Garmin Nuvi 500 & Transam GPS Points?

[RonT]

Can the ACA Transam GPS waypoints be loaded into the Garmin Nuvi 500 series?  I already have the ACA maps.  Does anyone have experience with this model on tour?  It is the only unit I see that has a "bicycle road" option. 

Are there recommendations on a more appropriate unit?  The handheld GPS units seem intended for off road use.  The bike specific units apear to be more for training and local use.

I have been through several GPS manufacturer web sites - but find myself uncertain...  Would appreciate any help.

Thanks,
RonT

[FredHiltz]

Can the ACA Transam GPS waypoints be loaded into the Garmin Nuvi 500 series?  I already have the ACA maps.  Does anyone have experience with this model on tour?  It is the only unit I see that has a "bicycle road" option. 

Are there recommendations on a more appropriate unit?  The handheld GPS units seem intended for off road use.  The bike specific units appear to be more for training and local use.

Hi Ron. Yes, the Nuvi 500 series can accept GPX files of waypoints, such as the ACA waypoints. It is an excellent automotive GPSR, good for casual or occasional handheld use. For bike touring, its "up to 8 hours" lithium battery means recharging every day or buying extra batteries at $40 each. It normally charges from an auto 12 VDC source. You would need the AC adapter from Garmin to charge from 120 VAC.

It comes preloaded with street maps and topo maps. These are not useful on a computer for preparing waypoints and routes. It is possible to enter routes on its touch screen, but painfully tedious.

Its limits of ten routes and 500 waypoints are about half of what the better receivers offer. This is important. Our transcontinental routes need a lot of each.

You got it right about the bike-specific units being designed for local training rides.

The hiking handhelds are actually very good for long tours. They do have bicycle routing, although that feature is over-rated IMO. No matter how its preferences are set, you are going to need a few intermediate via points to tell it which roads you want it to follow.

Many other models let you buy your choice of maps, either preloaded on an SD card or on DVD. Take the DVD, which works on your computer, and buy a blank SD card to fill from the computer.

Rather than repeat the many discussions of which works best, I'll refer you to several discussions linked in these:

http://www.adventurecycling.org/forums/index.php?topic=4473.0
http://www.adventurecycling.org/forums/index.php?topic=7185.0

In the Garmin line, the GPSMAP series and the Etrex Vista series seem the most popular.

Another excellent reference is http://gpsinformation.net/. Read the first three articles and combine the info about hiking and automotive units.

Please write back about specific questions that come up. Someone here will have faced them.

Fred

[RonT]

Fred,

  Very helpful reply - I do think I was moving in the wrong direction by using the "bike path" option as a descriminator.  I have not been able to find the etrex but the Garmin 62st and the and the Oregon 450 both seem to be excellent and appropriate units.  AA battery power, lots of memory, map options, optional bike mount, waterproof and sunlight readable screens.

   I think my preference is the Oregon 450 because of the larger, higher resolution "touch" screen.  I have been led to believe the touch screen is a better ("more intuitive") interface than the buttons.

   I think the 100K scale topo maps might be the way to go; along with the optional "Cityscape NT" streets with points of interest info.  The optional 24000 scale maps seem like they have the best info (not just the topo detail but I get the impression there is more trail, camps etc info(?)).  But they are prohibitively expensive for the full Transam (~$500 total).   And maybe all that topo info is not really needed for cycling(?).

   Looks like the 200 route memory capability (2000 waypoints) in these units might allow me to load the entire ACA Transam download (assuming one route per each of the ~175 ACA map panels)?

   These units, at ~$600 with options, are not cheap...  But they seem to have the necessary capability.  I don't need to rush into purchasing but unless I get a better way forward, suspect I will. 

   Comments are welcome.

Thanks,
Ron

[FredHiltz]

Hi Ron. I just added up the TA waypoints. 1632 mark points of interest and 1777 mark the cycling routes. Many of the latter define the route for non-mapping GPSRs, straight from point to point. You could delete perhaps half of them as unnecessary with a mapping GPSR that will follow the road from point to point.

The published routes contain no more than 30 waypoints each, the limit of many receivers and requiring two to eight routes to cover a map panel. These routes are not likely to fit your own daily rides. They are intended to help you identify the waypoints that mark the cycling route and also to be starting points for building your own routes.

Reloading waypoints and routes en route is not hard. See http://www.adventurecycling.org/forums/index.php?topic=7185.msg35316#msg35316.

Garmin still sells the Etrex line. It's the lowest cost mapping receiver that I'd consider suitable for cycle touring. I like the Etrex Vista HCx at $300 list. Authorized dealers sell it for less. The 62 series is certainly the latest and greatest, for those who are ready to pay for some nifty features.

I agree that the 100K topo maps are better for cycling. The 24K series are not only expensive but also huge. I don't know how much memory one would need for an XC ride. Note that both series come from the USGS maps of the 1960s - 1980s. The points of interest are old.

The map combo that I use on long rides is 100K Topo plus City Navigator for road routing.

I am waiting for someone to report on the touch screens for cycling. How well do they work in the rain? With gloves? With gloves in the rain? I can work the Garmin buttons with medium-weight gloves, although not with my big mittens. Also, several reviews (Google search Garmin Oregon Review) mention less visibility in some lighting conditions than the transflective screen used in the Etrex and GPSMap series. The Oregon does have more pixels, but does that make a better view? If you find some reports about these factors, please pass them on here.

Fred