Best Garmin model - that does routing - for 400km-1200km brevets?
02-26-17, 07:43 AM
#26
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 11,182
Bikes: 1961 Ideor, 1966 Perfekt 3 Speed AB Hub, 1994 Bridgestone MB-6, 2006 Airnimal Joey, 2009 Thorn Sherpa, 2013 Thorn Nomad MkII, 2015 VO Pass Hunter, 2017 Lynskey Backroad, 2017 Raleigh Gran Prix, 1980s Bianchi Mixte on a trainer. Others are now gone.
Mentioned: 47 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3455 Post(s)
Liked 1,454 Times
in
1,133 Posts
I think the best Garmin for long brevets is a GPSMAP 64 or 64s. It uses AA batteries. You can set it to not recalculate the route and display distance to next turn. It will beep before and at the turn and display a large turn arrow. You can have it alarm at controls.
....
....
I learned that the Garmin 64 can charge internal NiMH batteries on a different link on this forum, so I bought a Garmin 64. More detail here:
https://www.bikeforums.net/19280740-post66.html
I found that the Garmin would not play well with my Sinewave Revolution USB charger when it is powered directly by my hub, but it worked great with a cache battery in the circuit. The hub powers the Sinewave USB charger, that feeds the cache battery, which then simultaniously supplies the Garmin. The cache battery smooths out the power flow instead of getting a rectified sinewave power curve from the charger, that appears to smooth out the power flow well enough to give the Garmin what it needs.
I do not do rando riding, instead do long bike tours. Got home a few days ago from a 380 mile tour in South Florida. This was my first tour with the Garmin 64. I was self sufficient for all electrical needs with my dynohub, Sinewave Revolution USB charger, cache battery, Garmin 64 for charging AA NiNH batteries, charging cable for my smart phone (it was almost always off, only used when I had wifi) and a USB powered charger for my camera Li Ion batteries. I never needed to plug into an outlet for additional charging.
The hub when used for charging would generally charge up the AA batteries in the Garmin in a couple hours. Then I could run the Garmin many more hours on that charge, during which time I could use the hub output to charge other devices (smartphone, camera batteries, AAA batteries in taillights, headlamp batteries since I was camping, etc.).
Note that if you run a bike headlamp from the hub during the night, you will not get any charge out of the USB charger during that time, a spare set of charged AA batteries for the Garmin could come in handy for night riding.
***
Regarding routing with the Garmin 64, it gives you options for automobile routing, cycling, tour cycling, mountain biking and as the crow flies. I have not been able to figure out the differences between the types of routing, so I can't speak knowledgeably on that topic. But three different types of cycle routing appear to use bike paths differently. The auto routing appears more likely to put you on busy roads.
I got the plain Garmin 64 and loaded open streets maps from the internet onto it. The 64 does not have the internal compass or internal pressure sensor of the more expensive models, but for my uses that is good enough.
02-27-17, 12:27 PM
#27
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Far beyond the pale horizon.
Posts: 14,259
Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4245 Post(s)
Liked 1,350 Times
in
936 Posts
It might also depend on the amount of data you are recording (cadence/speed/heart rate).
I don't have a lot of information about the issue. I've heard about it and had a problem at around 180 miles that appeared it might have been the same sort of issue (maybe, it wasn't!).
Part of the problem is that it's hard to duplicate.
I mentioned it as more of "there might be an issue that you need to be aware of".
Last edited by njkayaker; 02-27-17 at 12:30 PM.
02-27-17, 12:34 PM
#28
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Far beyond the pale horizon.
Posts: 14,259
Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4245 Post(s)
Liked 1,350 Times
in
936 Posts
Regarding routing with the Garmin 64, it gives you options for automobile routing, cycling, tour cycling, mountain biking and as the crow flies. I have not been able to figure out the differences between the types of routing, so I can't speak knowledgeably on that topic. But three different types of cycle routing appear to use bike paths differently. The auto routing appears more likely to put you on busy roads.
* automobile -> include highways.
* cycling -> exclude highways (where cyclists aren't typically allowed) -> for "fast" road riding.
* tour cycling -> prefer cycleways/paths.
* mountain biking -> prefer unpaved/dirt.
* direct (crows files) -> bearing to end point. This is more of a hiking use where the paths you are using are not on the map in the device.
02-27-17, 12:44 PM
#29
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Far beyond the pale horizon.
Posts: 14,259
Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4245 Post(s)
Liked 1,350 Times
in
936 Posts
A tcx file with course points is the much better choice.
But a gpx track file (and a tcx file without course points) will still give you a line to follow and give you off-course warnings.
Gpx and tcx files are the same thing (except that tcx files have course points as an addition).
02-27-17, 12:50 PM
#30
just another gosling
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Everett, WA
Posts: 19,527
Bikes: CoMo Speedster 2003, Trek 5200, CAAD 9, Fred 2004
Mentioned: 115 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3885 Post(s)
Liked 1,938 Times
in
1,383 Posts
I recorded to a card (I always record to a card). I had enough power.
It might also depend on the amount of data you are recording (cadence/speed/heart rate).
I don't have a lot of information about the issue. I've heard about it and had a problem at around 180 miles that appeared it might have been the same sort of issue (maybe, it wasn't!).
Part of the problem is that it's hard to duplicate.
I mentioned it as more of "there might be an issue that you need to be aware of".
It might also depend on the amount of data you are recording (cadence/speed/heart rate).
I don't have a lot of information about the issue. I've heard about it and had a problem at around 180 miles that appeared it might have been the same sort of issue (maybe, it wasn't!).
Part of the problem is that it's hard to duplicate.
I mentioned it as more of "there might be an issue that you need to be aware of".
I record cadence, speed, HR, but not power. I use the Smart Interval Recording rather than 1 sec.
__________________
Results matter
Results matter
02-27-17, 12:57 PM
#31
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Far beyond the pale horizon.
Posts: 14,259
Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4245 Post(s)
Liked 1,350 Times
in
936 Posts
It tells you where the next 4 or 5 turns are, in order, in terms of distance to your current location, and it lists in text what the next turns are called (i.e. the road name). And it beeps if you go off course, and keeps yelling at you till you get back on course.
(Although this doesn't help you if you decide to ignore it like I did on a Fleche a few years ago (long story)).
(Although this doesn't help you if you decide to ignore it like I did on a Fleche a few years ago (long story)).
Weird turn instructions are common enough that one has to be able to handle them. The "bonus miles" were really the result of ignoring the unit.
Keeping an eye at the map screen makes navigation with the GPS much more reliable because it will allow you to catch "blown turns" after the fact and, also, even know about turns before you might miss them. If you use the units like old technology (keeping the screen on the course points like a cuesheet or on a data screen), you are more likely to miss turns and less likely to recover from missed turns). (People are free to do what they want but they should realize that not using the map screen compromises the reliability of navigation).
The "where you are" and course/map display is very reliable on these units.
Any significant "bonus miles" with a GPS and a loaded course/route is the result of not really looking at the map enough. It takes some practice/experience to do this easily and as a normal part of your riding.
Last edited by njkayaker; 02-27-17 at 02:05 PM.
02-27-17, 01:02 PM
#32
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Far beyond the pale horizon.
Posts: 14,259
Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4245 Post(s)
Liked 1,350 Times
in
936 Posts
Still, having a map make it much easier to understand what you are looking at. And the units that have maps have better (bigger) screens.
Maps can also help you when you can go off course.
Ridewithgps has an option (for paid subscribers) to move the course points earlier in the track. That way, the course-points should pop-up ahead of the turn. This makes them more useful but one might not get all of them.
The "best GPS you can get" is cheap compared to the cost/time of training and equipment. The extra cost is well worth not having to read cuesheets (and look for street signs).
A used 800 is $150 and very good. I'd strongly recommend a unit with maps.
Last edited by njkayaker; 02-27-17 at 02:22 PM.
02-27-17, 01:15 PM
#33
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Far beyond the pale horizon.
Posts: 14,259
Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4245 Post(s)
Liked 1,350 Times
in
936 Posts
I made too many wrong turns with my Edge 500 because without maps it wasn't possible to see which of several options (the next road at a 45 degree angle hiding behind the service station after the traffic light) was correct when the signage was hidden or insufficient for the lighting conditions.
*The map units have better (bigger) screens for viewing the track.
* The without following a course displays upcoming street names. This lets you often know the street name before being able to read the street sign (if you can find the street sign). I've used this feature to help read cuesheets.
* The map shows the intersection, which can be a big help in figuring out what turn you need to make.
* The map shows context that is useful for relating your real world place to the navigation system.
* The map can help you work through routing glitches (even routing glitches cause by having a map).
You can create current/up-to-date maps that cover exactly the area you need and much smaller (so the speed isn't an issue). One can also set up the copy before eating dinner or going to sleep, etc.
The 820 doesn't use cards and the 1000 doesn't need to (it has enough internal memory).
Last edited by njkayaker; 02-27-17 at 01:29 PM.
02-27-17, 01:36 PM
#34
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Far beyond the pale horizon.
Posts: 14,259
Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4245 Post(s)
Liked 1,350 Times
in
936 Posts
I've only heard of it being an issue with the 800.
When I had a problem that appeared it could be an instance of the recording problem, it was a real pain to deal with (the unit froze up hard).
Even with that potential issue, it appears the 800 is more reliable than the newer units. In my experience, in the rare cases I do have issues with the 800, restarting the course reliably fixes the problem.
In my experience, the Touring was much less reliable: the "turn guidance" failed too frequently and it wasn't correctable by restarting the route.
Last edited by njkayaker; 02-27-17 at 01:43 PM.
02-27-17, 01:40 PM
#35
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 11,182
Bikes: 1961 Ideor, 1966 Perfekt 3 Speed AB Hub, 1994 Bridgestone MB-6, 2006 Airnimal Joey, 2009 Thorn Sherpa, 2013 Thorn Nomad MkII, 2015 VO Pass Hunter, 2017 Lynskey Backroad, 2017 Raleigh Gran Prix, 1980s Bianchi Mixte on a trainer. Others are now gone.
Mentioned: 47 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3455 Post(s)
Liked 1,454 Times
in
1,133 Posts
The details of how the different routing works is not well documented but it appears to be (more or less):
* automobile -> include highways.
* cycling -> exclude highways (where cyclists aren't typically allowed) -> for "fast" road riding.
* tour cycling -> prefer cycleways/paths.
* mountain biking -> prefer unpaved/dirt.
* direct (crows files) -> bearing to end point. This is more of a hiking use where the paths you are using are not on the map in the device.
* automobile -> include highways.
* cycling -> exclude highways (where cyclists aren't typically allowed) -> for "fast" road riding.
* tour cycling -> prefer cycleways/paths.
* mountain biking -> prefer unpaved/dirt.
* direct (crows files) -> bearing to end point. This is more of a hiking use where the paths you are using are not on the map in the device.
In the photo I used a DIY mounting that attaches with the stem cap bolt.
02-27-17, 01:57 PM
#36
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Far beyond the pale horizon.
Posts: 14,259
Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4245 Post(s)
Liked 1,350 Times
in
936 Posts
Thanks, that appears to be what we were seeing. Thus, your definitions might be exactly right. One day I think I used the tour cycling and it added a lot of distance on roads to reach a bike path. And one day of cycling put us on some muddy agricultural roads instead of nearby paved roads. Once we reached an area were we knew we would be on major roads, I used the automobile routing, as I knew that was where we wanted to be. The crow flies route, that appeared to be the default when I told it to find a route to a waypoint so I then had to change the "activity" to get a more proper routing.
Many of the OSM maps are created for use on the 800 (it's the unit that most people used). The 800 has an "automobile" mode. The 1000 and later units don't have an "automobile" mode.
Some of the maps use the "highway" classification for "cycleways" so that one can use the "automobile" routing (on the 800) to prefer using them. This could do funny things to the routing on the 1000 and new units.
Of course, the basic road classification in the source map has to be reasonable too.
Using on-device routing is a bit risky. You can sometimes get really unexpected routes. In England, for example, the way roundabouts are classified (on OSM) can cause very long detours to avoid them. (The Garmin CN maps classify roundabouts in away that avoids this problem.)
It appears, when using the Edges (the models for cycling) for navigation, most people use loaded courses when using them for navigating. It seems most people with the Edges (even the ones with maps) don't use them for navigation.
It's bigger than I prefer and I like the unit more forward (I look at the map a lot). The Edges are easier to mount and there are more options available.
Last edited by njkayaker; 02-27-17 at 09:45 PM.
02-27-17, 02:15 PM
#37
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Far beyond the pale horizon.
Posts: 14,259
Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4245 Post(s)
Liked 1,350 Times
in
936 Posts
It looks like I am not maximizing my use of my Garmin 510, so I will work on that and see if I can get it to meet my needs without driving me nuts. I once tried using years ago for routing /tracking and it sucked, so I figured that I had to buy another device that would do it better. (Perhaps the solution is to have two devices like someone mentioned, one for Cadence/heart rate/distance, the other for a map that is always on display...)
I have a Bontrager Node 2 cyclocomputer that uses the same sensors as the Garmin (the battery on the Node lasts for months). The Node 2 is expensive for a cyclocomputer. One could use a much cheaper one. Though, if you want cadence (or heart rate), you are likely better-off using something that uses ANT+ (the sensor technology that the Garmins use).
"Course points" are especially useful for the units that don't have maps (like the 500/510/520).
GPX track files will work too. (Both gpx track and tcx files will give you a track-line/breadcrumb.)
(Don't use "GPX route" files!)
By default, "course points" notify at the turn. It's more useful to have them notify before the turn. You'll have to pay to be able to move them in ridewithgps (that's $6/month but you can do it month-to-month). Bikeroutetoaster lets you move them for free.
You have the 510. Try it. You can use a cheap battery charger to keep it going.
The 510 doesn't really do "routing". It does basic track following. It will tell you when you are off course (when you've wandered too far away from the track).
Last edited by njkayaker; 02-27-17 at 09:52 PM.
02-27-17, 02:18 PM
#38
Jedi Master
QUESTION: In your opinion, what is best Garmin model for doing long brevets?
RELATED QUESTION: For Garmin Etrex , if you are low on batteries, can you replace the AA batteries without it interrupting your ride recording? i.e. I want to be able to ride a 600km or longer and replace batteries etc and still be able to upload it as a single ride onto Strava.
RELATED QUESTION: For Garmin Etrex , if you are low on batteries, can you replace the AA batteries without it interrupting your ride recording? i.e. I want to be able to ride a 600km or longer and replace batteries etc and still be able to upload it as a single ride onto Strava.
02-27-17, 02:26 PM
#39
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Far beyond the pale horizon.
Posts: 14,259
Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4245 Post(s)
Liked 1,350 Times
in
936 Posts
If you are using loaded routes, note that there are all sorts of apps available for smartphones that let you load routes (usually as gpx or kml) files.
If you are carrying the smartphone anyway, it's a cheap (close to free) backup to a dedicated GPS unit. It's also easier to review the map (with the route) on a smartphone.
On long rides, I usually turn my smartphone off so that it doesn't drain the battery unnecessarily hunting for a cell tower.
If you are carrying the smartphone anyway, it's a cheap (close to free) backup to a dedicated GPS unit. It's also easier to review the map (with the route) on a smartphone.
On long rides, I usually turn my smartphone off so that it doesn't drain the battery unnecessarily hunting for a cell tower.
02-27-17, 07:44 PM
#40
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 11,182
Bikes: 1961 Ideor, 1966 Perfekt 3 Speed AB Hub, 1994 Bridgestone MB-6, 2006 Airnimal Joey, 2009 Thorn Sherpa, 2013 Thorn Nomad MkII, 2015 VO Pass Hunter, 2017 Lynskey Backroad, 2017 Raleigh Gran Prix, 1980s Bianchi Mixte on a trainer. Others are now gone.
Mentioned: 47 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3455 Post(s)
Liked 1,454 Times
in
1,133 Posts
I plan to continue using the old Legend for canoeing and kayaking as long as the my Legend lasts, as I like the way that the black and white GPS units can continue to have the screen on without draining the battery for backlighting. But I still want to be able to run all my GPS units on AA batteries.
02-27-17, 08:52 PM
#41
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Far beyond the pale horizon.
Posts: 14,259
Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4245 Post(s)
Liked 1,350 Times
in
936 Posts
Agree that the Garmin 64 is bigger than most other GPS units, but I only want GPS units that use AA batteries so that I can use it for kayaking, canoeing, backpacking, etc. I don't want a cycling specific GPS for that reason. But I readily admit that I am probably in the minority in that regard when it comes to touring cyclists.
(I got my 800 cheap enough that I wouldn't be too upset if I needed to buy a different unit if the 800 wasn't suitable for other situations.)
I'd like to have some various units to see how they might work differently but I have already spent more time that is reasonable in investigating how the Edges work (not just using them). I also know that there's a lot of commonality between different devices (especially, those made by Garmin).
The Edges have "course points" which, I believe, the non-cycling units don't have.
"Course points" are like waypoints that are part of the track file. They are useful for things like randos (you can use them to monitor the distance to controls).
GPS units are all basically the same but different units have a shift in focus.
1- wilderness (hiking).
2- cycling (motorcycling).
3- automobile (what most people are familiar with).
Many people think the cycling ones work like (are used like) the automobile ones.
Using them more like the wilderness ones is likely going to be more effective but it's a bit more work.
Last edited by njkayaker; 02-27-17 at 09:59 PM.
02-28-17, 05:58 PM
#42
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 326
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 182 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
So if I decide I want better mapping and routing ability, and money was no concern, what would be the best device(s) for rando purposes, edge 820? edge 1000?
02-28-17, 07:00 PM
#43
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Far beyond the pale horizon.
Posts: 14,259
Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4245 Post(s)
Liked 1,350 Times
in
936 Posts
The "mapping" (displaying maps) doesn't appear to be different between the units. The 1000, with it's bigger screen and faster CPU helps displaying maps (and turn directions).
The newer Garmins might be more flaky (buggy).
The 800 (no longer made) might be the most reliable. (I don't recommend the Touring.)
If I wasn't using the 800, I'd choose the 1000 over the 820 (I look at the map a lot; the bigger screen would be useful to me).
Some people might not like the orientation of the USB socket on the 1000 for charging while riding (I'd have to look to see if the 820 is different).
The routing when using a loaded course doesn't appear to be functionally different between the units (what you'd be doing on a rando ride).
There are more features/options for "route to a point" (on device routing) on the 820/1000 compared to the older units (810/800) but planning routes before hand (on ridewithgps, for example) is likely to be more reliable.
Last edited by njkayaker; 02-28-17 at 07:06 PM.
03-13-19, 12:06 PM
#44
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: philadelphia, pa
Posts: 242
Bikes: 650b traditional rando, 700c SS rando, 700c fast rando..... plus a mountain, folder, and retired urban track in the basement
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 37 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I'm bailing from the Electronics thread on Garmin Edge 520+ Woes because I wasn't really getting useful answers. Questions below. After re-reading through this thread, and my understanding of the 520+ as a regular 520 plus proper mapping, it sounds like removing mapping from my 520+, and using the below settings should solve most of my problems? The time it takes to load a course up has really been killing me, and I am not sure if it is best to have to deal with this several times (e.g. after every controle for short legs) or just once at the beginning (loading an entire course and knowing I won't be able to nav via GPS, just CPS and following others during the opening leg until it is done processing).
"Course Points -> ON"
"Turn Guidance -> OFF"
There are two types of "turn notifications":
1) course points included in the tcx file.
2) "turn guidance" (what Garmin calls it) that show big white arrows on the screen about 0.1 miles before the turn.
1) The "course points" are basically part of track following. These pop-up as icons (usually an arrow indicating direction) and a 10 character label (the truncated street name). These are how the units that don't have maps (like the 500/510) can provide turn notifications. These are not completely reliable because they are highly dependent on position (the placement of the course point on the map might not be exactly the position of the turn in the real world). The Garmins provide a page that lists these with the distance from the current location. Ridewithgps writes its cuesheet entries out as "course points" in the TCX file. You can add custom entries (like for rest stops) in ridewithgps and these will show up on the "course point" list.
2) The fancier "turn guidance" (big white arrows) works (more or less) like a car GPS. These are much easier to see than the little course points and they are much less position sensitive. The Garmins generate this turn guidance by "walking" the track file you've copied to the unit to see what roads on the installed map the track appears to use. Using a map to plan the route that is different from the map installed on the device can cause this calculated route to not be quite right. This is how the device also can calculate a route to a point/place you select. You can see the list of turns for the "calculated route" by pressing on the text at the top of the map screen.
The devices have options to recalculate the route if you go off course. On some of the units, this abandons your course and calculates a route that is the "shortest" way to the endpoint. This isn't what people expect. It's advisable to turn off the "recalculate" option.
Sometimes, this fancier turn guidance can stop working. Some of the Garmins are more reliable than others with this (the ancient 800 might be the most reliable). That the fancy turn guidance isn't working doesn't mean the basic track following is not working.
Often (sometimes), you can just reload the route and it will start working again. The routing can be more reliable for shorter routes and it's faster to restart shorter routes anyway. That means, you should probably break really long routes up into smaller segments. Routes that cross over themselves can cause problems too (you can split these routes up also).
You can use both turn guidance at the same time (or separately).
The file you load to the Garmin has to be a "track" file, which contains a list of points that accurately describes the turns and curve of the path you want to travel on. (If you see lots of straight lines that "cut corners", you might have loaded a "route" file, which won't work on the Edges.
It doesn't matter if the track files is a gpx or tcx file (except that tcx files can have "course points".
It takes some practice/experience using them.
The 800 has a known issue of not being able to record rides longer than around 180 miles. You want to be sure to restart recording before then (I've heard that hitting the lap button avoids this problem). I have no idea if the other units have a similar problem.
"Course Points -> ON"
"Turn Guidance -> OFF"
Bumping this thread.
I got an Edge 520+ to replace my trusty Edge 500 for this upcoming randonneuring season and the road to Paris-Brest-Paris. I'm also experiencing a lot of woe in getting the 520+ to behave like my old 500.
What I used to do with the 500:
Any assistance would be greatly appreciated!
I got an Edge 520+ to replace my trusty Edge 500 for this upcoming randonneuring season and the road to Paris-Brest-Paris. I'm also experiencing a lot of woe in getting the 520+ to behave like my old 500.
What I used to do with the 500:
- Create routes in RWGPS. Generally i'd do it by controle or maybe every 100k.... never would make long routes. Also helped the unit load routes faster.
- The mapping page was excellent. A breadcrumb trail with the next cue and distance to turn. All I needed!
- Stop and save files every 200k or so. I'd generally experience freezing and corruption with 300km+ rides, so I got into the habit of resetting every 200 and then stitching files together later.
- Charge on the go with a Gomadic charger.
- It takes FOREVER to load routes, even if they're short. DC Rainmaker pointed this out in his review of the pre-production 520+, and it doesn't seem to have gotten fixed. Would turning off all mapping help with this issue? A breadcrumb is totally fine with me.
- Using .tcx from RWGPS, sometimes I get a full cue sheet as one of the main pages, and sometimes I do not. It will just have "Start" and "Finish" cues. I have to dig into the menus to find the cue sheet, which is not helpful.
- Related to the above bullet, on the mapping page, during navigation it will show me the route highlighted, but sometimes will give me no cue or distance to turn.
- Does the 520+ suffer the same issues with long files? Saved routes / recording data with too many waypoints?
- Can I charge on the go with any regular USB stick and cable, or do I need a specific pinned one like Gomadic?
Any assistance would be greatly appreciated!
There are two types of "turn notifications":
1) course points included in the tcx file.
2) "turn guidance" (what Garmin calls it) that show big white arrows on the screen about 0.1 miles before the turn.
1) The "course points" are basically part of track following. These pop-up as icons (usually an arrow indicating direction) and a 10 character label (the truncated street name). These are how the units that don't have maps (like the 500/510) can provide turn notifications. These are not completely reliable because they are highly dependent on position (the placement of the course point on the map might not be exactly the position of the turn in the real world). The Garmins provide a page that lists these with the distance from the current location. Ridewithgps writes its cuesheet entries out as "course points" in the TCX file. You can add custom entries (like for rest stops) in ridewithgps and these will show up on the "course point" list.
2) The fancier "turn guidance" (big white arrows) works (more or less) like a car GPS. These are much easier to see than the little course points and they are much less position sensitive. The Garmins generate this turn guidance by "walking" the track file you've copied to the unit to see what roads on the installed map the track appears to use. Using a map to plan the route that is different from the map installed on the device can cause this calculated route to not be quite right. This is how the device also can calculate a route to a point/place you select. You can see the list of turns for the "calculated route" by pressing on the text at the top of the map screen.
The devices have options to recalculate the route if you go off course. On some of the units, this abandons your course and calculates a route that is the "shortest" way to the endpoint. This isn't what people expect. It's advisable to turn off the "recalculate" option.
Sometimes, this fancier turn guidance can stop working. Some of the Garmins are more reliable than others with this (the ancient 800 might be the most reliable). That the fancy turn guidance isn't working doesn't mean the basic track following is not working.
Often (sometimes), you can just reload the route and it will start working again. The routing can be more reliable for shorter routes and it's faster to restart shorter routes anyway. That means, you should probably break really long routes up into smaller segments. Routes that cross over themselves can cause problems too (you can split these routes up also).
You can use both turn guidance at the same time (or separately).
The file you load to the Garmin has to be a "track" file, which contains a list of points that accurately describes the turns and curve of the path you want to travel on. (If you see lots of straight lines that "cut corners", you might have loaded a "route" file, which won't work on the Edges.
It doesn't matter if the track files is a gpx or tcx file (except that tcx files can have "course points".
It takes some practice/experience using them.
The 800 has a known issue of not being able to record rides longer than around 180 miles. You want to be sure to restart recording before then (I've heard that hitting the lap button avoids this problem). I have no idea if the other units have a similar problem.
03-13-19, 08:39 PM
#45
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Far beyond the pale horizon.
Posts: 14,259
Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4245 Post(s)
Liked 1,350 Times
in
936 Posts
I'm bailing from the Electronics thread on <a href="https://www.bikeforums.net/electronics-lighting-gadgets/1166649-garmin-edge-520-plus-woes.html#post20835945">Garmin Edge 520+ Woes</a> because I wasn't really getting useful answers. Questions below. After re-reading through this thread, and my understanding of the 520+ as a regular 520 plus proper mapping, it sounds like removing mapping from my 520+, and using the below settings should solve most of my problems? The time it takes to load a course up has really been killing me, and I am not sure if it is best to have to deal with this several times (e.g. after every controle for short legs) or just once at the beginning (loading an entire course and knowing I won't be able to nav via GPS, just CPS and following others during the opening leg until it is done processing).<br /><br />"Course Points -> ON"<br />"Turn Guidance -> OFF"
You shouldn't need to "remove the mapping" (whatever that means). Using the settings you listed should be enough.
A few points....
* The 520+ is a small device with a small battery. There is a trade-off (there is always a trade off). With the 520+ (and the 820), the trade off is a slower CPU. (The 1030 is much faster.)
* The 520+ should be fine calculating medium-sized routes (62.5 miles). My ancient 800 had no issues calculating centuries. (I'm note sure if it's reasonable to expect these devices to deal with 250+ mile routes.)
* The route calculation (the thing that is taking time) is only done with "turn guidance" enabled.
* The route calculation takes more time with longer courses (obviously) but it doesn't seem to be linear. That is, calculating a route in 4 pieces might be faster than calculating the route in its entirety.
* Even if it's linear, it's generally more manageable to wait 5 minutes four times than it is to wait 20 minutes once. (Get into the habit of starting the calculation before you do other stuff.)
* Since you might need to restart a route, it's a good idea to split it up.
* "GPS" refers to determining your location. You are using GPS with "course points" and "turn guidance" (these things are "add ons" to GPS).
Last edited by njkayaker; 03-13-19 at 09:25 PM.
03-14-19, 03:21 AM
#46
Kamen Rider
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: KL, MY
Posts: 1,071
Bikes: Fuji Transonic Elite, Marechal Soul Ultimate, Dahon Dash Altena
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 351 Post(s)
Liked 277 Times
in
164 Posts
@seajaye ,
I have a 520 so I don't know how similar my experience will be with the 520+. That aside, two important things that I have noticed with RWGPS TCX files:
1) The first time you load the course is always significantly slower than the subsequent times, so after transferring the course onto the Garmin (i.e. copy the TCX file into the NewFiles folder), I always open up the course. I also want to change the colour of the course so opening it up that first time is more of a necessity than a chore for me.
2) I find that the Garmin works with the course better if the maps match. For example, I have OSM Cycle maps loaded into my Garmin, so when I build the route in RWGPS I also make sure it is using OSM Cycle maps as I build the route. It is fine to switch to other maps for reference purposes (for example, I find the default Google map shows more landmarks and POIs than OSM), just as long as I switch back to OSM Cycle before plotting additional points along the route.
I have a 520 so I don't know how similar my experience will be with the 520+. That aside, two important things that I have noticed with RWGPS TCX files:
1) The first time you load the course is always significantly slower than the subsequent times, so after transferring the course onto the Garmin (i.e. copy the TCX file into the NewFiles folder), I always open up the course. I also want to change the colour of the course so opening it up that first time is more of a necessity than a chore for me.
2) I find that the Garmin works with the course better if the maps match. For example, I have OSM Cycle maps loaded into my Garmin, so when I build the route in RWGPS I also make sure it is using OSM Cycle maps as I build the route. It is fine to switch to other maps for reference purposes (for example, I find the default Google map shows more landmarks and POIs than OSM), just as long as I switch back to OSM Cycle before plotting additional points along the route.
03-14-19, 06:45 AM
#47
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Far beyond the pale horizon.
Posts: 14,259
Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4245 Post(s)
Liked 1,350 Times
in
936 Posts
2) I find that the Garmin works with the course better if the maps match. For example, I have OSM Cycle maps loaded into my Garmin, so when I build the route in RWGPS I also make sure it is using OSM Cycle maps as I build the route. It is fine to switch to other maps for reference purposes (for example, I find the default Google map shows more landmarks and POIs than OSM), just as long as I switch back to OSM Cycle before plotting additional points along the route.
The newer Garmins (like the 520+) come with (detailed) maps based on OSM and include the cycle paths (that are included on the OSM cycle maps). So, there's no need to use OSM maps to replace the OSM maps it already has.
If you need maps for regions not covered by the installed maps, use one of the sources of free OSM maps that are available (that is, don't buy maps).
Last edited by njkayaker; 03-14-19 at 06:53 AM.
03-14-19, 07:16 AM
#48
Senior Member
The 520 only displays maps (it doesn't matter what maps are installed as far as how it does navigation). The map installed on the 520 (not the plus) covers a lot of area but it does not have any detail (the 520 doesn't have much memory, which makes installing maps a pain).
The newer Garmins (like the 520+) come with (detailed) maps based on OSM and include the cycle paths (that are included on the OSM cycle maps). So, there's no need to use OSM maps to replace the OSM maps it already has.
If you need maps for regions not covered by the installed maps, use one of the sources of free OSM maps that are available (that is, don't buy maps).
The newer Garmins (like the 520+) come with (detailed) maps based on OSM and include the cycle paths (that are included on the OSM cycle maps). So, there's no need to use OSM maps to replace the OSM maps it already has.
If you need maps for regions not covered by the installed maps, use one of the sources of free OSM maps that are available (that is, don't buy maps).
(On the fancier routing GPSes, where the map DOES matter for navigation, it's a little more complicated: if you always use OSM both places, the auto-routing will never try to guide you off the road because the route and the roads line up perfectly, but if the OSM maps don't line up well with the actual road (which isn't uncommon around my area -- google maps tends to be much more accurate), it'll get a little weird because it thinks you've gone off-route when you haven't.)
03-14-19, 08:15 AM
#49
Kamen Rider
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: KL, MY
Posts: 1,071
Bikes: Fuji Transonic Elite, Marechal Soul Ultimate, Dahon Dash Altena
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 351 Post(s)
Liked 277 Times
in
164 Posts
Yeah. Also, anecdotally, the Garmin appears to read/process these better (faster?) than if the routes don't line up.
03-14-19, 08:31 AM
#50
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Far beyond the pale horizon.
Posts: 14,259
Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4245 Post(s)
Liked 1,350 Times
in
936 Posts
The person he replied to has a 520+ (not a 520).
It fine to install more detailed maps on the 520.
You don't need to install maps on the 520+ (it already comes with the OSM maps). The way he talked about installing maps might have lead the 520+ to do that.
if you always use OSM both places, the auto-routing will never try to guide you off the road because the route and the roads line up perfectly, but if the OSM maps don't line up well with the actual road (which isn't uncommon around my area -- google maps tends to be much more accurate), it'll get a little weird because it thinks you've gone off-route when you haven't.)
You should consider updating the OSM database.
Last edited by njkayaker; 03-14-19 at 08:35 AM.