Grasscatcher
-
Posts
1114 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Grasscatcher
-
-
@ Timpat.....Isn't that program DNRGPS from Minnesota DNR?
I use DNR Garmin,...... same thing.
Expert GPS by Topografix will also open / import data in shapefile format, then save in GPX format and send to your GPS.
-
Thrak, I wonder if your problem with the 78S could be coming from a setting that you have it on. I was out caching a few days ago with the 62S and decided I wanted to change the auto zoom from auto to off. After I did the gps became very unstable and sluggish. It wouldn't update the caches and several other problems. I first turned the gps off and back on several times but at first it would work fine than back to the unstable problems. I switched the zoom setting back to auto and it started working ok again. I know your gps should work with any setting, but this was a problem I was having.
@thrak,
I also have a 78S so, after reading your post, I did the compass calibration. Completed successfully the first time. I'm on v 5.00. So ??????
I agree with n4grt on possible cause. Might try switching active profile to another one that you (have) never use(d). If that is applicable in your case, then that profile should still have essentially "default" settings. Then try calibrating the compass.
If it calibrates when on the different profile (even try yet another) , then that would confirm that the problem is caused by "another setting". Which one....???? At that point, it would probably be backup and master reset time. Then, back to the original profile to test. Hopefully you won't have to go on a longer witch hunt to find a "problem causing" setting.
Good Luck
-
I carry a backup set of standard alkaline bats for "emergency replacement in the field"
I suggest you carry either Energizer "Advanced Lithium AA" or another pair of Eneloops for your replacement. Alkalines are not reliable.
10-4.
In a year an Eneloop will still have almost 80 % of its top charge.
The point I was making was that, for as many times as they have been used in the last several years, my "backups" could have been made of peanut butter! So, why buy expensive Lithium for "Non use"?
A GPS is supposed to be a "thinking person's tool". That means, start off with fully charged batteries, and test your "backups" before you start also. (whether they be Lithium, Eneloop, Alkaline, or reg Heavy Duty.
-
All you have to do is start a thread about "Best Batteries?" and you get 37000+ opinions.....
Here are actual FACTS....
Approx 6 years ago, I bought a total of 20 Sanyo Eneloop (2000 mah) batteries and a Maha C-9000 charger (4 slots).
These batteries power 4 GPSs, 1 digital handheld scanner, backup for 2 HAM handheld radios,and 1 digital camera. Some of the various units are used DAILY. I am NEVER without freshly charged bats on standby.
In my GPS case, I carry a backup set of standard alkaline bats for "emergency replacement in the field"......never happens..... Some "replacement" pairs have been carried for so long that all the printing on the OD has been worn off(from friction) but have never (yet)been placed in the unit.
How many batteries have I NOT bought over the last several years? ....A BUNCH !
How many times have I been caught with no fresh replacement batteries in the field? NEVER
Oh yeah, I still only have and use the ORIGINAL 20 Eneloops.
Not an endorsement for a particular product, just actual facts from actual use. YMMV
-
Look at your owners manual starting on page 27. Step by step directions.
However, it's easier to just save the whole track and then download it to MapSource, Basecamp, or other third party software and then edit out what you don't want.
Don't have your owners manual?, then just download it (free) from Garmin site.
-
I'd expect that on a bike, you're going fast enough that the track log should be fairly accurate. In fact, I often have the opposite problem where the track log is up to half a mile shorter than the trip odometer which makes me wonder if the track distance is calculated in two dimensions while the trip odometer is calculated in 3 (Oregon 450). My biggest pet peeve is that the track still logs when I'm not moving, and that adds a bunch of extra distance as my estimated location jumps around within the error interval. I like that the new Oregon 600 series lets you easily turn tracking on and off, but I still wish that there was an option to stop tracking when the GPS isn't actually moving. The trip computer can detect this (stopped time vs. moving time), why can't the tracking do it also?
Explanations(IMO) in general order....
Track shorter...yes because Odometer is sampled at 1/sec and anything other for track logging will be shorter. I'm not sure if odometer sample data is reported in 3D or not. I have other software that definitely reports in 3D for track distance and, of course, it is always longer. Also, any roughness in track logging or elevation spikes result in added length.
Logging while stopped.....yes, because you have instructed it to log a trackpoint every X time or X dist....period. It does exactly that, "wherever" it "thinks" it is at that instant.
Change tracklogging to "distance" to reduce random points while stopped. ....but that will also cause different distance variations. Also there are 3rd party softwares that will easily "filter" track files to (mostly) eliminate those "birdnests" of points.
The new Montana also easily turns track logging off and on with a one button shortcut.
I agree, if the trip computer can detect "stopped", then the track logging interval could be internally adjusted accordingly. It would sure save a lot of track editing.
-
@ 13371-Only on older models prior to Oregon (like 60,76,older e-trex) was there any data lost when you saved. On Montanas, Oregons, Dakotas,ETrex now complete data is saved, nothing is lost. It used to be that saved tracks were different than "active log" or current track. Not true now.
@ Yeah, but you still have to "put up with" DeLorme.........HA !
Under those ideal conditions even a "chalk and string" method will produce acceptable results. However when you get into real world conditions like at hiking speeds on a 1.88 mile (3.76 M RT) uphill hike with 20 hairpin turns and nearby rock faces for just a little added multipath effect, things get somewhat different. The more points logged, the more chances for error and it always gets added in to make track excessively long.
Prove it to yourself. On an intricate trail, carry multiple units at the same time and have one set to log at 1/sec and vary the others. Do the same hike again except , change which unit logs at 1/sec, do it again ........and you'll find that the 1/sec unit (whichever) will always log the longest distance and quite often will be longer than "actual."
-
I have also noticed a difference in total distance and ascent between the trip computer on my Montana and what Garmin Connection shows when i upload the track. Usually not enough to worry about but did think it strange. The bad part is the Website always seems to decrease both of them.
That is to be expected. The trip Odometer samples at 1/sec. Even if your track log interval is also 1/sec, when track distance is displayed by Basecamp,Garmin Connect,etc, filtering tries to take out errors and anything removed shortens the track.
Many people think that logging tracks at an interval of 1/sec is the "only" and most accurate way.
WRONG ! Sometimes it may be the most accurate interval to "describe" the actual physical shape of the path traveled on the ground, but at the same time it nearly ALWAYS overstates the length and elevation (changes). (ascent/descent)
-
@13371...it would be interesting to see the track profile data as plotted by different softwares.
Do you have any "fitness sensors" like heart rate,cadence,etc? If so then you probably have Garmin Connect.See how it plots with that.
Then there's also Garmin Training Center, BaseCamp, and other free programs.
I have found that each will display the exact same data differently.......probably due to different filtering.
...or even export the track data in csv format into Excel and plot it there with no filtering.
By the way, Neat bike!
Remember the old timey chain guards on fat tire bikes? It would tale ONE HUNK of sheet metal to build one for that one! HA !
-
"said 41 mph" ?
Was that on trip odometer page? If so, then the problem probably was / is the difference in the trackpoint logging interval.
Look at the speed data for individual trackpoints and see if there are any that show the 41 mph.
Maybe the "Max MPH" is an average over a short period of points and you possibly didn't maintain the 41 for long enough.
or....maybe the speed "pucker factor" kicked in and shut the blood supply to your eyes off, causing them to lie to you......(only kidding)
-
I guess I'll do it this way it works but is slow.
Using GPSVisualizer ...
With utility, convert my .gpx to .txt file on my desktop
open the .txt file with Excel, make necessary elevation edits, remove temp column data, re-save (keeping .txt format)
Convert the .txt file to a .gpx file with utility
Save .gpx file from web into a different folder on my PC
Done
And at that point you will have a totally INACCURATE dataset that has absolutely NO relationship to reality......but you will be satisfied and happy, and of course, that is the most important thing.
Enjoy your exercise in futility.....
-
This is what i get with my garmin. The profile is fine, and I understand there may some 'errors' but overall the device logs beautifully smooth and I'm OK with the results but the sign at the top of trout Creek says 9,487 feet. I use WAAS and I've learned that the altimeter needs to be bypassed when operating at significantly fast elevation changes (above 4.5%/60 MPH) or the results will be wildy off. I'd still like to modify all the points to get me to an image that reflects 9487. On balance the elevation rise is more or less accurate and the dips and such are more or less accurate. I'm not trying to go to the mars with this project, i simply want to edit my recorded data, put it into a profiler, and get an end result that matches with the real world summit sign. I've messed around with TrackProfiler but it doesn't want to display anything in feet/miles even though I've modified the option setting, and when I attempt a global elevation change, it doesn't seem to do anything.
NO.....that chart is NOT what you get with your Garmin.....
That is what you get with your Garmin data when plotted with "whatever" software that has however many unknown filters to manipulate the data .
"..... and when I attempt a global elevation change, it doesn't seem to do anything.".... See, even the software knows that you shouldn't do that!
-
My point was,.... and still is....., that you would have more accurate overall data if you only corrected/ changed the very few points at the actual summit, and not adjust the whole data set by a fixed uniform amount. A "fixed amount" adjustment would almost guarantee greater inaccuracy.
-
@Wildmidwest,
Did your unit repeat "with itself" on the multiple trips? If so, why would you doubt that it is accurate?
Be sure that your tracks don't have any long straight gaps or "zig/zags" in them like where the unit might have lost sat connection then regained signal, or may have been affected by multipath error, etc.
If not, believe your unit's data until it is proven incorrect otherwise.
Sometimes trails get moved, sometimes maps are incorrect. USGS topo map making tolerance is +/- 40ft.
I've got as high as 13-20 "copies" of tracks on a specific trail and, when displayed together they overlay each other very favorably.However, in places, none are "on the trail" as shown on the official map or topo map. My data is correct....the maps are wrong.
-
.....and then when you get through editing your data, you'll have only one point in the whole file that you "Know" is correct and all the rest will then be questionable. I would bet that many will actually be off more than the 20 ft "correction" you just made.
And really, you don't "Know" that the one "summit" point is correct, do you? Is it a Benchmark with "adjusted elevation"? Did you calibrate your unit just before you started?
There is a summit near me that all the topo maps and highway signs say is 13383 ft, yet at the very top of the summit there is an official Benchmark that says 13420 ft. Which is correct?
Also think of this....20 ft is easily within the tolerance range of what you should expect from your GPS.
-
Go onto the 62/78 Wiki and ask about using the "Stopwatch" function in conjunction with track logging.
If you're looking for accurate data, then you need to know up front that "elevation" is the Least accurate axis of the GPS, and also ,so many things affect the accuracy of the altimeter data that it becomes only useful for relative comparison.
-
Not only is Post #5 stupid, it's dangerous.......and I can't believe that a Moderator hasn't already removed it.
-
Try this, in "Setup" go to "Heading", and under "Compass" turn it Off.
Now your Dakota should work exactly like your Etrex.
As long as you are moving, (just like your Etrex) it should point to your destination.
Getting the magnetic compass "out of the picture" should make it easier to understand.
Later you can turn it back on and calibrate it and see how you unit works differently. Really, about the only difference is that it should still point toward the destination even while standing still. (but standing still you'll never get there anyway)
Problem is probably due to where and/or how you are holding it and possibly some magnetic interference.
Just turn the compass off and see if the pointer doesn't lead you right to the destination just like your old one.
-
Yeah but, but, but that mean ole Garmin company still needs to be strung up by their heels 'cause it's been 13 days since they last updated the Montana. (V 5.0)
-
Anyone ever notice that "Track Up" people are generally so "Directionally Challenged" that they need more help than a GPS can give them?
"Track Up" people never know what direction they are going, they just want to find something that agrees with them.....ANYTHING !
When "Track Up" people look at a paper map, they find that they don't even agree with themselves!
Whatever works for you.......
-
@ mineral 2,
You are "preaching to the choir" here.....and you're definitely NOT suppose to use logic or common sense ! HA !
I think that some posters would only be happy if they could send their GPS out to find caches on it's own and have it bring back a list of what it found......
No, really, the OP needed to enter a bearing into his GPS that was given to him in decimal degrees.
For whatever reason I don't have a clue. I don't even care. Maybe it was for some special project where someone thought it was of infinite importance and required.
In another forum he was led to believe that it couldn't be done. I disagreed and told him how.
-
(100's of miles)?????? NOT HARDLY!
Calculate the error in feet in just over "one" mile. (or less).
And around here you've got whiners that complain about their GPS being "useless" if it can't "hold their hand" and "lead" them to within less than 10 ft of a cache.
-
@kurchian,
Go back over to the Oregon wiki and read the answer there.
-
All of you are arguing semantics....
Both programs are worth exactly what you paid for them. Take yours back and get your money back if you don't like'em.
Oregon 450t Distance from a waypoint
in GPS technology and devices
Posted · Edited by Grasscatcher
@Walts Hunting
"Your way" and the other one you referred to would work "OK" but would be straight the line distance.What if the path is a zig zag or really knarly set of switchbacks?.....Not so good....
That may, or may not, be accurate enough. That would be solely dependent on the configuration of the path.
Doing it with the stopwatch should be the "as traveled" distance would be more accurate, or just as accurate, consistently independent of path traveled.