SergZak

I know the answer but I'm NOT willing to share it!!! Just kidding... key sequence: 1. hit FIND key 2. highlight WAYPOINTS then press ENTER 3. select BY NAME and press ENTER 4. scroll throught the alphabet and highlight OK and press ENTER 5. hit the MENU key 6. select DELETE ALL and press ENTER That be it...happy deleting!

I'd like to add that if you enable WAAS for the first time on your unit and it has not yet found satellites 35 and 47 ,it will continue to cycle (search) through satellites 33 and over (I forget the highest sat #). If it cannot see them/find them because of them being blocked or other reasons, having WAAS enabled will really slow your unit down while it continuously searches for them. In this case, it's best to simply disable WAAS.

quote:Originally posted by rickrob:Do you like WAAS or not? I have not used it. Please tell me if it works Thanks It all depends on where you are and how clear the unit's view is to the horizon. WAAS has not really helped in my case, in fact it decreases my accuracy and has been consistent in this respect on all my WAAS units (GPS V, eTrex Vista, GPSMAP 76S, MAP 330, Meridian Gold). I have also found that screen redraws with WAAS enabled are slower. I'm in the Los Angeles area (Whittier) and about the only time I've seen WAAS do any good was down at the beach. I expect it would work very well on the water in a boat which is geared more towards WAAS's intended purpose. Since LA is mountainous/hilly, I simply disable it and don't really think about it.

quote:Originally posted by zjdeere:Any idea how the 76 compares in size with the Garmin III? Tiny sounds good, but I would not want to get a unit with less reception than my current GPS. By the way, I got the quad helix name from the Garmin site... Comparing my GPSMAP 76S to my GPS V (same case size as the GPS III), the MAP 76S is about 1 1/4" longer and 5/8" wider...but the MAP 76S is of course thinner (the GPS V is triangular in it's depth proportion). so Quad Helix=Quadrifilar...we learn something new every day...

quote:Originally posted by zjdeere:Any idea how the 76 compares in size with the Garmin III? Tiny sounds good, but I would not want to get a unit with less reception than my current GPS. By the way, I got the quad helix name from the Garmin site... Comparing my GPSMAP 76S to my GPS V (same case size as the GPS III), the MAP 76S is about 1 1/4" longer and 5/8" wider...but the MAP 76S is of course thinner (the GPS V is triangular in it's depth proportion). so Quad Helix=Quadrifilar...we learn something new every day...

quote:Originally posted by zjdeere: Hello, I currently have a Garmin III that I have for years. I like the unit, but would like to upgrade. I am considering the GPS76 Map or the Etrex Vista. I think I would like to stick with Garmin due to the fact I'm familiar with the operating system. A few questions. What the heck is this "quad helix antenna" and how much difference does it make? Next question, which unit would you purchase... Thanks in advance! "Quad helix" is Magellan's name for the antenna in their GPS units. Garmin's similar antenna design is called a "quadrifilar" but I believe both are pretty much the same type of antenna. The Vista has a "patch" antenna. The quadrifilar is known to have better sensitivity/reception than the eTrex(Vista) line, especially in heavy tree cover. The Vista's antenna is best at being held horizontal (optimal when homing in on the cache) to the ground while the GPSMAP 76(S) is best at being held vertically (not so optimal but still very usable). I have the Vista and this past weekend purchased a GPSMAP 76S (from West Marine in Newport Beach, CA). I like the size of the Vista (tiny)...the GPSMAP 76(S) is huge compared to the Vista. Also be aware that the GPSMAP 76 (not the S version) has only 8mb for map data while the Vista and the GPSMAP 76S both have 24mb. The GPSMAP 76(S)'s tide table feature is also very nice. They are both outstanding units but if you need the greater antenna sensitivity, stick with the GPSMAP 76(S). [This message was edited by SergZak on June 04, 2002 at 08:05 PM.]

If you haven't yet, download & install the latest version of MapSource (v4.08) and firmware v2.04 for the GPS V from the Garmin website. When you run MapSource, make sure autorouting data is being tranferred along with the map data...click on edit/preferences then select the "transfer" tab and UNcheck the "reduce mapsize" check box. If this box is checked, autorouting data won't be transferred along with the map data. Note that uploading the autorouting data along with the map data uses more of the GPS V's RAM so you won't be able to upload as much map data as you could with autorouting disabled. Both City Select and MetroGuide USA support autorouting with the GPS V. Roads & Recreation and US Topo do not.

1. GP Battery 1800mAh NiMH 2. Monster Power 1800mAh NiMH

MetroGuide 4.01 comes on two CD's. The GPS V will autoroute using MetroGuide but be aware that some road restrictions (like one-way streets and speed limits) are not available in MetroGuide. This shouldn't be too big of a problem if you don't have many one-way streets in your area.

v2.04 has been installed on my GPS V since the day it was released. I've seen no problems or any other abnormalities. Taking a little road trip from Los Angeles to San Diego this weekend and the GPS V will be going along with me. (along with a beautiful blonde. )

v2.04 has been installed on my GPS V since the day it was released. I've seen no problems or any other abnormalities. Taking a little road trip from Los Angeles to San Diego this weekend and the GPS V will be going along with me. (along with a beautiful blonde. )

I forgot to mention the quality of the GPS V's backlighting...it's superb. It looks nothing like any of the other GPS's that use electro-luminescent (EL) backlighting which looks yellowish and muddy. The GPS V's backlighting is a very nice crystal clear light-blue with no muddy yellowish cast. The webpage says "high contrast FSTN with bright backlighting". The GPS V does not emit any type of high frequency "whine" which is associated with EL backlighting so this tells me that the backlight is different. Whatever it is, it's as much as a pleasure to use at night as it is in the daytime

I forgot to mention the quality of the GPS V's backlighting...it's superb. It looks nothing like any of the other GPS's that use electro-luminescent (EL) backlighting which looks yellowish and muddy. The GPS V's backlighting is a very nice crystal clear light-blue with no muddy yellowish cast. The webpage says "high contrast FSTN with bright backlighting". The GPS V does not emit any type of high frequency "whine" which is associated with EL backlighting so this tells me that the backlight is different. Whatever it is, it's as much as a pleasure to use at night as it is in the daytime

quote:Originally posted by The Artful Dodger: I am having second thoughts about buying the GPS V. I think mainly due to the screen size. The V looks tiny compared to the Map76 and I think eye strain might be forthcoming if I use the V. Perhaps the auto-routing mishaps the other cacher experienced can be overcome. I've used an eMap for over a year...the screen is a bit larger (and of poorer resolution) than the GPS V that I've upgraded to. This reduction in screen size did not bother me in the least bit. The autorouting feature in my opinion is simply awesome...I've never been guided the "wrong way". This may happen though if you are using MetroGuide instead of CitySelect since MetroGuide maps do not contain certain road info like one-way streets and street speed limit data. About the only drawback I've seen with the GPS V is the fixed 19mb map memory. If the GPS V used Garmin data cards (or dare I say SD cards....shame on Garmin for keeping these things proprietary), this would be about the closest unit to perfect I've used. The other thing that goes along with the lack of data card use (of course using the USB data card programmer) is the time it takes to download the map data to the unit...it's not incredibly long (about 35 minutes or so for 19mb) but it's still annoying if you live in a highly populated area like Los Angeles like I do. Venturing out to San Diego requires reloading map data chopping most of LA out of the data set. I for one am very happy with the GPS V.

quote:Originally posted by The Artful Dodger: I am having second thoughts about buying the GPS V. I think mainly due to the screen size. The V looks tiny compared to the Map76 and I think eye strain might be forthcoming if I use the V. Perhaps the auto-routing mishaps the other cacher experienced can be overcome. I've used an eMap for over a year...the screen is a bit larger (and of poorer resolution) than the GPS V that I've upgraded to. This reduction in screen size did not bother me in the least bit. The autorouting feature in my opinion is simply awesome...I've never been guided the "wrong way". This may happen though if you are using MetroGuide instead of CitySelect since MetroGuide maps do not contain certain road info like one-way streets and street speed limit data. About the only drawback I've seen with the GPS V is the fixed 19mb map memory. If the GPS V used Garmin data cards (or dare I say SD cards....shame on Garmin for keeping these things proprietary), this would be about the closest unit to perfect I've used. The other thing that goes along with the lack of data card use (of course using the USB data card programmer) is the time it takes to download the map data to the unit...it's not incredibly long (about 35 minutes or so for 19mb) but it's still annoying if you live in a highly populated area like Los Angeles like I do. Venturing out to San Diego requires reloading map data chopping most of LA out of the data set. I for one am very happy with the GPS V.

quote:I have Mapsource 4.06. Am I understanding you correctly that 4.07 will convert my track data from My Vista to a graph on the computer? Alan Starting with v4.07, MapSource will generate a vertical track profile from your tracklogs as long as the elevation data is there. MapSource is up to v4.08 as of today. http://www.garmin.com/support/download.html

quote:Originally posted by harrkev: I would get a USB MMC/SD card reader/writer. They can be had for $20 or under. Transfer of a 120MB map takes around 5 minutes. I have and use an SD card reader/writer. My problem was that uploading *firmware/basemap* via serial port (I use the SD card reader/writer for detail maps) was taking forever. This was traced to the Pfranc USB-serial converter as I mentioned in my solution above. Thanks for the replies guys.

The problem turns out to be the Pfranc USB-serial converter I was using: (http://www.pfranc.com/usb/usb.shtml) For some strange reason, this converter is dog-slow with my Magellan units (MAP 330, Meridian Gold) but works just fine and dandy with my Garmin units. I used my Belkin USB-serial converter and upload speeds to my Magellan units are normal. BTW, I have been using the latest drivers with the Pfranc converter. This unit (along with the Belkin) was used on a Compaq notebook running WinME.

I have a Meridian Gold that for some reason transfers basemap and firmware data very slowly. If I upload detail map data from MapSend Streets to the SD card via the com port, the speed seems to be about right...a 1 meg detail map takes about 2m 30s to upload. Uploading the 1.03 14 meg basemap takes literally hours (3+ hours at least) trickling data when it should be taking about 40 minutes. Updating the firmware is equally slow. The only time I see normal speed is when uploading detail maps from MapSend to the SD card (which I pretty much never do since I have an SD card reader). Com ports check out fine since I see 115,200 baud data transfer when uploading maps to my Garmin units. I've tried two different PC's (my main desktop and my laptop using a USB to serial adapter). Any ideas on setting up the Meridian's baud rates and the PC's so they will communicate more reasonably? Maybe the prolem lies within "Magup.exe"? Are any of you other users seeing this same sluggish data transfer when doing basemap/firmware updates? Problem solved (sort of...see below) [This message was edited by SergZak on May 13, 2002 at 08:34 PM.]

quote:Originally posted by Jolly B Good: I've been holding up upgrading my firmware til the kinks are out. But I have a question. According to the GPSV manual pushing the rocker button left or right while viewing a long list of POI or Waypoints is supposed to jump up or down the list by one full page/screen. But this didn'nt work with 2.02. I was wondering if Garmin fixed the problem in 2.03 or 2.04. I tried this just now and can confirm that it has not been fixed in 2.04 (don't know about 2.03 though). All you get when pressing the rocker left/right when viewing a large list of waypoints/POIs is a quick double beep.

quote:Originally posted by Jolly B Good: I've been holding up upgrading my firmware til the kinks are out. But I have a question. According to the GPSV manual pushing the rocker button left or right while viewing a long list of POI or Waypoints is supposed to jump up or down the list by one full page/screen. But this didn'nt work with 2.02. I was wondering if Garmin fixed the problem in 2.03 or 2.04. I tried this just now and can confirm that it has not been fixed in 2.04 (don't know about 2.03 though). All you get when pressing the rocker left/right when viewing a large list of waypoints/POIs is a quick double beep.

Available at the Garmin website: http://www.garmin.com/products/emap/download.html

Go get it at the Garmin website: http://www.garmin.com/products/gps5/download.html

quote:Originally posted by RAD Dad:This means that the reason the maps are not up to date is NOT because the vendors they get the map data from give them bad data, if it was, all the products would have the same omissions in the maps. I get your point now. I'm assuming that Garmin has priority levels when it comes to which map data gets updated with this "new data" first. Since City Select/City Navigator are used on the higher end mapping Garmins with route calculation abilities, I'd expect this to get top priority since having missing data would be more "noticed" when using these higher end products. Then comes MetroGuide and then either Topo or Roads & Recreation...this seems to me to be the priority logic they are using when updating maps. Roads and Recreation & Topo are not really geared towards having super accurate streets and data...most of the streets in both are not even named which is good in some ways since it allows you to upload many more map data chunks to the GPSR. The data is basic and accurate *most* of the time and I think it works well for it's supposed intended use which is in a hand-held GPSR for recreational use. Now you can also ask in this case, if there is more map data available since the chunks are smaller, why don't they update the maps to the most recent database? I think it all boils down to the priority issue I mentioned above. [This message was edited by SergZak on April 10, 2002 at 10:58 PM.]

quote:Originally posted by RAD Dad:This means that the reason the maps are not up to date is NOT because the vendors they get the map data from give them bad data, if it was, all the products would have the same omissions in the maps. I get your point now. I'm assuming that Garmin has priority levels when it comes to which map data gets updated with this "new data" first. Since City Select/City Navigator are used on the higher end mapping Garmins with route calculation abilities, I'd expect this to get top priority since having missing data would be more "noticed" when using these higher end products. Then comes MetroGuide and then either Topo or Roads & Recreation...this seems to me to be the priority logic they are using when updating maps. Roads and Recreation & Topo are not really geared towards having super accurate streets and data...most of the streets in both are not even named which is good in some ways since it allows you to upload many more map data chunks to the GPSR. The data is basic and accurate *most* of the time and I think it works well for it's supposed intended use which is in a hand-held GPSR for recreational use. Now you can also ask in this case, if there is more map data available since the chunks are smaller, why don't they update the maps to the most recent database? I think it all boils down to the priority issue I mentioned above. [This message was edited by SergZak on April 10, 2002 at 10:58 PM.]