlanW]

The only factor that lets the Oregon down is the fact that it doesn't do turn by turn navigation, which to be fair isn't such a big deal, but a nice to have feature. I have ridden many Audaxes plus LEJoG in 2010 just by following the outline overlay on the map and not had any issues at all. Other than occasionally not paying attention and consequently heading of in the wrong direction.....doh!!

Alan, when you say the Oregon doesn't do turn by turn navigation, do you mean when following a track? It does when navigating a route, but in my opinion there are various downsides to routing which mean that I now just follow the pink track line on the map. Does the GET behave differently? I must say it was a surprise to me that my Oregon is worse in that respect than the old serial-only, mapless EtrexH which I used to use.

I have only used it to follow a pink line track line and I wasn't aware that you could even get it to do turn by turn directions when navigating a route to be honest, I didn't think that it could do that? The GET does both routes and tracks with turn by turn navigation having to do anything. I also had a Etrex HCx for a number of years and I have to say that it was a great little unit and the sole reason for moving to the Oregon was my eyesight was/is getting worse and I couldn't see the screen as well as I would have liked on the Etrex.

Then the reason for going with the GET, other than the fact that I won it, was I that liked the idea of the variable round route option. If nothing else it would take me on roads that I wouldnt normally ride on. However, in the real world, its pretty rubbish unless you like doing figure of eight rides and rides that cross over the same path on a number of occasions just to tally the chosen up. And I dont much want to go along specific cycle routes and back alleys either..... That said once I loaded OSM onto the SD card of the GET it did improve that, but it still suffers from "figure of eight" type rides. Perhaps its just me, but I class a ride as starting at point A, doing a circular route of a given distance and back to point A again?