How much better does the 67i perform as a GPS receiver compared to the 66i?
Garmin marketing says the 67i "multi-band" capability provides "more consistent track logs." And it says that the 67i will perform better under more difficult terrain and canopy locations. I assume both claims mean improvement compared to the 66i, which does not have the multi-band capability. But the marketing descriptions of the multi-band capability don't explain much more about why than is obvious. Namely, the 67i can receive signals from more than one satellite at a time. The explanation at What is Dual Frequency/Multi-Band GPS? | Garmin Customer Support is confusing. It suggests that without multi-band capability a 66i cannot process signals from more than one satellite. That requires further explanation since we know a GPS fix requires processing signals from multiple satellites.
Someday, when someone (maybe someone from Garmin) records simultaneous 67i side-by-side 66i track logs showing the difference in various locations like clear hemisphere above, heavy canopy, vertical terrain, urban high rises, etc., I hope he will clearly describe the locations and post the .gpx or .fit files here. I'd really like to see the differences. I bet others would too since the 67i is 20 percent or $200 more expensive, and the multi-band capability is one of only two major improvements. The other being battery life which is easy to interpret from the numbers.
