Trumper

KK, sorry for the fuss. It's here: http://www.stanford.edu/~twiggins/benchmark/mark.html That's about a mile north of Interstate 40, just east of the Painted Desert, in Arizona on really old Route 66. There's an old trading post out there and a concrete bridge over the Dead River. Really cool place. Anyway, sorry if I caused some fuss here--I just found the benchmark way out there and thought it was "interesting"--guess not. Cheers, Tom

Just saw the post above: Not in AZ either.... Should I just post where this is and be done with it? Sorry.... Edit: whoops, my bad. It *is* in AZ. Here's some pix of where it's located: http://www.stanford.edu/~twiggins/benchmark/mark.html

Howdy. KK, I get the message about "not interesting." But that's exactly what I said in my first post: "I'm not a benchmarker--I'm a geocacher. I happened across this benchmark, took a picture, and thought it might be fun for someone to figure out where it is...." That's all; sorry if that's not something you appreciate; I was just trying to give you a pic of something I found.... For what it's worth, it's not in NV either. So apparently, it's not as easy as some folks think it is!

OK, the first time he posted, he didn't list where he thought it was located (that's why his first post had an edit). And that's why I responded that the puzzle wasn't "solved." He went back and added that location later.... Now he's posted where he thinks it is located: Wrong. Even the state is incorrect. So the puzzle remains: where is it located?

Howdy. I didn't say it had something to do with geocaches.... I just posted the pic in case someone wanted to suss where it is located... So I don't think the puzzle is solved; I just asked where is it? Anyway, I'll post the location and co-ords later....

I think it varies by the volunteer assigned to "approve" a particular cache. Some are Speed Gonzalez, some are 3-Toed Sloths. Luck of the draw....

Howdy. "I don't do benchmarks." I was out taking some pictures in a really old, deserted part of an abandoned US road. I found this off the roadway: http://www.stanford.edu/~twiggins/benchmark/benchmark.jpg I don't know if that's "interesting" to you benchmark folks or not, but I thought I'd post it here in case anyone wanted a look...and wants to puzzle out exactly where this is located.... I'll post the answer and pix of the area in a few days. Good luck! Edit: I'm a geocacher, not a benchmarker, so I don't know if this is possible...just thought someone might like a challenge....

Seems to be an even split from folks who find this disappointing and those who like it (cause their kids like it). I would be happy with a blend: some small rubber toys and then a mix of other things. But I posted cause I seem to find lots that have 90% cheapo, crusty rubber animal thingies. I'm not "in it for the swag," I'm just wondering why these things predominate? I *always* try to upgrade. The last one I did last weekend, I took a rubber keychain (for future placement), and left a ziploc baggie full of 50 state quarters for swapping. I tend to leave yo-yos, jacks (ball and those jack thingies), stickers (in a baggie--ruined if wet), or something like that when it's obviously a "kids" stash full of rubber thingies.... Anyway, onward! I think the best thing for me to do would be to take a few rubber thingies and replace 'em with (what I think is more) interesting things for kids. That should help with the population (out of) control I'm talking about....

Ahoy. I'm new, but I think the most discouraging thing I'm finding about geocaching is the huge number of caches filled with cheap, rubber animal things. It seems every cache I find has (maybe) an interesting item or two, then about half a dozen rubber animals or dinosaurs that look like they cost about 2 cents. Some are *all* cheapo rubber things and assorted junk. What's the deal with this? Is it fashionable to leave those things? Does someone sell big bags of 'em for a dollar or something? I always try to leave something decent, interesting, or localized. I guess some don't, and that's OK, but sheesh there's just too much pure junk! OK, rant off.

Ahoy. I'll be in Zion, Bryce, and the Grand Canyon for a couple of weeks starting in late May. I'd love to put the Nat'l Park Topo on, but I just don't have $90+ for something I'll use for a few days (even if I could afford $90--student ya know). Anyone selling it used? And, would we have to go through all that "authentication/code/unlock" stuff? Would that be a problem? Thanks, Tom vader@deathstar.stanford.edu

Ahoy. I will be taking a trip to some national parks in about two weeks. I have the route, wp, and other info ready to go. I was considering buying the Topo West for National Parks. Then I wondered: can you download both to the Quest at the same time? That is, how would I switch from looking at, say, the interstate...and want to see the Grand Canyon topo? Can it be done? Advice appreciated.... Note: Once I leave, I won't have a laptop or any way to reload or switch maps and download those....

Wow, did they get that wrong! --buried in the ground --all the caches were "riddles" --coordinates kept in xx.xx format... phew, did they blow it! They always do though: I work in radio and TV and just about every time they get that totally wrong too. My favorite is the guy moving a TV switcher bank handle in a radio station to change audio! Hahaha. This show was written a "script writer" who did shoddy research. That's pretty common....

Just saw other thread...nevermind! Sorry....please delete.

I assume you are asking because you want to say it and someone else will be writing it down or entering them into a device/program. So for your example: 096 (degrees)51.087W I'd say, "NinetySix Dot FiftyOne Dot ZeroEightySeven breaking it out to individual numbers works too (I prefer this): "Nine Six Dot Five One Dot Zero Eight Seven I leave off the N/W, Lat/Lon also cause those are assumed. *IF* it was something unusual, then I'd specify. Otherwise, it's assumed. I put the "Dot" in there because that's what you write/enter AND it helps clarify where one section ends and another begins. YMMV

Quote Hemlock: Also I think one of your problems is that you are adding too many points to your route and not letting MapSource do the work for you. For instance, instead of a route from SF-->Topock Exit-->Old 66 Byway Turnout-->Sitgreaves Pass-->Okla City just do SF-->Sitgreaves Pass-->Okla City for example. MapSource (and your GPS) will know to turn off at Topock Exit. Ah, good point. I could have done that in this case. There are other side-trips though where I'll still have a problem. E.g., If I take a side-trip to the painted desert, meteor crater, or an old section that winds out to a deserted building then back to the same exit where I left I-40, I wonder what it will do. Instead of adding side-trips one at a time (and all the waypoints on that side-trip), I'll just add one. Then when the route is right, I'll go back and add the additional waypoints I want for the "attractions" on those side-trips. I'll try the "add above" trick when inserting waypoints too. This is new to me and it seems to be like most software applications: a pain in the *ss to setup, but great to use after you've done all the prep work.... Thanks.

Howdy. Yep, I already did that. It's a minor pain because when I "add waypoints" to the route, it adds them alphabetically, not in the order I added them. So I have to add a group at a time, then go to properties, then move them around to the correct order. But when I clicked the recalculate button, it still draws a map like the one above; it leaves the loop I don't want (I-40) there even though it does draw the new route. Maybe I should be making these side-trips "Via" points instead of "Waypoints" ???

Howdy Here's a screenshot of my first attempt to make a route with Mapsource for my upcoming trip with the Garmin Quest. I originally made the route as just SF to Okla City. Then I thought I'd go in and add the waypoints for the side-trips I wanted to take. So that screenshot shows me leaving I-40 at Topock, going on old Route 66 through Oatman, then rejoining I-40 at Kingman. But when I do a "recalculate route," it does indeed take my new route, but it leaves the old route via I-40 there. Why? What's gonna happen when I get there in the car? Will it start assuming I'm off-route and trying to get me back to I-40? I saved, quit, then re-opened the route thinking maybe the "recalculate" feature didn't "erase" the old route or something. Nope, it's still there. So the question is: How should I do side-trip routes like this so that it draws the route the way I want to go and it *erases* the part where the original route (I-40) used to be? Almost all of my side-trips are little loops like this off of I-40 at some point then re-joining I-40 later. Thanks for any advice.... Oh, and should the list of waypoints be *alphabetical* over in the left column? That's pretty useless really--it should be in order not jumbled according to the alphabet!

Correct: .tpo files are NG files. However, Mapsource cannot import them. I have .tpo waypoint files, so these are indeed from a newer version. GPSBabel does not (and states so) work with this file. I might be lacking the bizarre UNIX-like skills to run Babel correctly though. But yeah, if I could just get these into Mapsource, then I could d/l them to the GPSr. Well, my NG Topo is about 2 years old. I don't plan on upgrading it--ever--now that I have MapSource and a GPSr. Not sure what the ability to import .tpg files has to do with this.... NG Topo has an export function, and that even has a "Garmin Waypoint+" format listed to export. But that saves the waypoints as a text (.txt) file and MapSource won't recognice that at all--not even in "Import" function. If I cheat it by renaming the tag to .wpt, it still can't recognize the file and gives an error message. So I'm still stuck. I tried various programs, but nothing out there seems to work getting .tpo into the .wpt file format that MapSource wants. Any ideas? Thanks.

Howdies. I have some waypoint files for old Route 66. They mark some interesting things on the old highway. They were produced with National Geographic Topo and are in .tpo format. I have a Garmin Quest and when I attempt to import files using MapSource, I see that it wants files in .wpt for waypoint files (there is no "Import" function for .tpo files). I checked GPSBabel, but they specifically state it won't work with my Quest (grrr). I tried a search, but couldn't come up with a similar issue elsewhere here. Does anyone have any idea how I might get these .tpo waypoint files imported to Mapsource? I'd really like to have these waypoints and the thought of entering 1,000+ waypoints by hand is Thanks, Tom

Thanks again for all the thoughts and advice. I pulled the trigger and ordered the Quest. My reasoning was that I'd use the unit most of the time for the cross-country trips and then getting to caches (not wandering around or hiking for hours once I get to the caches...). I really liked the 60 and 76 series, but the Quest seemed to be really in tune to use in the auto and for my primary use. I don't think it will be a big issue taking it out and wandering around a bit finding caches (or other stuff); leaving a unit like that stuck right on your windshield would just be an invitation to a smash and grab artist anyway (so it will always get disconnected when I park). Right. So I'm busy with a fairly interesting project now. I have a very extensive guide to Route 66 that has text about the old sections of road that goes with at Atlas of printed Topo maps that have corresponding guide numbers (like "A15 for exit 227 in Arizona"). But I found a downloadable set of GPS waypoints that go with those guide numbers; unfortunately, they are in the same format (Nat's Geographic Topo) used to print the maps. So since the Garmin isn't gonna accept the Nat'l Geo maps, I just printed the waypoint data out. Then I write the waypoint numbers on the guide book. If I want to track/view say, the Painted Desert in Arizona, I look in the guidebook, see the GPS co-ords, then look at the Quest to see where it is, distance, etc. Does anyone know if there is a way to get the Nat'l Geographic waypoint data into the Quest or maps that come with it? That would be cool--otherwise, I'd have to do it by hand...ugh! Anyway, thanks again! I'm pumped waiting for the big brown present truck.... Tom

OK, here's a comparison of the maps.yahoo.com and Garmin CitySelect for old Route 66 just outside Ash Fork, AZ. First, the Garmin screenie: and here's the Yahoo maps screenie: Interesting that both are "NavTeq," but have different detail.... No, I don't have a laptop or I'd be in much better shape! Does anyone know if the Quest will autoroute on the basemaps? How about the 60cs? GPS V? I'm leaving in about 10 days so I hafta pull the trigger on one of these soon....

Well, my decision process is narrowing. Since I will use it mainly in the car--and take those long SF to OKC trips twice a year, I'm leaning towards the Quest or GPS V. I can't get both in my hand to evaluate--and that probably wouldn't help much anyway since I am a clueless newb. But I *can* download both manuals and get a pretty good feel from the screenshots there. And man, does that Quest look nice. So it's gonna come down to, do I want the basics and something I might have to fiddle with and memory limitations OR just suck it up and spend the $500 and get the Quest? I'm leaning towards the latter.... BTW, I gave a bad road note earlier. Old Route 66 goes from Kingman, AZ to just west of Ash Fork, AZ (not Williams as I stated). If I look at that location using maps.yahoo.com, it shows the Crookton road cut-off, "Historic Route 66," old railroad beds, etc. Not bad. Wondering if the City Select will do that? I'll have to check.... So many folks on here rave about the 60cs I just dunno...I'm thinking the Quest might be better suited to driving around and still let me geocache; as long as I'm not hiking around in the woods or out in the rain or something (and I have no plans for that). So am I clear thinking the Quest is a better choice for me? Thanks again for letting me spew all this stuff....

Bummer. I guess you are saying that I *can't* make a "swath map" that just covers the section of I-40 from LA to OKC then? Have to load the entire states? If the Quest isn't so hot for geo (and you raise valid points), then I'd skip that in favor of the 60cs. After all, I only make the LA--OKC drive 2x a year. The rest of the time it would be local jaunts for geocaching...and general goofing around. That GPS V is looking better and better...I'm looking at the PDF manual right now and just don't know (mainly the color looks *so* much better!). It appears to be pretty good for autorouting and the customizable features make it great. Hmmm, still pondering....

Great thoughts so far: It appears that the 60cs versus the Quest is a close call. The 60cs + maps + automount is just about the same (maybe a little more) than the quest. Since I think the primary use would be driving around *getting* to various places--and then maybe a little bit of walking around once there--that gives the Quest the nod. BUT (that's a big but--haha), someone pointed out that the GPS V has autorouting. It is indeed discounted right now--so I could get that with the CitySelect included and add a bead bag mount for about 1/2 the price of the Quest/60cs. Yikes! 1/2 price? Now I'm wondering if I could live with the grey scale display on the GPS V. And the big question is, would I be able to make a map that's 19mb to fit on there that would just cover Interstate 40 (50 miles either side) from Los Angeles to Oklahoma City. I don't think CA, AZ, NM, TX, OK entire states would fit. Or can you just add states like that from City Select. Man, 1/2 price...$250 versus $500. That's a really difficult choice (even though I love the pix of the coutours and routes in color...). I guess the question above about map sizes fitting will help me decide. Obviously, I think any of those would be fine for geocaching (that doesn't involve 2+ hours out of the car hiking around--which I don't plan on doing! Lazy me....

Howdy. I'm about to take the plunge. I'll try to list all of my considerations so this might help with the usual newbie "which unit" question. I drive from San Francisco to Oklahoma City twice a year (to visit my dad). When I drive, I like to take old Route 66 on some of the backroads quite often. So I have various maps and guidebooks. A few of those have GPS waypoints listed for hard to find sections of old road, points of interest, etc. I'd also like to get into geocaching; sounds like fun! I think I'd like it. So the things I need in a receiver are: autorouting. I'd really like to have that so I don't have to constantly check/orient in the car. Good maps. I don't have any idea if the maps available will show the older Route 66 roads I'm interested. Example: a big stretch (about 150 miles) goes from Williams, AZ to Kingman, AZ. I need decent detail there and I don't think the basemap in most units will show what I need (or will it?). Enough memory to hold maps for the route from San Francisco to Okla City. I don' know if I have to load entire states or if I can just add the areas (basically 50 miles either side of I-40 from CA to OK...or how much memory that would require. I really have no clue here.... I don't care about tree cover or hiking out in wilderness areas; no plans to do that. Main use would be car then carrying for geocaching. I'd need the unit, decent maps for my drives, and then whatever is necessary for local area geocaching. Garmin 60cs. Looks great, but by the time I get the unit, add maps, and a car holder/cord, it's super pricey (approaching $500). Magellan Gold. Seems OK. Does it autoroute? Not sure what final price would be after unit, maps, car holder/power accessories. Is a Magellan color (which one) gonna be better for me? How does the price compare to the 60cs? Garmin Legend C. I don't think this has the features I need...sigh. So am I gonna hafta spring for the big 60cs? That's just a nutzo amount of cash...but if that's the only unit that's gonna do what I want, so be it. Advice appreciated and thanks....