Garmin thingy

[arallsopp]

OK. But be advised, 'on unit' routing can be a little wild at times. My Etrex, Ape's Edge, and an unexpected trip to the coast will vouch for that

There's a primer website out there somewhere. I'll see if I can dig it up.

 

[arallsopp]

Got it! http://www.soi.city.ac.uk/~jwo/landserf/audax/

 

[Dave5N]

I have the Garmin 705. It's great fun, but a bit of an expensive toy.

Useful for plotting routes in unfamiliar territory - helps you keep in the lanes.

 

[rich p]

Got it! http://www.soi.city.ac.uk/~jwo/landserf/audax/

Cheers arallsop, I'll go through that tomorrow when I'm more alert! Would you recommend Auntie H's Oregon?

 

[rich p]

I have the Garmin 705. It's great fun, but a bit of an expensive toy.

Useful for plotting routes in unfamiliar territory - helps you keep in the lanes.

Cheers Dave. I don't really want to plot routes just get the ride data afterwards.

 

[arallsopp]

I suspect we'll find out the other side of Christmas. One thing in its favour is that (I believe) it runs on AA batteries. My Etrex does the same, and it gives you pretty much unlimited staying power on the road. When it gets down to <5%, route to your nearest petrol station.

 

[Crackle]

So do I need to buy mapping software too, whatever it is?

With most no. It just records the GPS data which you then download onto the supplied software and it shows you your route on a map and splits it down so you can examine speed and ascent etc. etc.

If you want to follow a map you need one like the 705 or Satmap or similiar and then you have to buy maps.

As for ascent data, it varies widely and most basic maps supplied with the device software use a fairly coarse world database. So you don't get truly accurate data, just an indication. Like the difference of plotting the same route in Bikely vs Mapmyride vs Bikehike, all will give different ascent data. So only a device with a barometric sennsor will measure ascent accurately.

So if you bought something like a 205, it would allow you to programme a basic course as waypoints and bleep turn indications at you when you got close to a turn but not show you a map. It would record your route, times, speed etc.. which you could download into something like Sportstracks (Excellent software) and examine later.

 

[Auntie Helen]

Auntie H's Oregon was chosen after a great deal of thought and after using an Edge 205 for 9 months and realising what I liked and disliked.

I was on the cusp of ordering an Edge 605 (actually had it in my Basket on Amazon) when I went riding with someone with an Oregon. It seemed so much more a complete package and it had a touch screen which is more useful to me than buttons on the side (my Garmin is mounted on the end of my boom so a long way away - I can touch the front easily but reaching the side without grinding my thumbs off with the pedals is difficult).

I think the Oregon, as a somewhat newer product, has far more options than the Edge. It has barometric pressure (which isn't useful to me in the slightest) and it can be used as a marine GPS, which is (once I buy the marine maps). It is routeable. Like most of these gadgets I gather it can take slightly random routes at times so it's worth keeping an eye on it.

The unfavourable comments I've read about the Oregon seem to be about the reflectivity of the screen. I have a number of options for mounting the thing on the trike so I'll see how I get on with it. I think it's very good that it has AA batteries and that it remembers everything if you take them out. The person I rode with who had one said he'd done about 24 hours of riding and the battery meter had gone down to halfway so it looks like they last quite well too.

YACF has a lot of these gadgets with a chap called Frankly Frankie particularly in the know. He's done a lot of screen shots comparing the new Dakota (which I don't think is an option) with an Etrex but it gives you overall ideas about some of the pluses and minuses of these gadgets: http://yacf.co.uk/forum/index.php?topic=25948.0

The main disadvantage of my Edge 205 was the fact that it switches off with vibration (a known fault) and that it doesn't have maps at all. The advantage is that it's small and light. The Oregon is double the size, but that is an advantage with where I'm fixing it on the trike. Still it's more to carry around, but at least I don't have to carry a charger for it on tour as I can just take 6 AAs and they should do it...

 

[andym]

I don't want one for touring and pre-loading routes, I like maps and changing course on a whim.
I do a few short trips each year where a few mates and I pretend to be fit, young things and tackle some mountain routes in the Alps etc. I'd quite like a gadget that will just record the route, altitudes and profiles. Is there such a thing?

Well one option would be to buy a very basic yellow Garmin eTrex with a monochrome display. I'd recommend buying secondhand on eBay. Bought new, they are (IMO) fairly poor value.

I think a Garmin with mapping is probably the best bet. Even if you don't plan to use it it's nice to have the mapping in reserve. (And I suspect that even if you think you don't want it now, then you may subsequently give in to temptation).

I bought the Garmin City Navigator DVD (buy the DVD direct from Garmin rather than an SD card or DVD from Amazon or whatever). I think it's actually really worth the money even if you plan on mainly using maps. The City Navigator includes the small local roads that would only be shown on the most detailed Michelin (or whoever) maps. I found it extremely useful when I needed to find an alternative to a couple of D roads where bikes were banned, or when I simply wanted to improvise routes across country. The City Navigator also in effect gives you a street map for every town or village you pass through.

The City Navigator mapping also comes with a database of Points of Interest - a lot of this is useless clutter (which you can switch on or off) but it's useful if you ever need to find the nearest hospital with an A&E department, or cash machine.

You don't need to have mapping software to use with the Garmin. I found it useful to put markers on key intersections on the map on the Garmin. I found this useful going through towns or larger villages - although if you are used to using a map on a handlebar bag you might not find this as useful as I did.

Personally I think routing is a bit of a two-edged sword: it's very useful to have something that tells you when to turn, but you absolutely can't rely on the device to plot a route for you - you have to keep a really careful eye on what the gizmo is doing. On the other hand I did find it useful for simple routes like Portsmouth Rail Station to Portsmouth Ferry Terminal.

The free Garmin MapSource (RoadTrip on a Mac). Is useful for route planning. But even if you're not interested in routeplanning you might still find it useful for doing things like marking the location of interesting places to visit or campsites.

Coming to choice of kit. I think you can basically group them into four families:

- the monochrome eTrex GPSes (either with or without a base map). If you can get a secondhand one at a decent price then they could be a very useful intro (or you may find it's all you need). But don't buy new.

- the colour eTrex GPSes. They are (IMO) the best adapted to the needs of touring cyclists: especially if you are interested in being able to store a multi-day route or POIs etc. The battery life is good (a couple of days riding on one pair of rechargeable AAs) and the fact that they use AA batteries is an advantage. The Vista Cx also comes with a barometric altimeter and it will display an altitude profile for the day's riding;

- the Edge family. These are designed primarily for use as a training aid. Which doesn't mean they can't be used by touring cyclists but they have a number of memory limitations which might be a disadvantage. Also the fact that they don't use AA batteries is, to my mind, a disadvantage;

- the touchscreen colour displays (Oregon Colorado etc). These are very nice, but they are more expensive. A larger screen is an advantage if you need to scroll around a map, but it (I assume) comes at a cost of shorter battery life. I have also read criticisms that the display isn't bright enough for really sunny days - I can't vouch for this.

 

[PpPete]

I think a Garmin with mapping is probably the best bet. Even if you don't plan to use it it's nice to have the mapping in reserve. (And I suspect that even if you think you don't want it now, then you may subsequently give in to temptation).

<snip>

- the colour eTrex GPSes. They are (IMO) the best adapted to the needs of touring cyclists: especially if you are interested in being able to store a multi-day route or POIs etc. The battery life is good (a couple of days riding on one pair of rechargeable AAs) and the fact that they use AA batteries is an advantage. The Vista Cx also comes with a barometric altimeter and it will display an altitude profile for the day's riding;

.

If you buy a colour eTrex (HCx series) which are mapping capable, you don't have to buy the mapping from Garming (or anyone else)

It will work to record the route as is. And if you want mapping later you can get it free from openstreetmap.org and download it to a MicroSD card than fits into the Garmin. Lots of discussion on this over on YACF.

I've got a Legend HCx which is very adequate, although it lacks the barometric altimeter / profile display of the Vista. I use a RAM mount zip-tied to the stem. It seems more secure than the Garmin handlebar mount. If I know where I'm going, I just change the display and use it as a speedo/odometer.

 

[andym]

If you buy a colour eTrex (HCx series) which are mapping capable, you don't have to buy the mapping from Garming (or anyone else)

It will work to record the route as is. And if you want mapping later you can get it free from openstreetmap.org and download it to a MicroSD card than fits into the Garmin. Lots of discussion on this over on YACF.

Yep OpenStreetmap is there as an alternative. I was using it recently in Italy and I was very impressed with the quality of the mapping for places like Bologna, Ravenna etc. (For anyone who has an iPod touch or iPhone there are a number of applications that let you download openstreetmap data and these are well worth checking out). But I do know that people have criticised the gaps in openstreetmap's coverage and I don't know how good its coverage is of say chemins and voies comunales in the French countryside (not, I hasten to add that Garmin is completely reliable either). Its an excellent project and, like garlic bread, its the future.

That said, Garmin CityNavigator Europe costs £81 and, for what you get, its a real bargain.

 

[PpPete]

Yep OpenStreetmap is there as an alternative. I was using it recently in Italy and I was very impressed with the quality of the mapping for places like Bologna, Ravenna etc. (For anyone who has an iPod touch or iPhone there are a number of applications that let you download openstreetmap data and these are well worth checking out). But I do know that people have criticised the gaps in openstreetmap's coverage and I don't know how good its coverage is of say chemins and voies comunales in the French countryside (not, I hasten to add that Garmin is completely reliable either). Its an excellent project and, like garlic bread, its the future.

That said, Garmin CityNavigator Europe costs £81 and, for what you get, its a real bargain.

Don't get me wrong...CityNavigator may well be very good value at £81 (or even a real bargain?) but it's still £81 when you've already spent a fair wedge on the unit itself. When I bought mine, that was money I didn't have, and anyway Topo would have been a better product for what i wanted, then I would have wanted City Navigator later, then probably maps of another part of the world on another occasion.... and so on.

Great thing about OSM is that it's free for all the data for the whole world... and as for gaps in the coverage, you can simply check online before departure what the coverage is like at your destination, and maybe take the odd extra paper map accordingly. If you find any gaps "on the ground" then you can use your GPS tracks to update the OSM map itself, far more constructive than criticising any lack of coverage, and to my mind very satisfying in itself.

Sorry, don't mean to rant, but I think OSM is such a worthwhile project, and if everybody took the trouble to check and fill in gaps in their local areas it would be even better.

 

[rich p]

Cheers for the info, guys.
Andy, are you suggesting that the Vista would be a good choice for me as it has barometric altitude facility?

 

[andym]

Cheers for the info, guys.
Andy, are you suggesting that the Vista would be a good choice for me as it has barometric altitude facility?

Well maybe. I'm not a fan of barometric altimeters myself, as the altitude readings derived from the GPS position are enough for me. But IIRC, in your original post you said one of the things you wanted to be able to do was look at altitude profiles. The Garmin Vista provides the facility to do this without having to download to a computer.

I've uploaded a page from the manual so you can see the sort of information it provides.

 

[PpPete]

One of the slightly annoying things about the Legend is not so much the lack of barometric altimeter (like Andy I'm quite happy with the less accurate GPS derived data) but the Legend, although it gives an instantaneous elevation, it has no on-board facility to provide a profile like the Vista. I can get a profile later by downloading the track and using an online tool, but it's a bit of a PITA.

If I was buying again I'd almost certainly go for the Vista, although if money was really no object the SatMap10 would be a possibility.