# GPS users...



## Being (May 12, 2005)

Anybody know how to import tracks from a Garmin GPSMap 60CSx into Topo! ? Topo! is looking for 2 fields for position but Garmin seems to use only 1 field and the format does not match any I find in Topo! (National Geographics Topo! 4.0). I have tried splitting the Garmin field into 2 but the format is still a problem. :madman:


----------



## BigLarry (Jul 30, 2004)

*Should Be Automatic*

First, NG has an update to 4.22 that has better (direct) USB support. You can update automatically by an Automatic Updates setting in the Preferences dialog

You should be able to import your files from the GPS device without a need to mess with the transfer settings. Select your unit from the Preferences dialog under Receiver | GPS Type. This mostly sets the name formats and sizes.

I was trying to understand your issue and now realize maybe you're trying to read directly from the Garmin files, rather than the GPS device. It's a pain and I'm not sure how it's done. I just use my GPS (eTrex) as an intermediate transfer device. If the file's not already on the eTrex, I download it from Garmin, then back up into NG Topo!. The only issue is that you're limited to the maximum number of track points for the device (750 in my case). But there's easy way to reduce the points in most programs, with little effect on the track, even for long rides.

I may try to figure out how to do a text transfer, but it's sure to involve some intermediate file formats like *.txt or *.gpx, and perhaps even some other programs. Many good programs exist to convert waypoints, but very few for tracks (which are treated like Routes in NG Topo!).

A good book for dealing with all the formats, and great details on on the programs is "GPS Mapping: Make your own Maps" by Rich Owings. He logs on here as Redwoods Mountain Biker. See here. I'll be reading more on this to see if I can do it directly via file formats.


----------



## Being (May 12, 2005)

BigLarry said:


> First, NG has an update to 4.22 that has better (direct) USB support. You can update automically by an Automatic Updates setting in the Preferences dialog


Thank you very much. Simple solutions have a way of slipping right by me.


----------



## Koke (Nov 1, 2005)

When NorCal riders use GPS to make your own maps/routes you should add them to http://www.geoladders.com so that riders from outside your area can enjoy what you have to offer when visiting. There are hundreds of SoCal routes on the site already.


----------



## BigLarry (Jul 30, 2004)

*geoladders - maybe???*



Koke said:


> When NorCal riders use GPS to make your own maps/routes you should add them to http://www.geoladders.com so that riders from outside your area can enjoy what you have to offer when visiting. There are hundreds of SoCal routes on the site already.


I agree something like this would be good to find routes and trails. I tried a couple of other sites and found them too difficult to use or way to commercial compared to what I get out of it. So far, I like the Motion Based for the all the different imagery and tech details they offer for my tracks, and will likely subscribe at some point.

I browsed geoladders and it looks like a fun concept. But it only had SoCal and zero (0) NorCal routes. I have over 100 tracks of great NorCal rides I could add. But in a few minutes of looking around, I don't see a place to upload tracks. (Do you know where?) It almost seems the routes are managed and posted by the web masters. It appears you can only post your personal time on the given route to move your ranking up the points "ladder" by doing more rides faster.

Also, the hundreds of web objects per screen on geoladders were taxing the resources of my poor IE browser, and causing it to crash or display go nuts a couple times. I rarely have that happen.


----------



## Koke (Nov 1, 2005)

If you create a user acount (it's free) you can click on "Dashboard" and then "Routes Created [Create route/View all personal routes]" and then attach a .gpx file and some turn by turn photos for directions. There are no routes for CA north of Santa Barbara so that is why I suggested in my earlier post that NorCal riders should contribute their favorites. I have posted about 10 myself (it gets addiciting). If a user uploads a route that is legal and has correct directions then it becomes official.


----------



## Being (May 12, 2005)

Anybody willing to share their favorite Grouse Ridge route?


----------



## Dan'ger (Aug 26, 2004)

I've just uploaded about 10 GPX files of rides in the NorCal area - primarily the East Bay. I'll do more as time permits.


----------



## BigLarry (Jul 30, 2004)

*Data Crunch Advice*



Dan'ger said:


> I've just uploaded about 10 GPX files of rides in the NorCal area - primarily the East Bay. I'll do more as time permits.


I saw your 10 files in the geoladders personal section. They sure hide that list of personal tracks. Even with instructions, it took me a few minutes to find that link down at the bottom right of the page.

I saw you placed them in the "other" regions - you know, the ones outside Orange County.  I emailed Geoladders asking for a NorCal region. I'll wait to see if they're really interested in my tracks to do so.

I have a lot of files to convert from Garmin gdb to gpx files. How did you convert? 
Copying them one by one to a new file and doing a "Save as gpx" in Garmin MapSource doesn't save the track as a "route" which is needed for gpx. Transfering all the tracks to National Geographic would solve the issue, as NG uploads "tracks" as "routes". But it's very messy and very time consuming. Do you have another way? Did you use Motion Based? (Another reason for me to subscribe.)


----------



## Dan'ger (Aug 26, 2004)

BigLarry said:


> I saw your 10 files in the geoladders personal section. They sure hide that list of personal tracks. Even with instructions, it took me a few minutes to find that link down at the bottom right of the page.


It seems that Geoladders is not a very user-friendly site for those of us who wish to click and upload. The Motion Based interface is much more conducive and even offers an applet that connects directly to the USB.



BigLarry said:


> I saw you placed them in the "other" regions - you know, the ones outside Orange County.  I emailed Geoladders asking for a NorCal region. I'll wait to see if they're really interested in my tracks to do so.


I didn't intentionally place them in "other." They got placed there by whatever algorithm they've got on their site. I don't believe that I actually selected the region anywhere - it was automatically set by the geocodes or regions contained in the .gpx file.



BigLarry said:


> I have a lot of files to convert from Garmin gdb to gpx files. How did you convert?
> Copying them one by one to a new file and doing a "Save as gpx" in Garmin MapSource doesn't save the track as a "route" which is needed for gpx. Transfering all the tracks to National Geographic would solve the issue, as NG uploads "tracks" as "routes". But it's very messy and very time consuming. Do you have another way? Did you use Motion Based? (Another reason for me to subscribe.)


As far as converting them, import/export is a huge pain in the butt. I have been uploading the data into Motion Based at the end of rides. I haven't subscribed (yet) and I'm waiting to see what happens now that I have 10 uploads on MB. I think that it only allows 10 plots to non-members.

I downloaded the .gpx files from MB to a folder as well as all of the Google Earth plots.

My opinions of the GPS mapping software and services is:

TOPO! seems to be the dying bastard child of the industry. It is very rigid and has limited use for anything but graphics. It is also very expensive. The biggest downer is that you cannot upload TOPO maps to your GPS device, regardless of device.

DeLorme Street Atlas / Earth Topo seems to be a good choice for some things - I like the Street Atlas for my laptop in the truck whil driving / off roading. There's nothing like a live update 14" diag map while travelling. I have not used their Topo software but I imagine it is very easy to use from a PC/laptop standpoint. It has a variety of functions down to a radar function to locate gas stations among other POIs in a live update function.

The Garmin street software that comes with most of their devices is OK at best and again, I haven't bought their Topo package yet. The advantage seems to be the ability to upload maps directly into the GPS unit, assuming it is a Garmin device. The downside is from a PC, it doesn't have alot of functionality for live operation.

Motion Based, now owned by Garmin, is ESRI based for their mapping functions. My experience with government work is that any mapping that is ESRI based has a huge datatbase functionality. It has inherent flexibility for devices and purposes. The down side is a $100/yr membership. The positive is that it has a huge coolness factor. I have yet to experiment with direct uploads to my GPS.

GPX files seem to have become the standard that most GPS fanatic websites are based on. I have yet to convert everything into it, but when I do, I will be burning my TOPO! package in a huge bonfire!


----------



## Koke (Nov 1, 2005)

GeoLadders also has a software applet/agent (in beta form) that uploads directly from Garmin Edge 205 and 305 units. As far as NorCal not listed as a region yet, new regions are added shortly after new routes are created. There are different types of routes: 1. Personal Routes - routes that the creator does not want to become official or are so new they have not reached the "pending" status. 2. Pending Routes - routes that are being verified for accuracy. 3. Hidden Personal Routes - routes that a user does not want any other user to see and also does not want it to become official. 4. Official Routes - routes that have been tried and tested for directions and legality. I have created all of my routes on GeoLadders directly from Garmin Trips and Waypoints software "save as" .gpx format. I create a track and make waypoints that correspond with directions and mapped gallery images (all of which work with Google Maps on the GeoLadders site). I have never used Motion Based. Here is one route I created (make sure to click on "Google Map"): http://www.geoladders.com/show_route.php?sport=1&route=339


----------



## knobs (Oct 13, 2005)

*g7towin*



BigLarry said:


> I have a lot of files to convert from Garmin gdb to gpx files. How did you convert?


A few years ago I used g7towin for converting between formats. The current the web page says that it handles gdb. It used to have a batch driven interface too, although I don't know the details. If it still does, then a 10 line batch script could convert all of your files. There are some if's here. With a name like g7towin, you can google and feel lucky.

Personally, I'd prefer to have trail database in a garmin loadable map rather than individual tracks. The tools are out there, it's just alot of work. But that's a different topic.


----------



## BigLarry (Jul 30, 2004)

*None are anywhere near perfect yet*



Dan'ger said:


> It seems that Geoladders is not a very user-friendly site for those of us who wish to click and upload. The Motion Based interface is much more conducive and even offers an applet that connects directly to the USB....
> 
> My opinions of the GPS mapping software and services is:....


I agree. It's amazing how all the software has so many simple flaws that could easily be fixed to allow any one of them to become big hits, yet it doesn't happen.

Garmin doesn't plot very good looking altitude profiles, and doesn't show good 3D plots like National Geographic and other web-based programs.It also doesn't allow me to draw a track and estimate distance climb on a new ride like I can with National Geographic. It also doesn't allow me to click a point on a profile and have the map go to that point like National Geographic TOPO! On the other hand, Garmin has very nice editing tools for waypoints and tracks.

But I also agree that National Geographic TOPO! is expensive, and it's picture based programs will soon be history once the other programs get their act together on the ability to draw tracks, make good altitude profiles. The web programs like Motion Based way out class the pictures too.

Motion Based still doesn't do 3D, IIRC. It also doesn't allow track drawing and editing and easy waypoint generation based on satellite images like other programs, or autorouting or all the other things I do with the other programs.

The web based programs can't download to a GPS, nor can National Geographic. You can only do that with Garmin's software for Garmin units. I've had Garmin's Topo for so many years that I forgot how useful it was. When I looked at your 60CS without the Topo maps at Henry Coe, it was tough to see where you were in relation to the mountains, streams and other terrain. All you had was yourself in relation to the waypoints. You couldn't see that you might cross a mountain or lake if you went in a particular direction like you would with the downloaded Topo maps. The whole US is only $80 - well worth the bucks. I'll send you a PM about some alternatives.


----------



## BigLarry (Jul 30, 2004)

knobs said:


> A few years ago I used g7towin for converting between formats. The current the web page says that it handles gdb. It used to have a batch driven interface too, although I don't know the details. If it still does, then a 10 line batch script could convert all of your files. There are some if's here. With a name like g7towin, you can google and feel lucky.
> 
> Personally, I'd prefer to have trail database in a garmin loadable map rather than individual tracks. The tools are out there, it's just alot of work. But that's a different topic.


I've got g7towin. I found it from Rich Owing's book, along with a number of other programs he suggests. Unfortuantely, most of these programs convert waypoints and sometimes routes, but very few convert tracks.

I agree with you about just downloaded all the tracks in a single Garmin gdb file is easiest. But that's a proprietary format that only a (major?) fraction of users have. And the general exchange format of gpx doesn't seem to have a common format for tracks yet, one of the most useful things to transfer. Why can't they make a better gpx standard? It's all so primitive and frustrating really.


----------



## Dan'ger (Aug 26, 2004)

BigLarry said:


> ...When I looked at your 60CS without the Topo maps at Henry Coe, it was tough to see where you were in relation to the mountains, streams and other terrain. All you had was yourself in relation to the waypoints. You couldn't see that you might cross a mountain or lake if you went in a particular direction like you would with the downloaded Topo maps. The whole US is only $80 - well worth the bucks. I'll send you a PM about some alternatives.


Well, I've got to bite the bullit someday in regard to the Garmin topo maps. As you pointed out, it would have been handy at Coe and other long or potentially arduous rides. So far, I haven't really needed it as most of my rides have been at parks I'm familiar with or otherwise less than 20 miles and led by someone else.

Looking forward to the alternatives but buying the package is not going to cause me to starve my kids in trade. I should probably just do it and buy another handlebar mount while I'm at it so I can easily switch between my MTB and roadie.


----------



## knobs (Oct 13, 2005)

BigLarry said:


> I agree with you about just downloaded all the tracks in a single Garmin gdb file is easiest.


Actually, what I was talking about is not just a bunch of tracks. But a map file. In other words, think about collecting all your tracks for a place like Coe for example. Then run them through some tools that converts them to a single map file that can be loaded into a garmin reciever. There are public domain tools to do this, and you can even add routable trails, intersections, one ways, etc. I played with them for a while, just got irritated at the poor user interfaces, and gave up. I'd rather be riding.



BigLarry said:


> Why can't they make a better gpx standard? It's all so primitive and frustrating really.


Actually, the gpx format is not so bad. At least it's vendor neutral. It's the tools that are difficult. At least gpx can be massaged with xpath or xquery, but there's a level of expertise required there.


----------



## Dan'ger (Aug 26, 2004)

Koke said:


> GeoLadders also has a software applet/agent (in beta form) that uploads directly from Garmin Edge 205 and 305 units. As far as NorCal not listed as a region yet, new regions are added shortly after new routes are created. There are different types of routes: 1. Personal Routes - routes that the creator does not want to become official or are so new they have not reached the "pending" status. 2. Pending Routes - routes that are being verified for accuracy. 3. Hidden Personal Routes - routes that a user does not want any other user to see and also does not want it to become official. 4. Official Routes - routes that have been tried and tested for directions and legality. I have created all of my routes on GeoLadders directly from Garmin Trips and Waypoints software "save as" .gpx format. I create a track and make waypoints that correspond with directions and mapped gallery images (all of which work with Google Maps on the GeoLadders site). I have never used Motion Based. Here is one route I created (make sure to click on "Google Map"): http://www.geoladders.com/show_route.php?sport=1&route=339


Hmm...I've got a Garmin GPS Map 60Cs...gotta have my maps and geek fodder in big numbers!


----------



## XRAYO (Aug 8, 2005)

Here's a fantastic price on the Garmin Edge 305 Bundle in the MTBR Classifieds. Great deal from a great guy. I know the seller - I got mine here.


----------



## Being (May 12, 2005)

BigLarry said:


> I have a lot of files to convert from Garmin gdb to gpx files. How did you convert?
> Copying them one by one to a new file and doing a "Save as gpx" in Garmin MapSource doesn't save the track as a "route" which is needed for gpx. Transfering all the tracks to National Geographic would solve the issue, as NG uploads "tracks" as "routes". But it's very messy and very time consuming. Do you have another way? Did you use Motion Based? (Another reason for me to subscribe.)


I haven't tried this yet but it sounds good. EasyGPS


----------



## loomis (Nov 9, 2005)

Pardon my ignorance, but as a new GPS user, I don't understand the difference between routes and tracks. Can anyone recommend a good starter book to get my up to speed on using my GPS (Garmin 60 CS)?


----------



## knobs (Oct 13, 2005)

loomis said:


> Pardon my ignorance, but as a new GPS user, I don't understand the difference between routes and tracks. Can anyone recommend a good starter book to get my up to speed on using my GPS (Garmin 60 CS)?


I think the REI in Saratoga has an class on this subject. It may be easier to learn by doing. The list of classes is online at their website.

Tracks and Routes are essentially the same thing, except with different levels of granularity.
Tracks are like breadcrumbs dropped every few feet. Routes often include only major intersections. What you can do with each depends on your receiver.


----------



## BigLarry (Jul 30, 2004)

loomis said:


> Pardon my ignorance, but as a new GPS user, I don't understand the difference between routes and tracks. Can anyone recommend a good starter book to get my up to speed on using my GPS (Garmin 60 CS)?


A Route is usually a path that you want to take between Waypoints that you have givien names. Waypoints are points you label usually at intersections or places you want to go or turn on your route. When riding my bike on the route, I have my GPS show me the distance (and direction on compass or map screen) to the next waypoint, so I can see myself counting down to that location. For a car GPS with autorouting, a path through the streets to each waypoint will be generated automatically. For cars, your route usually consists of only the final waypoint with the rest of the route calculated automatically.

A Track is like a breadcrumb of a path that you have taken with track points placed down at a relatively high frequency.

A Route may typically consist of only a few points from 2 (begin and end) to a few dozen. On a typical 5 hour bike ride, the route I create to follow may consist of around 10-20 waypoints, every couple miles as approprate at intersections.

A Track of that same route may have 500 track points, each with position, elevation, and time I was actually at that point.

To add to confusion, National Geographic when importing a Track will call it a Route. But it's only National Geographic Topo! that does that.


----------



## Dan'ger (Aug 26, 2004)

Unfortunately, I decided to take advantage of REI's satisfaction guarantee on the Map60CS and return it. Besides having partially broken the antenna mast because of the bar mount kit that Garmin sells, I kept experiencing a "battery bounce" problem every time I rode over a rough section. What good is it if it even bounces on a road bike?

I took it back to the REI in Concord does not have the selection that I needed to make a decision, so I did not buy a new one on the spot. I'll have to go to <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com







Concord</st1:City> this afternoon and they credited my card, no questions asked. Unfortunately, <st1:City w:st=" /><st1:City w:st="on">Berkeley</st1:City> tomorrow to see about picking one up.

Anyway, the hunt is on - again - for the perfect GPS device for my needs. I encountered the same bounce problem with my old GPS III+ and expect that it is an inherent problem with the AA size battery compartments. From what I can tell, most of the "for biking" models have a rechargeable battery that plugs in inside the case but the biking models from Garmin don't have mapping. Which means that (ack!) I might have to break down and buy a Magellan or Lowrance if I want mapping on my bike or give up on the mapping capability.

<O</OLJ0913 has one of the biking models that also does wireless cadence and heartrate and mounts to the bar stem instead of the bars so that endos don't break the antenna.

<O</OI figure I'll buy whatever I buy at REI again so that I can return it if it doesn't meet my satisfaction.<O</O


----------



## LJ0913 (May 28, 2004)

Dan'ger said:


> Unfortunately, I decided to take advantage of REI's satisfaction guarantee on the Map60CS and return it. Besides having partially broken the antenna mast because of the bar mount kit that Garmin sells, I kept experiencing a "battery bounce" problem every time I rode over a rough section. What good is it if it even bounces on a road bike?
> 
> I took it back to the REI in Concord does not have the selection that I needed to make a decision, so I did not buy a new one on the spot. I'll have to go to <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com
> 
> ...


I am pretty lame when it comes to GPS systems, due to I am only interested in a few options that my Edge 205 offers. With that said: Dan'ger is there not a mapping GPS that has an internal battery? It seems they've been out long enough that Garmin, or (?) would have a rechargeable battery by now. Perhaps it requires too much battery to gather the mapping information? Again, I am no GPS expert and only done enough research to cover my needs. Ok, I'll shut-up now.

On a related note: Is anyone using MAC? I bought a MacBook last week (LOVE IT!) but unfortunately the Garmin's Training Center software won't be released for Mac until end of this year. Currently I have "LoadMyTracks" which works great for getting my gpx file in motionbased, but there's a few things in Training Software I like to use that motionbased doesn't offer. I can't find anything for Mac.

Thanks,
-Larry


----------



## GEOMAN (May 30, 2006)

Hi Larry,

I have an MBP and use Motionbased to interface with my Edge 305. Try the Motionbased Safari plugin (try it you'll like it).

Motionbased Safari Plugin

Also, I recently started mapping my mountain rides with a 60CSx (note the "x") and have ridden hard and rough and have not suffered any problems with battery bounce. I've never experienced battery bounce on the Edge 305 either. My $.02...

Geo.Man


----------



## LJ0913 (May 28, 2004)

GEOMAN said:


> Hi Larry,
> 
> I have an MBP and use Motionbased to interface with my Edge 305. Try the Motionbased Safari plugin (try it you'll like it).
> 
> ...


Hi Geo.Man,

Thanks for the info. I've used that plug-in for Safari a few times but I don't really care for it due to MB loading all of your tracks. I am not ready to clear my history off of Garmin yet (as MB suggest) I'll try to wait patiently.  Plus no map player in safrai - hopefully they will have support by the end of summer. I've tried the Adobe plug-in for Firefox for the map player no luck. Even tried the logout/login trick.

-Larry


----------



## GEOMAN (May 30, 2006)

If you want to have some fun with your MBP and all of Motionbased bells and whistles, install this and Windows (XP, NT, 2000, etc). You'll be able to see the Map Player, etc. (sorry, USB support doesn't work with Garmin GPS's yet but I bet it will shortly):

Parallels

Enjoy!

Geo.Man


----------



## Dan'ger (Aug 26, 2004)

GEOMAN said:


> Hi Larry,
> 
> I have an MBP and use Motionbased to interface with my Edge 305. Try the Motionbased Safari plugin (try it you'll like it).
> 
> ...


The bounce I've been experiencing is, as far as I can tell, due to the handlebar mount and the 2xAA batteries bouncing around under rough road conditions on the bars of my road bike or rough terrain on the bars of even my FS mountain bike.

I'm tempted to check out the 60CSx as I had the 60CS and the bar mount will be the same between the 2. I expect, however, that I will experience the same bounce unless there is something in the newer design of the CSx that compensates for it. The CSx is nice that it has a mini-SD card slot for map expandability and greater GPS satellite reception than earlier models.

The other problem with the bar mount and the MAP60 series of devices is the antenna mast. When mounted on the Garmin bar mount, the mast is the first thing to hit the ground in extreme endo conditions. Unless there's a stem / top tube mount that I'm unaware of, I'm tempted to not get another one from this series.

The Edge 205/305 seem to have a stem/top tube mount instead of a bar mount which seems like it would keep them out of the line of fire better from endos and crashing in general. Additionally, since the Edge has an internal rechargable battery, it may be more resistant to bounce.

It may be that you have a later model that takes into account problems from the earlier models and it may be that I just ride less smoothly than you do and crash more.


----------



## GEOMAN (May 30, 2006)

I expect the battery configuration is the same from the 60CS to the 60CSx... I've ridden some very tough rough trails and never had any battery bounce. Try stretching the contact springs in the battery compartment a little?

I have my area's topo miniSD card for my 60CSx and it is great.

Nope, never endo'd with my 60CSx on the bar (at $539 retail, it's a big potential risk) but I have (darnit) with the Edge and it survived without a scratch. You're right about the stem placement. Seems to afford it more protection in severe conditions. But, there's always a risk. 

Sounds like there are some other GPS nuts out there!

TERRIFIC!

Geo.Man


----------



## BigLarry (Jul 30, 2004)

Sorry to hear of your problems. I'm thinking of getting the Map60CSx in a couple months. Exactly how did you break the antenna? Was this an endo into a rock?

By "battery bounce", do you mean loosing power every so often on very rough trails, and having to turn it back on?

By comparison, I never had a problem with damage to my eTrex Vista, that also comes with a color screen that's almost as many pixels as the 60CS, but 25% smaller. It's antenna is built into the case that has a rubberized housing. I have bar ends that protect it a little on endos. But it gets knocked off the bars maybe a couple times a year, more often by my knee hitting it in an endo than it hitting a rock. It was always still working without so much as a power down, once I collect it along with the rest of the "yard sale". Once when holding it in my clumsy gloved hands, I dropped my eTrex Vista face down onto a rock a few feet down, and got a scratch/gouge on the face. It's fallen off the roof of my car (after I forgot it was there) and bounced down a paved parking lot a couple times, with no damage. Over 2.5 years, the rubber started wearing off the sides - mostly an annoying cosmetic issue.

I did get an issue when the eTrex Vista would power off on nasty rough trails. I found that using a better battery cover (I get one with each of my 3 handlebar mounts) would solve the problem. Also, it was important to have the handlebar mount not too tight when screwing down around the rubber spacer or stress of the bending of the handlebar mount itself would cause the battery to disconnect easier. It was easy to tell the mount wasn't right as the GPS wouldn't click on tightly - that is, if the GPS is too easy to click in rather than tight, it was easier to have battery issues. I also made sure the battery clips weren't flattened over time and every few months bent them out a little before putting in the batteries. With it done right, I may not even get one power off in a year of tough riding, even with a yard sale.

After about two years, the power-off issue suddenly got worse and would happen once or twice a ride and I couldn't get it better. It got annoying to turn back on all the time. So I took advantage of Garmin's "refresh" repair deal, where you can get a like-new unit for $125 fixed price. I used it to fix the cosmetic rubber and screen issues at the same time. Since the repair maybe 9 months ago, I've never lost power again on the bars, like the first two years, and everything's working great.

In any case, I may still buy the 60CSx just for better reception in my Oregon trip (that I just won!







) with lots of trees and hills. On the ride at Big Basin, I lost reception a couple times on the edge of a hill with big thick trees. Looking later on the computer, the tracks look continuous and you wouldn't know you momentarily lost reception, but I know from looking at the GPS while riding.

I hope I can do better with the 60CSx than your experience. Maybe I want to just get a color eTrex Vista instead considering my good luck with the smaller Vista on the handlebars. The new Vista will have expandable memory, but my biggest regret is that it won't have the advanced SiRF chip, which is useful in some places.

Also, the Edge can't show mapping and although a good cycle computer, may not be the best for MTB, especially if you want some navigation help. See more of my comments about the Edge here.


----------



## pacman (Jan 16, 2004)

(Why not an MTBR GPS board?)

I have a 76CSx and the battery holders are very tight. I can't see them disconnecting. I carry it in a Camelbak or side pocket. On a ride with (relatively) dense trees it never lost the signal.

MotionBased is overloaded. My last upload was put into a queue for processing! Online response has been terrible.

I am playing around with Topofusion. It has a lot of features and apparently a staff that is working on user suggestions. :thumbsup: Referring back to the Coe comments, Topofusion will build a trail network and will "average in" the tracks. For those who like climbing analysis Topofusion has 6 ways of computing net gain. Any other users? Got tips?


----------



## Dan'ger (Aug 26, 2004)

pacman said:


> (Why not an MTBR GPS board?)
> 
> I have a 76CSx and the battery holders are very tight. I can't see them disconnecting. I carry it in a Camelbak or side pocket. On a ride with (relatively) dense trees it never lost the signal.
> 
> ...


The 76 series is a very large chassis although I really like the functionality. It is the be-all end-all of hand-held mapping GPS devices.

Sure, I could buy any GPS mapping device out there and throw it in my pack and never have a problem. But the functionality I was looking for in replacing my GPS III+ was to have something I could use as a navigation aid for road and mountain biking, a bike computer AND travel recorder.

I have over the past few years become dependent on my GPS units for off-road driving and highway travel by hooking up the device to an external antenna on the roof of my truck and serial or USB cable to my laptop that sits securely on my center console, secured by bungee straps. Having a 14" map display while driving is much easier to read and less time consuming in the details than squimting at a 4" (or less screen) while driving. Besides, I usually have my laptop for road/offroad trips as a repository for digital photos and video and wireless email capabilities with a Sprint cell-internet card. I could go on and on about the benefits of being able to browse MTBR while driving... :nono: ...oh, and uploading pictures FROM the parking lot while drinking beer...

(I did once try to upload pictures from the back of an airport limo but almost got carsick in the process :skep: , so it had to wait until I got past security at OAK.)

Then I get to my location and the GPS is removed from the system and used for hiking, rock climbing, mountain biking, road biking, geocaching, etc. etc. and the mapping and data capability of the device becomes the important factor.

It appears that none of the "biking" related models from Garmin have mapping and all of the mapping based units ONLY have a handlebar mount.

While the eTrex and 76 series do not have a damage succeptible antenna mast, they still only come with a handlebar mount which puts them up-front in the line of fire.

At Sea Otter 2005, Shiggy (I think it was Shiggy) had some sort of under the handlebar mast mount. Maybe I should see if he knows where I could get such a thing to keep my devices out of the line of fire...


----------



## pacman (Jan 16, 2004)

Ability to float was the deciding factor - that accounts for the size.


----------



## BigLarry (Jul 30, 2004)

pacman said:


> (Why not an MTBR GPS board?)
> 
> I have a 76CSx and the battery holders are very tight. I can't see them disconnecting. ...
> 
> ...


Yes! An MTBR GPS Board! 

No program is yet perfect, in allowing you to use satellites find trails and make waypoints on screen that you can download, make 3D topos, create profiles with points linked to the track, easy editing tools to splice and make tracks to estimate ride distance and climb of a new route, integrate several data metrics like MotionBased does, the ability to average several people's tracks to make up the trail segments, ability to name each trail segment with the actual name, links to pictures or threads on a given trail, and so on. The gaps are so glaring in any given program that it seems like a real opportunity for the right programmers.

The Motion Based data collection and backgrounds look nice. I'm thinking of getting a subscription. The only issue is that I worry about loosing all my data if I miss a payment.

Topofusion sounds interesting. What's the typical error between the 6 ways of computing gain? I can see 10% differences between different peoples altimeters on the trail, or between my altimeter and National Geographic topo, even with the higher accuracy averaging.

I'm stalling on starting up with any of these web programs as they're in rapid evolution mode right now. I want to see where things fall out. For now, I stick mostly with Garmin's PC based MapSource program, just for speed and ease of use for recording tracks and making new routes. I can find and plot everything I want by just flipping between street and topo maps. But just to keep up they're going to have to link in that satellite view soon.


----------



## BigLarry (Jul 30, 2004)

*Look at eTrex Vista Cx*



Dan'ger said:


> While the eTrex and 76 series do not have a damage succeptible antenna mast, they still only come with a handlebar mount which puts them up-front in the line of fire...


It's amazing to have so much damage and problems with your GPS in such a short time. It gives me serious pause about getting the 60CS, as I really want the GPS on the handlebars for use while riding.

The pixel resolution on the Map60 and Map76 (240x160) are about the same as the eTrex VistaC (220x176), it just a bigger display from the bigger unit. In fact my old B&W eTrex Vista beats them both at 288x160 pixels, but the color adds a lot of effective pixels. I want color on my next unit.

Again, the eTrex Vista did fine for many years on my handlebars. I saw no single incident of damage like you had with your 60CS, in spite of numerous ugly crashes. For example, in three years my frame broke 3 times among many other bike parts and doctor and ER visits. In that time, after more than two years the GPS only needed a single low cost "refresh" mostly for cosmetics, a slightly sticky worn joy stick, and the power off issue - probably from a loose connection internally from wear over the years. Also, I'd think you'd get just as much wear issues from constant banging of the front fork with a mount above or below the handlebars.

I like have a GPS on the trail so much I'd easily consider using a bigger unit like the 60CSx and 76CSx if they'd survive on the handlebars. But the more I look at it, the slightly smaller eTrex fits so nice on the bars and seems more ruggedized. Incidentally, it has a mini-USB port for hooking to a PC. (I also have an extra eTrex mount for the car windshield that you can have because I don't use it.)

As for the car navigation, what I did is get a separate GPS unit just for the car - the Garmin Quest for about $350. It comes with an external antenna jack and mount for the windshield. It can be put in the shirt pocket on it's own Li battery, has voice call outs of turns on the included power cord speaker. It's all around more specific for your car in terms of software and even the features and controls. But then, good mapping PC software with a data link from a GPS like the eTrex can be pretty good too, for those with PCs installed in the front of their car.  (If you could only fit the laptop on the handlebars....?  )

In any case, it's been interesting see your tragic experience with the 60CS on the bars. It's definitely affecting my decision about it too.


----------



## GEOMAN (May 30, 2006)

A word about Motionbased; they have had to change their upload process so that they use a queue for larger files. If you are on a Mac and using the Edge, for instance, the Safari plugin uploads everything on your Edge every time you upload... This is not true for PC users, from what I am told. Once I deleted all of my old Edge data, my uploads were smooth as silk.

Actually, I sent a couple of emails to MB about a file I needed uploaded but they deemed it too large and "defective". They promise me they will have it uploaded by hand this weekend. The personnel over there have been very considerate and responsive, IMHO.

Time will tell but I love the service and subscribe.

Also, I use Topofusion. Fun!

GM


----------



## Dan'ger (Aug 26, 2004)

BigLarry said:


> It's amazing to have so much damage and problems with your GPS in such a short time. It gives me serious pause about getting the 60CS, as I really want the GPS on the handlebars for use while riding.





BigLarry said:


> Again, the eTrex Vista did fine for many years on my handlebars. I saw no single incident of damage like you had with your 60CS, in spite of numerous ugly crashes. For example, in three years my frame broke 3 times among many other bike parts and doctor and ER visits. In that time, after more than two years the GPS only needed a single low cost "refresh" mostly for cosmetics, a slightly sticky worn joy stick, and the power off issue - probably from a loose connection internally from wear over the years. Also, I'd think you'd get just as much wear issues from constant banging of the front fork with a mount above or below the handlebars.


That was my desire as well, although mounting it on the stem or an accessory bar beneath the main handlebar would probably keep it from getting damaged as badly anyway. I can always rig something to keep it strapped to the stem - we have the technology...but I think the 60 and rhino series are definately out due to their seemingly delicate protrusions.

The first casualty was my first handlebar kit that met its death on an uphill endo where I contacted the device with my knee. The plastic mounting plate cracked and would not hold the device, so I finished the ride with it in my pack. That crash did not seem to cause a single cosmetic scratch to the device.



BigLarry said:


> The pixel resolution on the ...but the color adds a lot of effective pixels. I want color on my next unit.


I think I will go with your suggestion about the eTrex Vista CS or whatever the high-end color one is called, although I will be eyeing the 76 as well.

If they hold up well enough, my karma would rather have paid the $135 for the refurb than "screw" REI, but in this case, I felt it justifiable.



BigLarry said:


> I like have a GPS...(I also have an extra eTrex mount for the car windshield that you can have because I don't use it.)


Maybe I'll buy your skinny ass a drink in trade?



BigLarry said:


> As for the car navigation, what I did is get a separate GPS unit just for the car - the Garmin...good too, for those with PCs installed in the front of their car.  (If you could only fit the laptop on the handlebars....?  )


I could use whatever cheap-ass GPS device I want for the truck since the DeLorme Street Atlas software on my laptop does all of the routing, turn by turn voice commands. For that matter, I can even talk back to it and it recognizes various voice commands about zooming in and out and automatic rerouting.



BigLarry said:


> In any case, it's been interesting see your tragic experience with the 60CS on the bars. It's definitely affecting my decision about it too.


I will continue to feed back about the next device I get. Despite the higher price of buying a device like this at REI, I think I'm going to - simply for the satisfaction guarantee, which I hope I never have to use again.


----------



## pacman (Jan 16, 2004)

BigLarry said:


> Yes! An MTBR GPS Board!
> 
> The Motion Based data collection and backgrounds look nice. I'm thinking of getting a subscription. The only issue is that I worry about loosing all my data if I miss a payment.
> 
> Topofusion sounds interesting. What's the typical error between the 6 ways of computing gain? I can see 10% differences between different peoples altimeters on the trail, or between my altimeter and National Geographic topo, even with the higher accuracy averaging.


For backing up you can retrieve your data from MotionBased as GPX. Topofusion's playback is smoother/finer becuase it's not web based. You can run offline (with maps/photos in cache). The alitude methods vary from reasonable agreement with Topo or Polar altimeter to wider range (based on DEM and tunablesliders ). Must learn more.

Topofusion will sync your digital photos with the GPS via the EXIF data and build a web page. sample

EDIT++

Checking my MB rides, here's a sample LINK
Just went through agonizing wait to see the data. The altitude gain goes to 5369 if MB Gravity correction is used. .. if I could get my money back ...


----------



## Dan'ger (Aug 26, 2004)

Well, I just got back from REI with my new eTrex Vista Cx! What a compact device. Looks pretty rugged, too.

Among other differences between it and the model you described having, the Cx has a miniSD card (came with a 32mb). The card slot location means that the bar-mount replacement battery cover for other models does not fit this model. Instead, it has a screw-on clip device external to the battery case that slides into Garmin's other mounting brackets.

The battery case without the bracket screwed on seems appropriate for straddling the bar stem with a couple of heavy zip-ties, and that's the way I think I will mount it for now. If that doesn't work out, I can always use the bar mount that I had for the 60CS as the included screw-on thingy allows it to be snapped in place.

The color screen seems nice.

Anyway - no external antenna mast, cleaner mounting - looks like a winner.


----------



## BigLarry (Jul 30, 2004)

Dan'ger said:


> I can always rig something to keep it strapped to the stem - we have the technology...
> 
> The first casualty was my first handlebar kit that met its death on an uphill endo where I contacted the device with my knee. The plastic mounting plate cracked and would not hold the device, so I finished the ride with it in my pack. That crash did not seem to cause a single cosmetic scratch to the device....
> 
> Maybe I'll buy your skinny ass a drink in trade?


The plastic bike mount allowed my eTrex Vista to come off the bar several times, usually from my knee hitting it hard on an endo like you did. I considered it an advantage as neither my knee or GPS would get hurt, especially with the rubber padding on the GPS. Sometimes, like when I hit a tree or big rock really hard, the GPS would fly off from the impact (as would I). I don't think I ever hit the GPS directly on anything, perhaps from the bar ends.

In any case, mounting on the stem makes a lot of sense for a lot of reasons. Let me know if your new "technology" works. I look forward to the "Rockville" test of your new unit.

Ass isn't quite skinny yet - getting there. But we can do a trade on the next bike event.


----------



## BigLarry (Jul 30, 2004)

Dan'ger said:


> Well, I just got back from REI with my new eTrex Vista Cx! What a compact device. Looks pretty rugged, too....
> 
> The color screen seems nice.
> 
> Anyway - no external antenna mast, cleaner mounting - looks like a winner.


Looking more carefully at Garmin's web site, they list the eTrex Vista as rated for 6 G dynamics, but that specification is missing entirely for the GPSMAP60. That might mean something relevant here.

Is the color screen any different from your previous Map60CS?

The Vista Cx doesn't have the SiRF chip, but neither did your Map60CS. It should have similar reception. Other than size, it should be about the same in terms of features to the Map60CS. Let me know what you find different.


----------



## Dan'ger (Aug 26, 2004)

BigLarry said:


> Looking more carefully at Garmin's web site, they list the eTrex Vista as rated for 6 G dynamics, but that specification is missing entirely for the GPSMAP60. That might mean something relevant here.
> 
> Is the color screen any different from your previous Map60CS?
> 
> The Vista Cx doesn't have the SiRF chip, but neither did your Map60CS. It should have similar reception. Other than size, it should be about the same in terms of features to the Map60CS. Let me know what you find different.


The screen is only minorly different. Slightly smaller and some of the menu icons are slightly different.

I'll be using it for some hiking and biking tomorrow and Auburn on Sunday - I'll lat you know what my preliminary findings are then.

Other than that, I am wading through the Garmin site to find my second activation key for the maps to work on my new device. This may only relate to the road maps, and if I don't find out how, it won't be a big deal.


----------



## BigLarry (Jul 30, 2004)

*Thanks for the MB and TopoFusion links*



pacman said:


> For backing up you can retrieve your data from MotionBased as GPX. Topofusion's playback is smoother/finer because it's not web based. You can run offline (with maps/photos in cache). The altitude methods vary from reasonable agreement with Topo or Polar altimeter to wider range (based on DEM and tunablesliders ). Must learn more.
> 
> Topofusion will sync your digital photos with the GPS via the EXIF data and build a web page. sample
> 
> ...


I couldn't find different climb calculations on the topofusion link you gave. It only showed two backgrounds (topo and satellite). But it had a digital photo link. I suppose this is a special presentation page you can make from topofusion. 
Looking at the main topofusion introduction page, they give an example of a climb calculation done 6 ways, with a range from 8900 to 13270' - quite a range! But the GPS and most algorithms gave a climb in the low 9000' range.

The MB site was SLOW!! They need to get some of those new AMD quad processors. Nevertheless I like MB much more than Topofusion from what I saw. 
The climb in your example was shown by MB as 3837, but listed as 3600' on the GPS per your comment - not too bad a discrepancy.


----------



## pffft (Dec 20, 2003)

elsietee here, logged on as pffft, and too lazy to log him off and log
in as myself:

Big Larry:
> The Vista Cx doesn't have the SiRF chip

I thought it did? That was one of the reasons I picked it and waited 
the three months for it to come out on the market. Did they change
the specs after advertising it as such?

I got my Vista Cx back in March (when it was finally issued) and have 
been dragging it around with me ever since. Had one hiccup with it in
the first week when it got stuck on the welcome screen and didn't roll
over to the satellite screen the way it was supposed to (and had in the
first five days). Poking buttons in a non-standard way could get you
over the problem and uploading their patch that came out a week or so
later solved the problems permanently - I think it was just teething troubles
of a newly-designed model.

In general it seems to get good reception, although that does depend 
on the day and where it is being carried (you can lose reception if you
carry it in a top pocket and then block it with your upper body).

A couple of weekends ago, I did an event at Almaden-Quicksilver Co. 
Park (San Jose, CA) where we did two consecutive 11 mile-loops. Looking
at the track, I got different degrees of accuracy for each loop, only an hour 
or so apart. It lost reception on both loops for a couple of hundred feet in a 
deep, narrow, heavily tree-lined canyon.

In general, rather than drop completely, it just loses accuracy - and you can 
tell how accurate it is by looking at the satellite page - on an open sky, the 
tightest I've seen was +-6ft, although around here (Sierra Foothills) +-15ft 
seems most common.

Whatever you do, if you get one, don't lose the little clippy thing that comes
with it to use with bike mount. The generic clip that comes with the (accessory,
i.e. separate purchase) bike mount doesn't fit the Vista Cx because of the new
design of the rubberised battery cover.

I've had excellent battery life out of the unit, although I'm sure to keep the
backlight off and also keep the compass turned off most of the time. I play
with it a lot and have only changed the batteries a couple of times in the
three months I've had it. Right now I've got generic rechargeables in there 
that seem to be doing well.

Did discover, in playing with Motion Based, that you can only upload _active _
tracks. Once you save them (even on the unit), Vista Cx seems to compress 
the files in some way that makes them incompatible with MB.

My understanding with non-subscriber use of MB was that you could upload
your tracks and it would store them all, but only show you detailed data for
the three most recent events - the older ones would just show the bare bones
details that you see on the first screen.

To subscribe, $100 does seem like a lot, but $8 a month less so - how many
cups of coffee is that? Three?

I've been uploading my tracks/waypoints to ArcView (ESRI GIS software) by
using the DNR tool and had fun with that. The USGS topo maps are available
as free downloads on the web, so I overlay my tracks on them. Haven't figured 
out how to upload from GIS to the GPS yet, but I'm still learning. And I just 
discovered how to upload to GoogleEarth, which was most amusing.

The basic Garmin map that comes standard on the unit is useless for 
this area - there's nothing here, so you see everything in a sea of 
nothingness. Since I've been using it on trails I know, I've been using it
more to see _where I've been _than _where I'm going_, so this hasn't been a
problem.

I still need to play with the routing ability - it seems that it is set up more
for road use than out-in-the-boonies use, but it may be that I just don't 
understand enough about how it works.

elsietee


----------



## BigLarry (Jul 30, 2004)

elsietee said:


> Big Larry:> The Vista Cx doesn't have the SiRF chip
> 
> I thought it did? That was one of the reasons I picked it and waited the three months for it to come out on the market. Did they change the specs after advertising it as such?


Easy to confuse because the "x" suffix adds the SiRF chip and memory cards to the MAP60 and MAP76 units, but *only* the memory card to the eTrex Legend and Vista. Carefully read Garmin's announcement here. Check the individual specs too.

Good news is the reception of the older chips wasn't that bad. I rarely loose signal. But I get very annoyed on the rare occasions when I do, and would like the better SiRF chip. However, even the better chip won't allow signals to get through mountains in deep canyons.



elsietee said:


> In general it seems to get good reception, although that does depend on the day and where it is being carried (you can lose reception if you carry it in a top pocket and then block it with your upper body).


That's right, often your body is blocking the signal. The best place and orientation to put the eTrex series (with the patch antennae) for reception is on your handlebars face up. It's also easier to use there too.



elsietee said:


> In general, rather than drop completely, it just loses accuracy - and you can tell how accurate it is by looking at the satellite page - on an open sky, the tightest I've seen was +-6ft, although around here (Sierra Foothills) +-15ft seems most common.


That's much better than I get on my old B&W eTrex Vista. On the satellite page I usually see 28ft accuracy, and only occasionally 15ft accuracy.



elsietee said:


> I've had excellent battery life out of the unit, although I'm sure to keep the back light off and also keep the compass turned off most of the time. I play with it a lot and have only changed the batteries a couple of times in the three months I've had it. Right now I've got generic rechargeables in there that seem to be doing well.


That's exactly right. The compass and light can greatly decrease battery time. I'm usually moving on the bike so I keep the magnetic compass off, and use the "moving" compass instead, which I have activate at a low speed (3 MPH?) in the setup settings. I can quickly turn on the magnetic compass on those rare occasions when trying to get my bearings while stopped. I find the map screen can run down the battery a little bit more, but use it a lot anyway since it's so useful at times for navigation. I mostly use the odometer screen with big numbers, setting one of the fields to count down my distance to my next way point, the other fields for speed, altitude, and overall distance. The new color Vista more than doubles the life time of the battery, a good deal.



elsietee said:


> Did discover, in playing with Motion Based, that you can only upload _active _tracks. Once you save them (even on the unit), Vista Cx seems to compress the files in some way that makes them incompatible with MB.


When you save the tracks on the Vista, it deletes the time information in the compression and resampling of points to get from a possible 10,000 track log points to the 1000 or so track points your GPS will allow per saved track. The saved points only have position and altitude, not time. Without time information, much of the MB software is useless. You can't calculate speed and things like that.



elsietee said:


> The basic Garmin map that comes standard on the unit is useless for this area - there's nothing here, so you see everything in a sea of nothingness. Since I've been using it on trails I know, I've been using it more to see _where I've been _than _where I'm going_, so this hasn't been a problem.


You need to also purchase the Garmin MapSource Topo maps for another $80. These maps cover the same regions as the street maps, but show contour lines, trails, lakes, mountain peaks, ... The Topo maps make it very easy to see where you are. Although Garmin's Topo are not quite as detailed as National Geographic, it's got most everything at just the right detail for the GPS screen, and Garmin's topo is faster and easier to work with. I don't have "blank" pages on my Vista map screen with Garmin's topo maps. Note you can only download Garmin's maps (such as street and topo) to your Garmin GPS unit. The Topo only takes a fraction (~5X less) of the memory for the street map of the same region. So I store both street and topo maps on my Vista. You can switch between topo and street all at once with a menu item on the map page.



elsietee said:


> I still need to play with the routing ability - it seems that it is set up more for road use than out-in-the-boonies use, but it may be that I just don't understand enough about how it works.


For MTB, I use the computer screen with the Topo map at home, and create waypoints for the intersections of trails. Sometimes, a trail isn't shown well on Garmin's maps, and I compare the topo map ridges and contours to a map I find on the web, and place a point based on altitude and nearby streams, peaks, and contours in that area. I can usually place a new way point within 100' when doing it blind for riding a trail the first time. After the first ride, I'll use my recorded track to move the way points for higher precision. 
I make a trail "route" by stringing the way points at trail intersections or other points, usually 10-20 per ride depending on complexity and distance. I have my odometer display screen show my distance to the next route waypoint, so I can count down the miles before the next turn, peak, lake,... or whatever waypoint.



elsietee said:


> A couple of weekends ago, I did an event at Almaden-Quicksilver Co. Park (San Jose, CA) where we did two consecutive 11 mile-loops. Looking at the track, I got different degrees of accuracy for each loop, only an hour or so apart. It lost reception on both loops for a couple of hundred feet in a deep, narrow, heavily tree-lined canyon.


Yes, on the back side of Quicksilver, next to the tall mountains under the trees with twisty switch backs is one the worst reception issues for a GPS. Below is a plot of that same Quicksilver run you mention, showing multiple tracks I've made with my eTrex Vista, and their deviation. Say out of 10 tracks of a given loop at QS, I find that one track will sometimes deviate over 200' on a bad day. But most are within 50'.

This plot is also useful for illustrating some of my other comments. First, this picture is from Garmin Topo showing the contour plots. As you zoom in, you'll see more detail, but this is typical of what you'd also see on your GPS screen. Second, note where I put my waypoints, on the trail intersections. And finally, note the purple straight lines which are routes I've made between various waypoints for different rides on different days.


----------



## Dan'ger (Aug 26, 2004)

My take on the eTrex Vista Cx:

It works well. The topo map is sharp albeit small. I haven't yet been able to figure out if you can have more than just 4 data displays on the odometer page and it seemed to calculate the elevation gain incorrectly as it said that we had climber 1600' when the upload showed 4K.

The joystick is a royal pain in the butt and way too sensitive. I haven't been able to figure out how to shut off the magnetic compass. It lost signal at one point on a north-facing hillside trail, heavily treed and steep to the south.

The more important thing used today was the time elapsed clock. We really needed to keep track of how long we were out there and make sure to take breaks and hydrate as it was kinda warm.


----------



## BigLarry (Jul 30, 2004)

*Garmin Alternative Customer Support*



Dan'ger said:


> My take on the eTrex Vista Cx:
> 
> It works well. The topo map is sharp albeit small. I haven't yet been able to figure out if you can have more than just 4 data displays on the odometer page and it seemed to calculate the elevation gain incorrectly as it said that we had climber 1600' when the upload showed 4K.
> 
> ...


Just got home from a Lacross party and saw your request for customer support.

Here's some user help on the Vista concerning your issues, if your eTrex Vista Cx is anything like my eTrex Vista B&W (which it should).

On the odometer page, you can go to the menu and select "Small Numbers" or "Big Numbers" to toggle between 7 smaller fields or 4 big fields, respectively. Each field is individually selectable, On the 4 big fields, I select from top to bottom: Elevation, Distance (to next waypoint), Speed, and Odometer. On the smaller display I also show trip details like elapsed time and stopped time.

Something must have gone wrong for the elevation climb total. I've never seen that sort of error on my Vista. First you want to make sure you selected "Total Ascent" for the field (not something like "Max Elevation" or "Max Ascent". Also, is it possible you reset the altimeter at some point during the ride. It can be reset in many ways. For instance, on the odometer page, the Reset menu has a selection box for "Reset Elevation Data" that you may have selected.

The joystick works great, fast and reliable, once you figure it out. I sort of remember it being clumsy the first couple days. You need to do rapid sideways taps to move around, and click straight down for selection (like enter). It's the quickest way to move and select of any of the Garmin interfaces I've used. I love it.

The compass can be turned on from the setup menu. But the shortcut is to hold down the page key on the upper right until you see the compass icon appear or disappear (it's a toggle). Vice Versa, if you see this compass icon turned on, and don't need the compass right then, turn if off to save batteries. The compass can be turned on rapidly when you need it. Calibration stays good when it's off. You only need to calibrate (spin twice slowly) when changing batteries.

Yep, you'll occasionally loose a signal on the edge of a steep hill with lots of trees. That's the toughest test for any GPS. The better SiRF chip might have helped there. But I find I get the signal back as I move a little to a new location, say a fraction of a mile away, so it's not so bad in practice. You just have to not get upset and trust the signal will come back further down the trail. It always does. How much of a gap did you have in distance?

I gather you didn't do any "endo" tests today. I want to find it this unit is "Dan Proof", as you managed to demolish the MAP60CS in short order. 

Edit: Just ran across your post of today's ride with a link to your Motion Based output. Nice! Where did you loose signal? I don't see any tell-tale straight lines. And my bike odometer typically shows 5-10% more miles than my GPS. It figure it's just because of the GPS smoothing out all the tight singletrack turns. So if the GPS says 24 miles, you probably did over 25.
Edit Yet Again: I just realized I did exactly that ride on our 3/12/05 ride last year. I checked my records and got 23.7 miles on my Vista GPS, 25.2 miles on the bike odometer, and 3320 on the altimeter after a 85' adjustment for barometric drift, which is also close to what I got from National Geographic calculations using our route.


----------



## Dan'ger (Aug 26, 2004)

BigLarry said:


> Just got home from a Lacross party and saw your request for customer support.
> 
> Here's some user help on the Vista concerning your issues, if your eTrex Vista Cx is anything like my eTrex Vista B&W (which it should).
> 
> ...


Turns out that my confusion regarding the odometer page was that I was mistaking the compass page for the odometer page. On the Map60, the odometer page was accessible by scrolling through the main pages and it appears that to select the page on the Vista, you have to go to the menu.

So, I have alot to learn. I just set up the page order so that the pages are in the same order that the were default on the 60.

The odom page has the same layout as the map60 but is just slightly smaller. It really didn't need to be that big anyway. Compass calibration same, too.

I can't explain the total ascent issue. It is set correctly and still read wrong.

I'm sure the joystick is a great device. I'm just not used to it yet and it seems difficult to use while riding. That may change. The map 60 and GPS III+ both had a toggle pad that was more "fat finger friendly" and wasn't quite so touchy.

No endos today. Hopefully, since I've discovered the "right" air pressures for fork and shock they will happen less. I am pretty pleased with the air settings from today, more so than on previous rides.

In any case, I did get some air on a few spots along the way. Nothing major, but enough to have shut off the 60 - no problem noted with the Vista. Rocky/rough sections had no effect.


----------



## BigLarry (Jul 30, 2004)

Dan'ger said:


> In any case, I did get some air on a few spots along the way. Nothing major, but enough to have shut off the 60 - no problem noted with the Vista. Rocky/rough sections had no effect.


You mean, like this (great photography courtesy of Wherewolf):









Can't quite see the Vista Cx being abused on the handlebars, but I love that AM1 myself. But my fork can't do that. Maybe it's the rider.


----------



## Dan'ger (Aug 26, 2004)

I think that was my biggest air today - on purpose, anyway. There were a couple of spots where it was a choice of roll or drop and I dropped. Could have been ugly.

I don't have any rides scheduled during the week, so I'll have to see what happens next weekend with the new GPS.


----------



## elsietee (Oct 5, 2004)

BigLarry said:


> Easy to confuse because the "x" suffix adds the SiRF chip and memory cards to the MAP60 and MAP76 units, but *only* the memory card to the eTrex Legend and Vista. Carefully read Garmin's announcement here.


I think they must have changed the specs sometime between
December and when they put that announcement out. I'm pretty
sure that the Vista Cx was _going_ to have the SiRF chip in stuff
I read before 2006 (when I was still waiting for it to come out).



BigLarry said:


> The best place and orientation to put the eTrex series (with the patch antennae) for reception is on your handlebars face up. It's also easier to use there too.


Tricky when I'm running or horse riding, though.  On the horse, I've been able to strap
it to the saddle around the same place a handlebar mount would be. When I've used 
it running, I've either held it in my hand (no fun) or for that Quicksilver event, I clipped 
it to the shoulder strap of my Camelbak. Since I've just bought a waistpack Camelbak
for running (was getting a bit too hot with the backpack one), I'll have to see how it
fairs, reception-wise, clipped to the waistband on my hip.



BigLarry said:


> You need to also purchase the Garmin MapSource Topo maps for another $80. These maps cover the same regions as the street maps, but show contour lines, trails, lakes, mountain peaks, ... The Topo maps make it very easy to see where you are.


Does the Garmin Topo show "boonie roads"? (I can't tell from the plot you uploaded if
the map is Topo or with the Street Map turned on as well? Currently, I only have the
basic street map that comes standard with the unit - and around here, only shows 
freeways, which isn't that handy  )



BigLarry said:


> For MTB, I use the computer screen with the Topo map at home, and create waypoints for the intersections of trails.


that's what I was trying to do using the USGS topo maps in ArcView GIS, then uploading 
them to the unit, but I haven't figured out the right projection going that direction. I tried 
to send pffft down an old jeep trail out the back of Cool and it showed the track in the 
middle of the Pacific Ocean, which was a little off course.



BigLarry said:


> I make a trail "route" by stringing the way points at trail intersections or other points...I have my odometer display screen show my distance to the next route waypoint, so I can count down the miles before the next turn....


Got it



BigLarry said:


> Yes, on the back side of Quicksilver, next to the tall mountains under the trees with twisty switch backs is one the worst reception issues for a GPS.


Which side is the back side? (I spent most of the time upside down, thinking I was
headed south-east when I was going north-west - discovered I couldnt' read the GPS
while running/riding horse). It didn't like some of the trees on Randol and lost reception 
completely half-way up Deep Gulch.

This was the MotionBased plot for it:
http://trail.motionbased.com/trail/episode/view.mb?episodePk.pkValue=809533
(this was a Ride & Tie event - two runner/riders, one horse, you take it in turns
to ride and leap frog each other, leaving the horse tied to a tree in between times...
strangely, they don't seem to have a category for that on MotionBased  )



BigLarry said:


> ...this picture is from Garmin Topo showing the contour plots. As you zoom in, you'll see more detail, but this is typical of what you'd also see on your GPS screen...


thanks for that - it gives a good illustration of what you get for $80.


----------



## elsietee (Oct 5, 2004)

Dan'ger: 
> ...it seemed to calculate the elevation gain incorrectly as it said that we had 
> climber 1600' when the upload showed 4K...

Yeah, I've noticed that too. I think what it's showing (annoyingly), is the difference 
between starting elevation and maximum elevation. Not sure if there's a way around it.

Dan'ger: 
> The joystick is a royal pain in the butt and way too sensitive.

 It definitely requires some finessing on the part of your fingers to
learn the technique of clicking the joystick.

> It lost signal at one point on a north-facing hillside trail, heavily treed and 
> steep to the south.

it's those north-facing steep-sided canyons blocked to the south that always get you.

Glad you guys had fun today.


----------



## BigLarry (Jul 30, 2004)

elsietee said:


> I think they must have changed the specs sometime between December and when they put that announcement out. I'm pretty sure that the Vista Cx was _going_ to have the SiRF chip in stuff I read before 2006 (when I was still waiting for it to come out).


Or they never really made it clear. Wonder why? 



elsietee said:


> that's what I was trying to do using the USGS topo maps in ArcView GIS, then uploading them to the unit, but I haven't figured out the right projection going that direction. I tried to send pffft down an old jeep trail out the back of Cool and it showed the track in the middle of the Pacific Ocean, which was a little off course.


Yes, that sounds tedious and error prone, even for me. I use Garmin's Topo maps so it's a lot easier with none of the format and interface issues due to direct compatibility.



elsietee said:


> Which side is the back side? (I spent most of the time upside down, thinking I was headed south-east when I was going north-west - discovered I couldn't' read the GPS while running/riding horse). It didn't like some of the trees on Randol and lost reception completely half-way up Deep Gulch.


I meant the back side from Hacienda, where most bikers come in. So yes, I meant loosing signal on Randol fire road under the trees on north facing hills, just like you mention. I've never done Deep Gulch, as it's off limits to bikes. 
As for reception, if you could just get handlebars on your saddle or running pack, you'd be all set.  (Hey, this is an MTB forum.) Your solutions may be as good as it gets. Just try to keep the unit up high and facing upwards. Shoulder or helmet mounts?



elsietee said:


> This was the MotionBased plot for it: http://trail.motionbased.com/trail/episode/view.mb?episodePk.pkValue=809533
> (this was a Ride & Tie event - two runner/riders, one horse, you take it in turns to ride and leap frog each other, leaving the horse tied to a tree in between times...strangely, they don't seem to have a category for that on MotionBased  )


Sounds like a fun even with exercise for you and your horse. I see your MB contour (on Map Player) shows a lot more error on the north side of the hill, typical of GPS units, especially with the trees there.



elsietee said:


> Does the Garmin Topo show "boonie roads"? (I can't tell from the plot you uploaded if the map is Topo or with the Street Map turned on as well? Currently, I only have the basic street map that comes standard with the unit - and around here, only shows freeways, which isn't that handy  )


The basic street maps are indeed very sparse. I own three sets of Garmin maps I've happened to collect over the years, Two road maps (MetroGuide and CitySelect) and the Topo. All are US national maps for about $80 each. The road maps give even the smallest street and alley in detail with house addresses along the road, allows autorouting, and have Points of Interest (like ATMs, Gas, fast food, bike stores, ... with address and phone) that's like a Yahoo Yellow pages in the palm of your hand. These maps are great additions to the GPS. I flip the GPS map display between these downloaded road maps and the downloaded topo maps, depending on what I'm doing (MTB or road riding). The screen I show here is just the topo map, which only gives major street names.

About 1/2 to 2/3 of the fire roads and 1/3 of the trails are typically shown on Garmin Topo. I have to infer the rest. As mentioned before, I use the web based maps, like those PDFs available from Santa Clara Parks of Quicksilver, to figure out trail intersection points from contours, features, and altitude. Here's a blank map of QS park, showing Mine Hill fire road as the faint black line by Bull Run, but missing Randol entirely. If you hold the cursor over a road or contour in Garmin software, it will give you the name of the road or altitude f the contour line, like shown on the 656' contour line label with my cursor on the line.


----------



## knobs (Oct 13, 2005)

*Another gps question*

I have a garmin vista, it has a barometric altimeter. There is a data field called "Average Ascent". The manual is not completely clear on what this means, so I would assume that this is the rate of climb over time, perhaps of all the climbs in the active log. On my rides this value almost always shows about 33 feet/minute, seemingly regardless of terrain. On some boring slog up a fire road at Coe, it's 33. On some less challenging terrain like Long Ridge, it's 33. (plus or minus a couple f/m). I just don't get why it always averages to nearly the same number.

Anyone else notice this or have any insight how average ascent works?


----------



## dan0 (Oct 12, 2005)

Dan'ger said:


> The bounce I've been experiencing is, as far as I can tell, due to the handlebar mount and the 2xAA batteries bouncing around under rough road conditions on the bars of my road bike or rough terrain on the bars of even my FS mountain bike.
> 
> I'm tempted to check out the 60CSx as I had the 60CS and the bar mount will be the same between the 2. I expect, however, that I will experience the same bounce unless there is something in the newer design of the CSx that compensates for it. The CSx is nice that it has a mini-SD card slot for map expandability and greater GPS satellite reception than earlier models.
> 
> ...


I have an etrex & a 60csx, the etrex has the same prob. with bounce, at first I thought it was just cutting out but the batteries were the prob. you can either wrap a little electrical tape around the batteries or put a piece of fabric or foam between the batteries and door.
I have the bar mount for the 60csx but I havent used it, I bought a cell phone pocket for my camelback and I keep it there strapped to the camelback straps. If I need to mark a waypoint it takes 2 seconds to pull it out and mark. I find I dont really need to have it in view while Im riding, if I need to look at it I generally stop anyway. I've seen a ram unit mounted on the stem for the 60 series


----------



## BigLarry (Jul 30, 2004)

dan0 said:


> I have an etrex & a 60csx, the etrex has the same prob. with bounce, at first I thought it was just cutting out but the batteries were the prob. you can either wrap a little electrical tape around the batteries or put a piece of fabric or foam between the batteries and door.
> I have the bar mount for the 60csx but I havent used it, I bought a cell phone pocket for my camelback and I keep it there strapped to the camelback straps. If I need to mark a waypoint it takes 2 seconds to pull it out and mark. I find I dont really need to have it in view while Im riding, if I need to look at it I generally stop anyway. I've seen a ram unit mounted on the stem for the 60 series


Yep, I saw the nice picture you made of the two side by side on this thread.

Maybe the 60Csx will survive better with a stem mount you mention.....But look at them side by side the screens don't seem that much different (maybe that's the bigger B&W eTrex screen). So at this point, the only advantage I see of the 60Csx is the better receiver. So far reception drop-outs have only been a minor nuisance. But I'm thinking on a trip in Oregon with thick foliage, it could become an issue. Hey, maybe an eTrex on the bars AND a 60Csx on top of the Camelback.


----------



## dan0 (Oct 12, 2005)

BigLarry said:


> Yep, I saw the nice picture you made of the two side by side on this thread.
> 
> Maybe the 60Csx will survive better with a stem mount you mention.....But look at them side by side the screens don't seem that much different (maybe that's the bigger B&W eTrex screen). So at this point, the only advantage I see of the 60Csx is the better receiver. So far reception drop-outs have only been a minor nuisance. But I'm thinking on a trip in Oregon with thick foliage, it could become an issue. Hey, maybe an eTrex on the bars AND a 60Csx on top of the Camelback.


reciever is alot better, like the color, also does maps, battery life is better, memory card....
I have the N.E. topo, and the streets & cities for north America and still have lots of room left. I re mapped some trails that I had mapped with the etrex and the 60csx seem more accurate
Bottom line, the biggest reason for me to switch was the sirf antenae. everything else is icing on the cake


----------



## LititzDude (Apr 3, 2004)

*I searched MTBR and found this string for a question?*

I have a GPS60Map and Garmin TOPO. I am looking to make a map of a local riding area, and would like to make a trail legend on the map? I am looking at the usual suspect sofwares, and none seem to be able to do this easily? Am I an idiot or is this a short fall of all the programs? HELP!


----------



## Being (May 12, 2005)

LititzDude said:


> I have a GPS60Map and Garmin TOPO. I am looking to make a map of a local riding area, and would like to make a trail legend on the map? I am looking at the usual suspect sofwares, and none seem to be able to do this easily? Am I an idiot or is this a short fall of all the programs? HELP!


Are you talking something interactive as the final product or just a static map with notations?


----------



## LititzDude (Apr 3, 2004)

What I would like to do is have the trails by color, line type and name in a legend to keep the map clean, as it has a lot of small sections and no room on the map. This is something I would like to print and copy for the Land manager, as we are making some changes after they logged it.


----------



## BigLarry (Jul 30, 2004)

LititzDude said:


> What I would like to do is have the trails by color, line type and name in a legend to keep the map clean, as it has a lot of small sections and no room on the map. This is something I would like to print and copy for the Land manager, as we are making some changes after they logged it.


Most mapping programs are very sparse on features, and only very slowly getting better. Although the web based programs are evolving much more rapidly, each is very lacking in very many ways.

Programs like Garmin Topo include the whole US for only $80, but the tracks color can't be changed and the medium resolution contour lines are designed for GPS utility, not for paper maps. It's your worst choice.

Clearly the best program for this is National Geographic TOPO! which costs about $80, but that's per each state, or group of small states. It has great resolution and colors and shading, as it starts from a picture of the professional quality USGS maps for it's background. It allows you to split tracks into small sections and color each track differently with 7 colors and 6 line styles (42 combinations). The output looks like a professional quality map, and I sometimes print them on National Geographic "Adventure Paper" that's much tougher than regular paper and the ink jet print doesn't run in the rain. The maps look beautiful. There's no legend capability, but you can annotate as you wish. There's also a cheap ($25?) 3D add on that makes the maps look beautiful. See 3D example of one of my rides here.

For an example of someone (Bill Levey) who a few years back took a GPS and made some extensive maps of Henry Coe park with National Geographic software, see this web site. He removed the background, perhaps because Henry Coe is so huge (30-50 miles) that it makes too much clutter on the screen and is hard to download. 
Look here for a smaller section where he left in the National Geographic topo background. All of his maps of the park can be found here. (I"vie done most of these trails - it's a fabulous remote park, 30 minutes from San Jose. My GPS is very valuable in navigating these remote trails.) 
BIll Levi also allows you to download the NG source file and place it over the NG background yourself, so you can make waypoints if you have the NG software, which I do.


----------



## Being (May 12, 2005)

Yes, National Geographic Topo! + PhotoShop (or any decent photo editor) will give you what you are looking for.


----------



## Being (May 12, 2005)

I threw this together in five minutes.


----------



## Dan'ger (Aug 26, 2004)

*So, I rode some rough trail yesterday...*

...and the Vista Cx held up great. Got some small amounts of air, rough, rocky terrain and none of it caused the batteries to bounce. I believe that I didn't even lose sattelite reception either.

The Elevation still does not read correctly. It seems to read the difference between the lowest point and the highest point not taking into account the ups and downs between.


----------



## Being (May 12, 2005)

I made my picture smaller so most people won't need to scroll to see the whole thing. Doesn't this forum have like a [screenshot] tag that will auto-size the image for you?


----------



## anotherbrian (Mar 18, 2005)

Dan'ger said:


> The bounce I've been experiencing is, as far as I can tell, due to the handlebar mount and the 2xAA batteries bouncing around under rough road conditions on the bars of my road bike or rough terrain on the bars of even my FS mountain bike.


That's a blast from the past. The bounce is a common problem with the Garmin III+ when used on motorcycles ... I could never reliably use the III+ on my BMW's (boxer motors shaking left and right) with the batteries, though had the luxury of wiring it in directly.

I suspect you could jam something into the spring contacts to reduce bounce on the 60CS (the Vista battery compartment is similar to the 60, I see in a later thread that that is what you ended up with).

Over the last ten years, I've bought a number of Garmin's, some still have their uses: 12, III+ (and external antenna), Vista (with re-radiating antenna), 60CS, and now an Edge 305.


----------



## Being (May 12, 2005)

*Testing some code I borrowed from an 0gre post*

What do you think of this legend?
Tuesday ride with Dan from Nevada City. Click on the picture for a larger view. Then click the expand icon on that picture for full resolution.

<table width=100%>[TR][TD][/TD][TD]

[/TD][/TR][/TABLE]


----------



## BigLarry (Jul 30, 2004)

*Beautiful, clear*



Being said:


> What do you think of this legend?
> Tuesday ride with Dan from Nevada City. Click on the picture for a larger view. Then click the expand icon on that picture for full resolution.


That's real cool. Very nice. Lots of useful data presented very clearly and easily.

I'm afraid to ask how long that took. It seems you manually colorized the profile plot area.


----------



## Being (May 12, 2005)

BigLarry said:


> That's real cool. Very nice. Lots of useful data presented very clearly and easily.
> 
> I'm afraid to ask how long that took. It seems you manually colorized the profile plot area.


Thanks. It took about an hour after connecting the GPS to the computer. Photoshop's magic wand is ... well ... like magic. Breaking the single route into individual routes after generating the profile was the most time consuming part. Topo! is kind of wierd about where it lets you split a route.


----------



## pacman (Jan 16, 2004)

*Topo*



Being said:


> Thanks. It took about an hour after connecting the GPS to the computer. Photoshop's magic wand is ... well ... like magic. Breaking the single route into individual routes after generating the profile was the most time consuming part. Topo! is kind of wierd about where it lets you split a route.


Zooming in 400% helps when splitting a track. For multiple tracks draw with a (dashed) hairline.


----------



## Being (May 12, 2005)

pacman said:


> Zooming in 400% helps when splitting a track. For multiple tracks draw with a (dashed) hairline.


:thumbsup: Good tips.


----------



## Dan'ger (Aug 26, 2004)

breezetrees posted this thread: http://forums.mtbr.com/showthread.php?t=200372 about a Briones map for GPS but the process can be for anywhere that the USGS has a map. If you really want a detailed topo map for places and would reather spend the time than the money for maps, this seems like the process.

Unfortunately, I have had no luck as I had some problems downloading the segment of map I wanted to work on as a GEOTiff file and now my work internet connection is so slow that it's taking forever to try to do it today.


----------



## BigLarry (Jul 30, 2004)

*Means you're climbing 2000'/hour*



knobs said:


> I have a garmin vista, it has a barometric altimeter. There is a data field called "Average Ascent". The manual is not completely clear on what this means, so I would assume that this is the rate of climb over time, perhaps of all the climbs in the active log. On my rides this value almost always shows about 33 feet/minute, seemingly regardless of terrain. On some boring slog up a fire road at Coe, it's 33. On some less challenging terrain like Long Ridge, it's 33. (plus or minus a couple f/m). I just don't get why it always averages to nearly the same number.
> 
> Anyone else notice this or have any insight how average ascent works?


I tend not to read that parameter on the GPS, but it makes sense.

The point is if you're limited in speed by the climb (anything under 8 MPH), the climb rate doesn't depend on the steepness, or how far you go sideways in distance as you climb, but simple physics of your power and size. You need to create more energy to go up a certain height for more mass (E(Joules)=Mass (Kgram)*Height(meters)*g(9.8 m/s/s)) So the more power you can put out and the lighter you are, the faster you go up. Smaller guys generally climb better. Lance Armstrong climbs faster because he puts out more energy (over 500 Watts or 0.7 HP, for an hour) and only weighs around 160 lbs.

For MTB with lots of climbing, most people are limited by their energy output over their weight. At my size, I always consider total climb, and not so much the ride distance in determining my capability for a ride.

Note 33'/min is 2000'/hour. I used to climb around 1100'/hour. As I lost weight and became stronger, I'm now approaching 1800'/hour. I remember I was almost your pace that time we passed in Henry Coe, so it makes sense. I usually calculate my average climb rate by simple division, like when I climb Kennedy at 1900' in 65 minutes. I find I have the same climb rate independent of steepness, as you also note.

BTW, top anorexic pro road bikers with high power output climb at 4000'/hour. MTBR A riders can climb at 3000'/hour, (40 minutes up Kennedy). Menso did it in 35 minutes, or around 3300'/hour.

Lance climbed up Alp D'Huez at around 5000'/hour, or 100'/minute. He could climb Kennedy in 20 minutes. Shows clearly why he's a world champ.


----------



## knobs (Oct 13, 2005)

Thanks for the rationale, Larry.

I'm not planning on climbing Kennedy anytime soon - there's no need to figure out how much I suck compared to Menso or Lance.


----------



## BigLarry (Jul 30, 2004)

*Ride any speed you like*



knobs said:


> Thanks for the rationale, Larry.
> 
> I'm not planning on climbing Kennedy anytime soon - there's no need to figure out how much I suck compared to Menso or Lance.


Sorry, I wasn't trying to make anyone feel bad. Actually, I don't see much value in non-professional riders being faster or slower than others. I mostly crunch the numbers just to see if I can keep up on rides.

None of us are as fast as Lance. He's so mutated from human form that he's practically an alien creature. We won't ever be as fast as the professional bikers either. Oh, unless, we turn pro, quit our jobs and live on the $25K/year the average pro biker gets if they're lucky, become 20 years old again, become shorter and smaller to the point you don't have an ounce of fat, get pro trainers, monitor every morsel you eat, get top equipment, ride 60 hours per week to the point you're always hurting and hate the thought of riding, ..... I'm just in awe of how exceptionally fast those super pros get. It's freaky really.

You're a typical MTBR speed, which is generally way above the norm. All of us have many people faster and slower than us. Be glad to enjoy your ride at whatever pace you take it. I've found the speed I'm riding has no bearing whatsoever on my enjoyment of MTB. Still doesn't. The only reason I want to get faster is so I can keep up with the fun MTBR rides without making them wait too long.

And you can surely ride up Kennedy if you can do Henry Coe and the big epic rides I've seen you do there. Personally, I'm just happy I make up Kennedy in less than half a day, which is what the average guy on the street would take, if they can make it at all. We ride on Wednesday afternoons, with a few MTBR guys out just having fun. I usually work late and can only make it now and then. But with me at Kennedy, everyone is guaranteed to beat someone.


----------



## Jersey Devil (Apr 27, 2005)

Interesting discussions. I bought a Magellan eXplorist 500 about 2 months ago and love it. There was an inital learning curve involved as I'm sure all GPS devices require. I bought the Mapsend Directroute NA software (pricey at $150) because I wanted the streetrouting capability. I also have employed a little hack that gives me topo lines on the GPS unit, so I have almost the best of both worlds. The Mapsend TOPO 3D USA is the same price, doesn't have streetrouting capablities but from what I've read has better topo than Garmin and gives you fancy 3d views on your PC. I have used my eXplorist to get me aound on streets I don't know as well as find my way on trails I don't know. It is very accurate, on geocaches I'm usually registering maybe 6 feet off at the cache. Here's a link to a little track plotting I did : http://forums.mtbr.com/showpost.php?p=2185306&postcount=14
and another: http://forums.mtbr.com/showpost.php?p=2190703&postcount=17
Be sure to go to the link I gave on the 2nd post, it has alot of stuff you may find useful.

Ride on!

JD


----------



## sungchang (Aug 31, 2004)

So BigLarry, cost being a major factor, which GPS would you recommend, eTrex Vista Cx or the 60CSx, or any other recommendation? I'm going to be using mainly for biking purposes and put it on either bar or stem, with occassional use for driving directions.


----------



## addictionms (Jul 14, 2006)

you really really want to have the SiRFstarIII GPS chips, they are way better and way faster. I took a quick look at Garmin and the ETREX stuff does not appear to be SiRFstarIII. You can tell by looking at the manuals, the hot start for the ETREX is around 15 seconds, the hot start for the 305 is 1sec. the 305 has the SiRFstarIII. 

I have an ETREX Vista and it takes forever to find itself, I also have a Pharos 525 (SiRFstarIII) and it is almost instant to find itself, and it does not get lost when on the seat of the car (read that in the woods) the ETREX Vista does.

Jim


----------



## BigLarry (Jul 30, 2004)

*Vista isn't that bad*



addictionms said:


> you really really want to have the SiRFstarIII GPS chips, they are way better and way faster. I took a quick look at Garmin and the ETREX stuff does not appear to be SiRFstarIII. You can tell by looking at the manuals, the hot start for the ETREX is around 15 seconds, the hot start for the 305 is 1sec. the 305 has the SiRFstarIII.
> 
> I have an ETREX Vista and it takes forever to find itself, I also have a Pharos 525 (SiRFstarIII) and it is almost instant to find itself, and it does not get lost when on the seat of the car (read that in the woods) the ETREX Vista does.
> 
> Jim


The eTrex Vista isn't that bad. Because the 60CSx isn't rugged enough for the handlebars, I now use the Vista on the handlebars, and the 60CSx with the SiRFIII receiver in the camelbak. So I have simultaneous tracks for both GPS in various conditions.

For an example of typical and worse reception of the Vista, see this post. The Vista only looses reception on the north side of steep hills with thick trees, such as one of the examples in the post, and even then it gets a good part of the track. In real riding, those situations are rare and I do fine navigating with the Vista. The second example is much more typical, where I get very much the same tracks with the two, but an occasional reception glitch out of the Vista.

Yes, the Vista takes a few more seconds to start up, but it's doing that while I'm putting on my gloves and helmet anyway. It's a non-issue.

That said, for the best reception you indeed want the SiRFIII receiver.


----------



## BigLarry (Jul 30, 2004)

sungchang said:


> So BigLarry, cost being a major factor, which GPS would you recommend, eTrex Vista Cx or the 60CSx, or any other recommendation? I'm going to be using mainly for biking purposes and put it on either bar or stem, with occassional use for driving directions.


In order of price: 
*eTrex Venture Cx* $200 (-$50 rebate=$150) No magnetic compass or altimeter sensors, but can do high resolution color maps with expandable memory.
*eTrex Vista Cx:* $300 (-$50 rebate=$250) The best of the eTrex line. It has sensors, expandable memory, high resolution color maps. It can do everything same as the GPSMAP60CSx, but in a smaller rugged package. Unfortunately, like all the eTrex line, it's missing the more sensitive SiRF III receiver.  
*GPSMap60CSx:* $400 (-$50 rebate=$350) The best for screen size, perfect reception, expandable memory, software, .. I use the 60CSx in the camelbak just to collect tracks with a little better precision in poor reception. In good reception, the accuracy of the Vista and 60CSx are very close. (See my previous post.)

Read more about what the sensors on this post. They may not be essential, but are nice: Mag compass for when standing still like in geocaching; and the barometric altimeter for a little better climb data. You can get altitude from the GPS, but it may only have say 100' rather than 30' accuracy.

The Vista and 60CSx can do full autorouting and recalculation if a wrong turn is made. The Venture can autoroute but it's not clear from Garmin's description if it can recalculate a route. 
Note that for street navigation and routing, you need to buy street maps (Garmin's City Navigator v8) for around $130. On the trail, you can use Garmin Mapsource Topo maps that are around $75. You can switch from street to topo via a menu item on the GPS. You also need a microSD memory card to store the maps. 1 GB will store half the US, and is running about $45 some places. Do NOT use the "faster" type II memory cards. The GPS will fry them. 
The maps also include the Points of Interest (POI). It's like a Yahoo Yellow Pages in your hand, showing you locations of food, gas, stores, ATMs,.. sorted by those nearest you, with address and phone numbers and auto routing to the found POI. One of the best features of the GPS really.

I'd suggest the eTrex line for cost and ruggedness on the handlebars. The above eTrex models even have a screen with about the same pixel count as the 60CSx, just smaller and more compact on the bars. The only thing the 60CSx really offers is the better SiRFIII receiver, which is indeed a big consideration. See my previous post above for a comparison of the relative reception.

Many bikers use the Edge, which also has the better SiRF receiver. But it's almost as expensive as the others. It also doesn't show maps, and the Li battery has a limited life and can't be swapped out on a trail.

Within a few weeks of use, Dan'ger and I have had survivability issues with the 60CSx, Dan broke his antenna twice on a couple endos. I lost buttons on mine even in the camelbak on an endo. But Blue Shorts has done OK with his 60CSx mounted to his shoulder harness. He's had his a couple months now.

Dan also had battery bounce (power off from short lost battery connection on bumps) with the 60CSx. Battery bounce can be helped with quality name brand batteries (rechargeable like PowerEx, Sony, Duracell, ..) that fit right, paper in the case for tighter fit, and springy foam behind the contacts. I've not had battery bounce in the camelbak with quality batteries and didn't need to fuss with it.

By comparison, I've had my eTrex Vista on the bars for three years of tough MTB trails, and it's still running fine. It's lasted three bike frames now. It's been tossed into the woods and against rocks countless times on bike crashes, yet bounces right back. It even bounced down the highway a couple times when I left it on the roof of my car. The eTrex line is near bullet proof. That's why the Vista is on my handlebars and not the 60CSx, even though I'd love the better reception.


----------



## pacman (Jan 16, 2004)

BigLarry said:


> Read more about what the sensors on this post. They may not be essential, but are nice: Mag compass for when standing still like in geocaching; and the barometric altimeter for a little better climb data. You can get altitude from the GPS, but it may only have say 100' rather than 30' accuracy.
> 
> Dan also had battery bounce (power off from short lost battery connection on bumps) with the 60CSx. Battery bounce can be helped with quality name brand batteries (rechargeable like PowerEx, Sony, Duracell, ..) that fit right, paper in the case for tighter fit, and springy foam behind the contacts. I've not had battery bounce in the camelbak with quality batteries and didn't need to fuss with it.
> 
> By comparison, I've had my eTrex Vista on the bars for three years of tough MTB trails, and it's still running fine. It's lasted three bike frames now. It's been tossed into the woods and against rocks countless times on bike crashes, yet bounces right back. It even bounced down the highway a couple times when I left it on the roof of my car. The eTrex line is near bullet proof. That's why the Vista is on my handlebars and not the 60CSx, even though I'd love the better reception.


My 76CSx has survived in my Camelbak with no problems. I get excellent tracking thanks to the chipset. I use the GPS to record data, it's rare that I need to navigate on the trail.

The batteries fit so tight they'll never bounce, must be completely different from 60CSx.

_{after rereading the posts}_ Looks like a good hint to turn off the compass. Who woulda thought that would use significant battery power? (psst geeks: what uses the power? electro-magnet, CPU cycles?)


----------



## Moto'n'PushBiker (Sep 22, 2005)

I've read here on mtbr that Garmin comes out with a Edge v2 this year that includes autorouting. Does anybody have more info about this?

Also, with the current edge, what would it look like (on the trail) if you entered waypoints before the ride to help when you get lost? I'm just trying to figure out how much help it would be compare to the GPSses mentioned above.


----------



## Being (May 12, 2005)

What are the advantages of MapSource Topo over NG Topo?


----------



## BigLarry (Jul 30, 2004)

Being said:


> What are the advantages of MapSource Topo over NG Topo?


Other than both having topographical data, they're quite different.

*National Geographic TOPO!*
Based on scanned USGS map images at five resolutions, each with a small zoom adjustment.
Images are slow to zoom and scan.
Data interface to GPS is slow.
Includes an underlying digital altitude information, to create altitude profiles from horizontal tracks you've drawn.
Can NOT be downloaded to any GPS. 
Can make nice 3D plots using the $25 add-on program. 
Only includes one state for $90

*Garmin MapSource Topo*
Fully digital data with lower resolution than NG Topo, not as pretty but less clutter for working and GPS viewing. 
Easy to scan and instantly zoom on full view screen. (Much nicer than web-based programs with small windows). 
Can swap between road and topo information instantly for the same area view.
Maps can be downloaded to Garmin GPS units. Your GPS can switch between topo and street maps with a map setup menu item.
Includes the entire USA for only $75 - a much better deal than NG

I use Garmin MapSource for every day storage of waypoints and tracks. I also use MapSource for directions, making new routes for road or trail. editing tracks, making new waypoints, and most all daily use.

I only use NG TOPO! for making profiles for hand drawn tracks, and nice maps and 3D output of rides. My opinion is that NG is overpriced, has poor software capability, and soon will be made obsolete by web programs like Motion Based or others.


----------



## Being (May 12, 2005)

Thanks for sharing your insight Larry. I was trying to decide if I really needed MapSource Topo since I already have NG. You've convinced me the purchase is worthwhile. I haven't found it cheaper than $100 though.


----------



## BigLarry (Jul 30, 2004)

Being said:


> Thanks for sharing your insight Larry. I was trying to decide if I really needed MapSource Topo since I already have NG. You've convinced me the purchase is worthwhile. I haven't found it cheaper than $100 though.


Try Amazon.com. My price is listed at $74.62 on this page. I hear rumors Amazon changes the price for people depending on if your cookies show you looking around, which I do.


----------



## revrnd (Aug 13, 2004)

loomis said:


> Pardon my ignorance, but as a new GPS user, I don't understand the difference between routes and tracks. Can anyone recommend a good starter book to get my up to speed on using my GPS (Garmin 60 CS)?


A route is a path you program into your GPS between 2 or more waypoints before you take to trip.

A track is the actual path that your GPS records while you travel between the 2 or more waypoints


----------

