GPS

[turtle]

First nothing replaces a map and good compass and the skill to use it. That being said for me simpler is better.

I'll second this...

I find even the best and brightest of GPS displays to be wholly inadequate for displaying maps. They simply can't compete with the size and resolution of a good printed map. Moreover, units that attempt to do so are more expensive, and either heavier (due to extra battery capacity) or offer shorter life (with the same battery capacity).

My approach has always been to get the simplest, cheapest, lightest GPS I can find that will accurately report position relative to a coordinate system or waypoints I have loaded. I rely on a printed map for "context" and "awareness" of my surroundings.

I figure I would never not print a paper map for a trip into unfamiliar terrain. (It would be folly to rely on a battery powered device alone.) So why spend the extra dollars and extra weight chasing a display that will be inferior to that provided on the paper?

It's true, you can lose the map. But at 0.1 oz each, I just print several, and give one to a friend and stash an extra one deep and dry in my pack.

[turtle]

But the ability to send an 'OK' message, and a customized message such as 'OK, but running late' are very valuable. They not only reduce stress levels at home, they may deter people at home from triggering an SAR operation that is unnecessary, embarassing, and expensive. For example, you could find yourself in a situation where the wise thing to do is hunker down for the night, but you can walk out on your own when daylight comes. If you have a PLB rather than a SPOT, you can't send a reassuring message home, and may be inclined to blunder your way down in the dark.

I'll second this as well...

As an engineer, I often summarize the SPOT vs. PLB debates as a tradeoff between reliability and bandwidth. It's true the PLBs have better reliability. But their bandwidth is rather limited, to say the least. In fact they effectively send exactly 1 bit of information.

[Ed]

I'm in general agreement with the comments here on map and compass vs. gps.

But there are situations where you would love to have a gps with a few well-chosen waypoints. An example being a winter storm where the snow covers the trail, fills in your tracks behind you, and reduces visibility to near zero. As for the cost of a gps, the Garmin Etrex 20, discounted, is not that much more expensive than the cheapest ones now; the cheapest ones often do not have a convenient computer interface for downloading waypoints, routes and tracks from your computer; and there are free Garmin-compatible topographical maps on GPSFileDepot.

[Norris]

To answer your original question, get a Garmin 62s.
PLBs are fine if you are going on a solo ocean crossing, but a bit of an overkill for hiking in the local mountains. SPOT is fine for an emergency or for reducing anxiety amongst loved ones when you send periodic "I'm OK" messages, but will do you no good as far as route finding. A good mapping GPS is a great tool, I recommend you get one. Traditional map and compass are obsolete.

[climbant]

Traditional map and compass are obsolete.

Can't believe I read this.

[Hikin_Jim]

Traditional map and compass are obsolete.

Hmm.

Nothing wrong with a GPS unit; indeed I'm considering getting one, but not carrying a "traditional" map at all? That doesn't seem to be a particularly good idea.

Here's why I say that:
1. GPS units are battery operated. If the batteries run out of juice, you're out with no guidance.
2. GPS units are electrical. They're vulnerable to being dropped, getting damp, or other forms of breakage.
3. GPS units have a very small display. In terms of route selection, it's important to see a larger area at a glance. If one only sees the tiny window's worth of map, it's really hard to make good route decisions. One could argue that your route should be pre-planned, which can be done on a larger map at home. True, but there are so many occasions where one's original plans are thwarted by heavy snow, brush, injury, etc. I want the ability to revise my plans if necessary. The mini-display on a GPS doesn't allow me to do that.

The ideal I think is to carry (and know how to use) both the GPS and a map. The map is your overview and planning document (and your backup). The GPS is your fine tuning and your double check (to make sure that your map reading is accurate).

GPS alone? Yeah, you might wind up "alone" all right. Let's hope SAR brought paper maps in addition to their GPS units.

HJ

[Screerider]

My Garmin came with some pretty good software for printing out maps. While it has a map screen, it's a small screen, it either shows a very limited area or very limited detail. Combined with my eyesight, I found it practically useless for route finding. It's handiness has came from the ability to pinpoint a location within a few feet. It was also good for documenting trips. If you travel in canyons or under heavy tree cover, you can lose satellite contact and it does become useless.
What I've found most useful was the software.
Instead of sharing 1 worn out topo map on a trip, every member of the party gets a copy with the proposed route printed on it. You can leave the wife a copy and leave it on your hard drive as well.
A GPS is a nice toy, not a safety device. IMO For the weight you're better off carrying your cell phone and an extra battery tho neither are really safety devices.
The good thing about a GPS is that if it puts the wife at ease, it's priceless. She's calmed down and you get a new toy. You can't beat that. Just get the software with it.

[Hikin_Jim]

My Garmin... It's handiness has came from the ability to pinpoint a location within a few feet.

It was also good for documenting trips.

Those are the two reasons I'm interested in getting one. I'd also like to have better estimates of miles walked.

While it has a map screen, it's a small screen, it either shows a very limited area or very limited detail...I found it practically useless for route finding.

Exactly. It's a fantastic position indicator but a horrible route finder.

If you travel in canyons or under heavy tree cover, you can lose satellite contact and it does become useless.

Yeah, and I get really uncomfortable without a map (unless it's somewhere I'm really familiar with).

HJ

[towbradley]

Thanks everyone, the garmin wins. Just have to weigh in on the model and price. And no matter what, a map is always in the pack. Side note, my very first trip up to the fire watch tower in san j , my friends and i were on our way back and made the first left turn which took us down the wrong trail....we came from humber park! My friends insisted we were going in the right direction, but i kept insisting we were off track....never had an actual good map. ROOKIE MOVE! Thank goodness it wasn't a major mistake. Anyway, thanks for all the input.

[climbant]

A gps coupled with a UTM ruler card is very helpful in plotting a very accurate location. The cards are are an inexpensive small piece of plastic with several map scales. Totally agree the maps on the GPS screen are virtually worthless for real route finding but the location help is awesome, especially when identifying geographical references is hard or confusing. You can get the cards in usgs scales and tom Harrison's oddball scales.