Garmin: 320-vs-220

[wireman252]

For those that have tried both units, which do you like better. I have a buddy that runs coon dogs , and he claims he's heard the 320 has given many coon hunters problems.He swears by the 220 with dc30 collars and claims he'll never switch.
I'm thinking of trying Garmin out, and curious what others think about them. Thanks.

[steve w]

The DC40/320 combination has not given me any trouble, my buddy runs the 30's,40's and 220 and has had an antennae break but otherwise good service. I think most of the bugs are worked out now with both units.I would let price and features dictate what I buy, no doubt you can save some $ with a 220. Not sure you can get the DC30's anymore.

[19rabbit52]

Hey John, I think the big difference is the enhanced map drawing capabilities, BirdsEye Satellite Imagery compatibility (subscription required). 220 does not have this. That is the big difference. 320 is also supposed to be more user friendly but I don't see enough difference to make one better than the other. What I do think is you can watch for a deal on a 220 with collars and then later upgrade to a 320 and you will have extra collars. I notice 220 alone sell pretty well as people damage or lose them alot. Money no problem? I'd just go with the 320. I do like my 220. I wouldn't pay any attention to increased range claims on the 320 as I've used mine side by side with Buck's and we get same range.

[T LEE]

I've had both and like the 320 twice as much . Bird's Eye View is the way to go.

[Rowco Beagle Kennels]

Troy and others, what range are you getting on the different units? Bobby/Johnny

[T LEE]

Troy and others, what range are you getting on the different units? Bobby/Johnny

Bobby , I tell everybody to take the small antenna that comes with the 320 and throw it in the trash . The longer 12 inch (long range) antenna picks up signal much better and has much better range. The standard antenna that came with the 220 would lose signal often. The 220 picked it back up shortly but I seldom ever lose signal with the 320 with longer antenna.

I get better range with the 320 but I don't think it's the extra 2 miles that some have claimed.

[19rabbit52]

Rowco, currently getting 4 to 500 yards with regular antenna. That is with a 220 or 320. This is in thick cover. Farthest I have used roof mount antenna is 1.5 miles, don't really know how far it is good for. Thickness of cover does make a difference. Where we get 4 to 500 yards, 2 months ago we would get eight/tenths of a mile.

[MaineDogs]

I have not used the 320 at all but i can say that if you have any interest in buying a 220 you probably better buy it soon. the 320 has recently came down in price meaning garmin is soon to put something different in the market..... my guess being a shock/tracker combo that will not communicate with the old garmin units.

Rowco, currently getting 4 to 500 yards with regular antenna. That is with a 220 or 320. This is in thick cover. Farthest I have used roof mount antenna is 1.5 miles, don't really know how far it is good for. Thickness of cover does make a difference. Where we get 4 to 500 yards, 2 months ago we would get eight/tenths of a mile.

I have the 220 with 2 dc30s and 1 dc40 and can get over a mile in heavy cover with small hills will all factory equipment.

[T LEE]

In Michigans U.P. , I was able to get 2.7 miles with the roof top antenna. The longer flex antenna with the handheld gave me 1.4 miles.

With both units they mark the last known signal... even if the collars go out of
range. It's easy to drive to that point (or near there) and recieve signal again.

I guess the 7 to 9 miles (that's factory claimed) is on very open land.

[Mo. Beagler 5000]

It makes me so mad... I got 4.19 miles through mountains and stuff while it was going in and out of service a lot but then sometimes I get on fkat ground and it cuts out at 600 yards..

i have the 320 and dc-40 with nothing modified...

[MaineDogs]

I guess the 7 to 9 miles (that's factory claimed) is on very open land.

Line of sight, the same as our shockers and hand held radios.

[johns03272008]

i have the dc30's and 220 and i have gotten 1.50 miles on fairly flat ground at most that was laying a collar in the brush and driving away!! i do not have the roof top antenna or extra long hand held antenna!! My buddy i run with has the 320 and 40's and the other day we had dogs out about 300 yards and we where both losing signal in and out!! so i think it also depends on the type of day, clouds in the sky, ect.... i personally think the only difference is the downloadable images and birds eye view which is helpful if you run unknown area's but where i run i can just about tell you where they are by looking at my map on the 220!! if your looking to get a good setup just to be able to track your dogs and see what they are doing than 220 would work but like everything electronice they are all out of date the second you buy them!!! I personally would not upgrade my unit and go with the 320 just because in my opinion i havent seen much distance increase!!! If there was significant distance increase i would consider it!!! also 220 is cheaper and you could get another collar or 2 for the price of the 320 so you can track more dogs at 1 time

[T LEE]

John , Is your buddy using the short antenna on the 320??

If so , ask him to use the longer flexable one that also comes with the 320. He will pick up nearly twice as much range verses the short one.

[johns03272008]

John , Is your buddy using the short antenna on the 320??

If so , ask him to use the longer flexable one that also comes with the 320. He will pick up nearly twice as much range verses the short one.

Hey Lee sometimes i will lose signal off and on within 50 yards i think its just the type of day but i will have him try it and see i dont recall which one but will see!! i do have the folding antenna on mine that you can buy and i didnt get any more difference in distance when i used that!

[Budd]

I ran the 220 for two years and have ran the 320 since March, I beleave I would be just as well off if I'd have stuck with the 220. Were I hunt is all BIG woods with no fields or many roads so I think the birdseye would be a waste of my money. I have 10 collars both 30's and 40's all with aftermarket antenna's. When I was running bobcat with the big hounds there were areas that I could pick them up out to 3 1/2 miles but have also lost em at 200 yards, just depends on the day. I ran down in Indiana in open, flat country and could get a little better than 4 mile with my 220 and done the same this spring with my 320. I do like the fact that my map on the 320 orientates better than my 220 ever did.