Garmin 60csx Trip Computer Issue

[Zeke&Josie]

I was curious if anyone else noticed an issue relating to the trip computer page on the Garmin GPSMAP 60CSx

 

I have noticed that if you are in an area where the accuracy reaches a certain point (approximately 100 feet) and/or the GPSr goes into 2D mode, the “Odometer” will no longer continue to “count up” even though you are still moving. The “Stopped” time will also begin counting up, in other words the unit thinks you are standing still even though you are still moving.

 

However if you go to the map page the present position icon will continue to show (fairly accurate) your movement along the map.

 

In other words, depending on which page you look at, your either moving or you’re stopped.

 

As an example I walked along a 4 mile trail last weekend and the unit, for a continuous period of time, entered 2D mode with an accuracy of approx. 100 feet (I had some fairly large mountains to my sides and front). At the end of the trail I only showed 3.06 miles traveled. When I was able to get back into 3D mode and 15 feet accuracy at the end of the trail, the unit began counting from 3.06 miles (i.e. it does not catch itself back up).

 

Both the map, hike description, and the track log confirm the trail at approximately 4.0 miles.

 

Can anyone else confirm this anomaly????

[kb9nvh]

Yes this happened to me as well.

I did find that during runs/slow trails that I needed to turn on track point every second to get a good representation of my track..but I did loose a portion of my track at one point and I know I didn't loose lock.

 

It got sperated to two tracks and I had a gap in between

 

I was curious if anyone else noticed an issue relating to the trip computer page on the Garmin GPSMAP 60CSx

 

I have noticed that if you are in an area where the accuracy reaches a certain point (approximately 100 feet) and/or the GPSr goes into 2D mode, the “Odometer” will no longer continue to “count up” even though you are still moving. The “Stopped” time will also begin counting up, in other words the unit thinks you are standing still even though you are still moving.

 

However if you go to the map page the present position icon will continue to show (fairly accurate) your movement along the map.

 

In other words, depending on which page you look at, your either moving or you’re stopped.

 

As an example I walked along a 4 mile trail last weekend and the unit, for a continuous period of time, entered 2D mode with an accuracy of approx. 100 feet (I had some fairly large mountains to my sides and front). At the end of the trail I only showed 3.06 miles traveled. When I was able to get back into 3D mode and 15 feet accuracy at the end of the trail, the unit began counting from 3.06 miles (i.e. it does not catch itself back up).

 

Both the map, hike description, and the track log confirm the trail at approximately 4.0 miles.

 

Can anyone else confirm this anomaly????

[moonpup]

LOL, if I could get my 60CSx accuracy to go over 30+ feet I'd give it a try, but it just works too darn good. Seriously though, I suppose I could try to shield the antenna and bury it in a backpack or something.

[+pdxmarathonman]

LOL, if I could get my 60CSx accuracy to go over 30+ feet I'd give it a try, but it just works too darn good. Seriously though, I suppose I could try to shield the antenna and bury it in a backpack or something.

don't forget to turn it upside down in the pack

[Zeke&Josie]

LOL, if I could get my 60CSx accuracy to go over 30+ feet I'd give it a try, but it just works too darn good. Seriously though, I suppose I could try to shield the antenna and bury it in a backpack or something.

 

Actually what I found out is that accuracy has very little to do with the problem and, assuming I do not have a defective unit, I consider this a major problem. All you need to do is go on a hike and you’ll see the problem.

 

This weekend while hiking I did some “experiments” and here is what I found out:

 

While hiking to a destination the Garmin GPS60CSx tallied up the following information upon my arrival (accuracy was between 15 – 45 feet during the trip).

 

Track Log – 9.28 miles

Odometer (from Trip Computer Page) – 8.08 miles

The green trails map and hiking description specify a length of - 8.8 miles

 

If I had to take a guess I would say that the Track Log was the most accurate due to washout and blowdown detours we had to take.

 

I decided to measure the return trip and the GPSr gave me the following information:

 

Track Log – 9.31 miles

Odometer – 7.45 miles

 

Interesting that the Track Logs were almost identical and the odometer was significantly different from both its first measurement and reality.

 

The next day I hiked up to a different destination and got the following data:

 

Track Log – 2.7 miles

Odometer (from Trip Computer Page) – 1.73 miles

The green trails map and hiking description specify a length of - 2.7 miles

 

The return trip gave the following info:

 

Track Log – 2.65 miles

Odometer (from Trip Computer Page) – 2.08 miles

 

Once again - Interesting that the Track Logs were almost identical and the odometer was significantly different from both its first measurement and reality

 

While driving home from the hike I decided to do the same experiment in the car and noticed that if you‘re traveling at a relatively constant speed the odometer is fairly accurate. Once you start doing a lot of stop, go, accelerating and decelerating the odometer’s error becomes larger and larger.

 

Here is what I think is happening. The odometer has nothing to do with your position being tracked across a “map”. I believe it (the algorithm) uses speed and the time traveled to determine a distance traveled (i.e. D=RXT). In the world of hiking, where you are typically traveling between 0-4mph, going up switchbacks, taking a break, looking at the scenery, etc, these speed errors (which at these slow rates are already full of errors) translates into an even worse odometer reading.

 

So if this is the case, what else is bogus info on this GPSr? How else do you determine an accurate distance traveled at a quick glance? I mean this is a $450 GPSr, shouldn’t I be able to determine how far I’ve travel without going through the steps of saving a track log???

[kb9nvh]

Yes, if this is true its a major bug. When I had a lower number than usual on my trip counter I attribuited it to my tracklog having not enough breadcrumbs. The next day I turned it to log track points every second and it seemed to fix the problem for me. (but I've not done it enough to be sure).

 

LOL, if I could get my 60CSx accuracy to go over 30+ feet I'd give it a try, but it just works too darn good. Seriously though, I suppose I could try to shield the antenna and bury it in a backpack or something.

 

Actually what I found out is that accuracy has very little to do with the problem and, assuming I do not have a defective unit, I consider this a major problem. All you need to do is go on a hike and you’ll see the problem.

 

This weekend while hiking I did some “experiments” and here is what I found out:

 

While hiking to a destination the Garmin GPS60CSx tallied up the following information upon my arrival (accuracy was between 15 – 45 feet during the trip).

 

Track Log – 9.28 miles

Odometer (from Trip Computer Page) – 8.08 miles

The green trails map and hiking description specify a length of - 8.8 miles

 

If I had to take a guess I would say that the Track Log was the most accurate due to washout and blowdown detours we had to take.

 

I decided to measure the return trip and the GPSr gave me the following information:

 

Track Log – 9.31 miles

Odometer – 7.45 miles

 

Interesting that the Track Logs were almost identical and the odometer was significantly different from both its first measurement and reality.

 

The next day I hiked up to a different destination and got the following data:

 

Track Log – 2.7 miles

Odometer (from Trip Computer Page) – 1.73 miles

The green trails map and hiking description specify a length of - 2.7 miles

 

The return trip gave the following info:

 

Track Log – 2.65 miles

Odometer (from Trip Computer Page) – 2.08 miles

 

Once again - Interesting that the Track Logs were almost identical and the odometer was significantly different from both its first measurement and reality

 

While driving home from the hike I decided to do the same experiment in the car and noticed that if you‘re traveling at a relatively constant speed the odometer is fairly accurate. Once you start doing a lot of stop, go, accelerating and decelerating the odometer’s error becomes larger and larger.

 

Here is what I think is happening. The odometer has nothing to do with your position being tracked across a “map”. I believe it (the algorithm) uses speed and the time traveled to determine a distance traveled (i.e. D=RXT). In the world of hiking, where you are typically traveling between 0-4mph, going up switchbacks, taking a break, looking at the scenery, etc, these speed errors (which at these slow rates are already full of errors) translates into an even worse odometer reading.

 

So if this is the case, what else is bogus info on this GPSr? How else do you determine an accurate distance traveled at a quick glance? I mean this is a $450 GPSr, shouldn’t I be able to determine how far I’ve travel without going through the steps of saving a track log???

[8mmag]

Yes, if this is true its a major bug. When I had a lower number than usual on my trip counter I attribuited it to my tracklog having not enough breadcrumbs. The next day I turned it to log track points every second and it seemed to fix the problem for me. (but I've not done it enough to be sure).

 

 

This is exactly the same theory I have on this, although I haven't tested it enough to confirm it either...

[+geobc]

Based on my experience yesterday, I was about to start a thread about Trip Computer vs Track Log discrepencies but then I spotted this thread. We went for a hike under a dense tree canopy with a pretty steep elevation gain. Our progress was very slow on the first part of the loop.

 

When we got back to our vehicle, the Trip Computer reported that we covered just over 6km. The Track Log reported just over 11km which was very close to the distance as listed on the trail maps of the area. This was my first time using the Trip Computer for a hike and also my first time comparing the results to the Track Log. I was shocked by the discrepency.

 

GeoBC

[8mmag]

Based on my experience yesterday, I was about to start a thread about Trip Computer vs Track Log discrepencies but then I spotted this thread. We went for a hike under a dense tree canopy with a pretty steep elevation gain. Our progress was very slow on the first part of the loop.

 

When we got back to our vehicle, the Trip Computer reported that we covered just over 6km. The Track Log reported just over 11km which was very close to the distance as listed on the trail maps of the area. This was my first time using the Trip Computer for a hike and also my first time comparing the results to the Track Log. I was shocked by the discrepency.

 

GeoBC

 

You raise an intersting point, maybe the trip computer is computing its info from the x-y coordinatess only, disregarding slopes by disregarding elevation change data (altitude or -z-). Since we all seem to agree this is the least accurate value of the three, that may make at least some sense...still that would be one steep grade to make that much difference.

 

Maybe you want to play with some of your tracklog in the steep part of your trek and calculate distances travelled both in 2D and 3D space and let us know what you come up with?

[+Boardslider]

Just to add my 2 cents, I have seen similar on my old Etrex Vista and even (although no track log) have seen an elapsed distance (odo) error on my forerunner.

 

In contrast to the poster who thinks the track log is more accurate and the Odo a mere average, I would hold with the opposite: The odo records continually, whereas tracks are point readings at a <preset> interval.

 

The same run on my forerunner came out to a significantly different distance over two days, and when I looked into it I saw that the number of trackpoints varied in quantity and distance. One day was wet and cloudy and the other was fine. Similar with the etrex.

 

The track log distance is calculated by adding up each track point -by drawing a straight line between each- now add in the logging interval and the fact that due to drop put some points may be missed or in the wrong place and you can see where the error is coming from. I would imagine that the odo is calculated on the fly using every 1 second update so the chances of the same averaging issue shouldn't arise.

[+geobc]

You raise an intersting point, maybe the trip computer is computing its info from the x-y coordinatess only, disregarding slopes by disregarding elevation change data (altitude or -z-). Since we all seem to agree this is the least accurate value of the three, that may make at least some sense...still that would be one steep grade to make that much difference.

 

Maybe you want to play with some of your tracklog in the steep part of your trek and calculate distances travelled both in 2D and 3D space and let us know what you come up with?

I didn't mean to suggest that the steepness had anything to do with the discrepency. As you say, that would have to be one hell of an incline to cause that much difference. ;-)

 

GeoBC

[+geobc]

In contrast to the poster who thinks the track log is more accurate and the Odo a mere average, I would hold with the opposite: The odo records continually, whereas tracks are point readings at a <preset> interval.

My experience indicated that the track log's distance was very close to the known distance, where as the trip computer was almost 50% short of the mark. That's a big difference and one that really makes the trip computer look flakey.

 

GeoBC

[Zeke&Josie]

I spoke with Garmin today about this Trip Computer issue. First let me say that their tech support was extremely busy and the “product support specialist” I received was about as receptive as a pissed off badger. After-holiday blues along with dealing with hundreds of Garmin customers all morning probably had something to do with it.

 

Anyway I started off with the question

 

“As a hiker how do I determine how far I have traveled along a given path or trail”

 

His answer was what I expected – “Use the odometer on the trip computer or save the track log”

 

After I explained to him the significant measurement differences I was receiving between the two (see my previous post) he then explained that it would not be uncommon to see those differences because the two pages/methods measure distance readings in totally different ways.

 

He stated that the odometer updates a distance/position every second (you cannot change the method) and based on satellite coverage (i.e. accuracy) and “many” other parameters this distance could have errors. He did not go into the definition of “many”.

 

The track log however is user defined (with a default value of “auto”). He stated that “auto” is probably the most accurate of these user defined methods. Which is what I always keep mine set on.

 

So once again I asked him “So As a hiker how do I determine how far I have traveled along a given path or trail. Which is the more accurate the odometer or the track log”

 

The answer was “It all depends” and without looking at satellite coverage and many other parameters (eg. type of terrain traveled) one or the other may be more accurate. The only way to definitely confirm is to download the track log to the computer and compare it to a map. Yeh- I’ll just pull out my laptop computer that I carry along the trail

 

He also stated that the GPS60CSx it designed to give the consumer only “estimated or general information, not an exact measurement” (which in some respects I agree). After waiting on hold for an hour and speaking with him for 10 minutes I ultimately never really got answer to my question.

 

I’m certainly not expecting this GPSr to provide me a measurement down to a gnat’s a**, but when the differences in the two readings are, in some cases, 100%, it makes me wonder.

 

Am I the only one that finds this disheartening? One of the most basic questions a hiker has along a trail is to know how far they have traveled or how miles remaining to get to their destination. I made the assumption when buying this product that it would provide me with a semi accurate, at-a-glance, answer to that basic question. Stupid me!!! I’ll just go back to looking at the map like I’ve been doing for years.

[GeoBobC]

I have a 60cX and have been using it on a nearly daily basis for two months on trail runs in the heavily tree canopied Northwest. I reset my odometer and clear the track log at the beginning of the run, and compare the odometer and track log distance at the completion. I have not seen the large discrepancies noted here. I have seen differences in the neighborhood of 10%. However, I have never had 2D coverage, even in steep, heavily timbered sections of the trails. I take the longer of the two measures as my recorded run distance. This approach has worked well for me.

[Vibramhead]

I spoke with Garmin today about this Trip Computer issue. First let me say that their tech support was extremely busy and the “product support specialist” I received was about as receptive as a pissed off badger. After-holiday blues along with dealing with hundreds of Garmin customers all morning probably had something to do with it.

 

Anyway I started off with the question

 

“As a hiker how do I determine how far I have traveled along a given path or trail”

 

His answer was what I expected – “Use the odometer on the trip computer or save the track log”

 

After I explained to him the significant measurement differences I was receiving between the two (see my previous post) he then explained that it would not be uncommon to see those differences because the two pages/methods measure distance readings in totally different ways.

 

He stated that the odometer updates a distance/position every second (you cannot change the method) and based on satellite coverage (i.e. accuracy) and “many” other parameters this distance could have errors. He did not go into the definition of “many”.

 

The track log however is user defined (with a default value of “auto”). He stated that “auto” is probably the most accurate of these user defined methods. Which is what I always keep mine set on.

 

So once again I asked him “So As a hiker how do I determine how far I have traveled along a given path or trail. Which is the more accurate the odometer or the track log”

 

The answer was “It all depends” and without looking at satellite coverage and many other parameters (eg. type of terrain traveled) one or the other may be more accurate. The only way to definitely confirm is to download the track log to the computer and compare it to a map. Yeh- I’ll just pull out my laptop computer that I carry along the trail

 

He also stated that the GPS60CSx it designed to give the consumer only “estimated or general information, not an exact measurement” (which in some respects I agree). After waiting on hold for an hour and speaking with him for 10 minutes I ultimately never really got answer to my question.

 

I’m certainly not expecting this GPSr to provide me a measurement down to a gnat’s a**, but when the differences in the two readings are, in some cases, 100%, it makes me wonder.

 

Am I the only one that finds this disheartening? One of the most basic questions a hiker has along a trail is to know how far they have traveled or how miles remaining to get to their destination. I made the assumption when buying this product that it would provide me with a semi accurate, at-a-glance, answer to that basic question. Stupid me!!! I’ll just go back to looking at the map like I’ve been doing for years.

 

I've been using the 60csx for 6 months, mostly for hikes in the woods, and I've consistently had the same problem. The trip odometer always reads less than the actual distance walked, as measured by the track log. I've tested this on measured trails (i.e., ones marked every quarter mile) and the odometer is always short, while the track log is usually right on target. I've complained to Garmin about this several times, with no result so far. On the phone, tech support have been clueless, and via email, they haven't even bothered responding. At least you got some kind of explanation, though I agree a thoroughly unsatisfactory one. I've found that the only way to figure out how far I've walked, prior to getting home and downloading the track, is to save the track log onto the GPSr, which will then give you a track length. One problem with this is that if your track log is more than 500 points, the save function will strip out some of the points, which will effectly straighten some of the turns, shortening it a bit. So, a 30-mile walk became a 28-mile track after saving. As long as you don't delete the active log, you can at least get an accurate mileage once you get home.

 

On the other hand, I haven't had this problem when paddling on open water. It's not clear to me whether this is because I'm generally moving in a relatively straight line, or because I always have a clear view of the sky when I'm on the water. I've also tested it a couple of times in a car, and the trip computer seems pretty accurate there. But I didn't buy this unit for driving; I bought it for hiking. So, I'm not very satisfied.

[andygriffith]

I've found that the only way to figure out how far I've walked, prior to getting home and downloading the track, is to save the track log onto the GPSr, which will then give you a track length. One problem with this is that if your track log is more than 500 points, the save function will strip out some of the points, which will effectly straighten some of the turns, shortening it a bit. So, a 30-mile walk became a 28-mile track after saving. As long as you don't delete the active log, you can at least get an accurate mileage once you get home.

 

I believe someone posted that if you enable saving your track to the microSD card that doesn't happen. Feel free to test and report back. I haven't tested this with my old CS, but did the CS have this issue as well, the discrepancy between the track log distance and the trip computer distance?

[+Train_Man]

I haven't noticed any huge difference but then again I haven't cross-checked any of my results. It always seems my long drives are accurate but I never really did a map check!

 

Does anyone still have this issue with 2.90? Also has this problem been 'reported' to garmin in an EMAIL? because it seems they kind of ignore phone conversations.

[Zeke&Josie]

 

I've been using the 60csx for 6 months, mostly for hikes in the woods, and I've consistently had the same problem. The trip odometer always reads less than the actual distance walked, as measured by the track log. I've tested this on measured trails (i.e., ones marked every quarter mile) and the odometer is always short, while the track log is usually right on target. I've complained to Garmin about this several times, with no result so far. On the phone, tech support have been clueless, and via email, they haven't even bothered responding. At least you got some kind of explanation, though I agree a thoroughly unsatisfactory one. I've found that the only way to figure out how far I've walked, prior to getting home and downloading the track, is to save the track log onto the GPSr, which will then give you a track length. One problem with this is that if your track log is more than 500 points, the save function will strip out some of the points, which will effectly straighten some of the turns, shortening it a bit. So, a 30-mile walk became a 28-mile track after saving. As long as you don't delete the active log, you can at least get an accurate mileage once you get home.

 

On the other hand, I haven't had this problem when paddling on open water. It's not clear to me whether this is because I'm generally moving in a relatively straight line, or because I always have a clear view of the sky when I'm on the water. I've also tested it a couple of times in a car, and the trip computer seems pretty accurate there. But I didn't buy this unit for driving; I bought it for hiking. So, I'm not very satisfied.

 

I agree – As a hiker I’m disappointed as well.

 

What’s interesting is that the “product specialist” told me that the trip odometer should always read greater because, since it is bouncing around inside the accuracy circle every second it will continually add up that inaccuracy and add it to the total distance. When I told him that I was consistently getting a lower measurement compared to the track log he implied that I was not reading it correctly.

 

I think the problem has less to do with accuracy of the reception, and more with type of terrain traveled and moving along a straight line at a constant speed/velocity. In other words the less movement in the x-y plane the more accurate the information. I guess that is fair to expect, but I just didn’t think the error would be so great. Maybe Garmin thinks we’re hiking along interstates.

 

I guess I should have been clued into the “flakiness” of the trip computer page when, out of a 105 page owner’s manual it receives only 1 page of instruction - yet instruction on how to play the games like “Gekoids” receive 4 pages.

 

I have always had a good experience with their support. In this case I was treated like I was bothering him and that I was expecting something from this GPSr that it was never design to do.

 

Utimately maybe I am.

[+geobc]

I haven't noticed any huge difference but then again I haven't cross-checked any of my results. It always seems my long drives are accurate but I never really did a map check!

 

Does anyone still have this issue with 2.90? Also has this problem been 'reported' to garmin in an EMAIL? because it seems they kind of ignore phone conversations.

 

My discrepency from last weekend's hike was with ver 2.90 of the firmware.

 

GeoBC

[kb9nvh]

On my 5 mile run I was off by 0.1 miles (short) on the trip computer. The next day it was spot on. My only difference (coninsedental maybe) was that I forced my track log to 1 second breadcrumbs (turned off automatic). I also made sure lock on road was off (I was running on a road and the map is not accurate enough so you really have to turn off lock on road for this). Also, to get good elevation data I HAD to turn off "autocalibration" of the altimeter. My run was 2.5 out and the same 2.5mi back showed about a 30 to 40 ft offset between the run out and the run back with autocalibrate on. With it off my two legs were identical.

 

I haven't noticed any huge difference but then again I haven't cross-checked any of my results. It always seems my long drives are accurate but I never really did a map check!

 

Does anyone still have this issue with 2.90? Also has this problem been 'reported' to garmin in an EMAIL? because it seems they kind of ignore phone conversations.

 

My discrepency from last weekend's hike was with ver 2.90 of the firmware.

 

GeoBC

Edited July 6, 2006 by kb9nvh

[andygriffith]

After reading about the discrepancies I decided to do some tests today going to and from work.

 

I have a 60CSx running 2.90/2.60

 

Lock on roads was off

 

Tracking setup was Auto/Normal and I logged the tracks to the microSD card to avoid any straightening.

 

Test 1

 

Backed my truck out of the garage and parked in front of my house and got a stable WAAS signal with about 10-14 EPE.

 

Reset my truck odometer

Reset my GPS trip computer

Reset and turned on my tracking

 

Drove to work

 

Truck odometer read 7.9 miles

GPS trip computer read 8.12 miles

Track log measured 8.13 miles

 

Test 2

 

Did the same thing driving home

 

Truck odometer read 7.8 miles

GPS trip computer read 8.12 miles

Track log measured 8.11 miles

 

Truck odometer may be off a little, I got rid of the stock tires and put slightly larger tires on and who knows how accurate it was in the beginning.

 

With my 60CS previously, I always relied on just the tracklog measurement, never bothered with the trip computer when I mountain bike. I always found that the tracklog was dead on with the computer on my bike.

 

So take this data for what it is worth, but they look pretty close to me. You may see a bigger difference when measuring slower speed other than driving speeds, I don't know.

Edited July 7, 2006 by andygriffith

[Vibramhead]

I've found that the only way to figure out how far I've walked, prior to getting home and downloading the track, is to save the track log onto the GPSr, which will then give you a track length. One problem with this is that if your track log is more than 500 points, the save function will strip out some of the points, which will effectly straighten some of the turns, shortening it a bit. So, a 30-mile walk became a 28-mile track after saving. As long as you don't delete the active log, you can at least get an accurate mileage once you get home.

 

I believe someone posted that if you enable saving your track to the microSD card that doesn't happen. Feel free to test and report back. I haven't tested this with my old CS, but did the CS have this issue as well, the discrepancy between the track log distance and the trip computer distance?

 

The bizarre thing about saving the track to the microSD card is that you can't use the GPSr to read a track stored there. You can only download a track from the card to a PC. Consequently, you can't determine when you're out on the trail how long a track on the microSD card is.

 

Here's what Garmin tech support said:

 

Thank You for contacting Garmin International!

You may have noticed that the latest firmware updates to our X-series units have added USB Mass Storage support. I have some tips as to what this means and how it may be useful:

 

*To clarify, this does not allow you to access the internal memory of the GPS unit. This will allow you to access the Micro SD card on the unit as a drive on the PC.

 

 

To activate Mass Storage mode (with the latest firmware version installed on the unit):

 

1. Go to the Main Menu

2. Select Setup

3. Select Interface

4. There will be a button on the bottom of the screen labeled USB Mass Storage - highlight this and press enter.

5. If the unit is already plugged into the computer, you will be in Mass Storage Mode - If not, plug the unit into the computer at this point.

 

6. To remove the unit from the computer after you are done, you will want to find the Safely Remove Hardware icon in the System Tray of Windows (Bottom-right corner, near the time), click on the icon, and choose Safely Remove USB Mass Storage Device - Drive(X:).

 

 

What you can do with this feature:

 

1. You can check the format (File System) of the data card in the unit.

a. Open My Computer, right-click on the drive assigned to the unit in Mass Storage Mode and choose properties.

b. The File System will be listed towards the top of this window

*note: our units work best with FAT File System - if it says FAT32 here, you will want to re-format the card.

 

2. You can re-format the card.

a. Open My Computer, right-click on the drive assigned to the unit in Mass Storage Mode and choose format....

b. In the Format window, you will want to use the drop-down menu to choose the File System to FAT (not FAT32).

c. Click Start to format the card.

 

3. You can retrieve tracklogs you have saved to the data card.

a. The ability to save an active track to the data card was added during the last firmware update. (Tracks > Setup > Data Card Setup)

 

b. If you have a saved track log, you can open My Computer and double click on the drive assigned to the unit in Mass Storage Mode.

 

c. This will open a window allowing you to view the contents of the card - you should see any supplemental maps, saved track logs, and any other files that may be on the data card

[andygriffith]

The bizarre thing about saving the track to the microSD card is that you can't use the GPSr to read a track stored there. You can only download a track from the card to a PC. Consequently, you can't determine when you're out on the trail how long a track on the microSD card is.

 

I am not sure what you are talking about. I have tracks saved to the microSD card and can access them with my GPSr.

[+Tharagleb]

It works a little funny, if you delete the track log off the main track screen it seems to stay on you data card. From there you can only delete those track logs (or access via USB mass storage).

 

Currently I have one track on my main tracks screen but 3 under the data card setup screen.

[pyt22fr]

After reading about the discrepancies I decided to do some tests today going to and from work.

 

I have a 60CSx running 2.90/2.60

 

Lock on roads was off

 

 

May I know how to set lock on roads to off ?

 

Thnks.

 

pyt22fr

[andygriffith]

After reading about the discrepancies I decided to do some tests today going to and from work.

 

I have a 60CSx running 2.90/2.60

 

Lock on roads was off

 

 

May I know how to set lock on roads to off ?

 

Thnks.

 

pyt22fr

 

Page 43 in the manual. It is easier than trying to explain it here.

[andygriffith]

The bizarre thing about saving the track to the microSD card is that you can't use the GPSr to read a track stored there. You can only download a track from the card to a PC. Consequently, you can't determine when you're out on the trail how long a track on the microSD card is.

 

I am not sure what you are talking about. I have tracks saved to the microSD card and can access them with my GPSr.

 

I don't understand this either. I saved 2 tracks yesterday to my card and I can still delete them without going into USB mass storage mode.

[andygriffith]

After reading about the discrepancies I decided to do some tests today going to and from work.

 

I have a 60CSx running 2.90/2.60

 

Lock on roads was off

 

Tracking setup was Auto/Normal and I logged the tracks to the microSD card to avoid any straightening.

 

Test 1

 

Backed my truck out of the garage and parked in front of my house and got a stable WAAS signal with about 10-14 EPE.

 

Reset my truck odometer

Reset my GPS trip computer

Reset and turned on my tracking

 

Drove to work

 

Truck odometer read 7.9 miles

GPS trip computer read 8.12 miles

Track log measured 8.13 miles

 

Test 2

 

Did the same thing driving home

 

Truck odometer read 7.8 miles

GPS trip computer read 8.12 miles

Track log measured 8.11 miles

 

Truck odometer may be off a little, I got rid of the stock tires and put slightly larger tires on and who knows how accurate it was in the beginning.

 

With my 60CS previously, I always relied on just the tracklog measurement, never bothered with the trip computer when I mountain bike. I always found that the tracklog was dead on with the computer on my bike.

 

So take this data for what it is worth, but they look pretty close to me. You may see a bigger difference when measuring slower speed other than driving speeds, I don't know.

 

I did the same test today going to work with my old 60CS.

 

I got 8.12 on the trip computer and the track log. I agree that the algorithms for the 60CSx need to be tweaked a little bit.

[pyt22fr]

 

May I know how to set lock on roads to off ?

 

Thnks.

 

pyt22fr

 

Page 43 in the manual. It is easier than trying to explain it here.

 

OK, got it, thanks.

 

pyt22fr

[Suscrofa]

As of today I did notice that for a trip on foot, I got 5.55km on the odometer while the track shows 6.93km BUT on the way back to home by car, I got 26.8km trip odo and 26.76km for the track.

 

So close to 25% discrepancy when walking but correct when driving.

The foot trip was in a forest but no loss of signal at all.

 

True that when looking at the track on foot, it is not always a straight line (I wasn't drunk !). I hope the trip computer does not do some linear regression !

 

It is rather puzzling indeed.

[kb9nvh]

There is something going on with the trip computer...I'm not convinced its always wrong but I've seen enough discrepenies to wonder now. My car odometer, in 25 miles, is 1/2 mile higher than the trip computer consistently....probably the car odometer is wrong. I checked the trip computer to the track is it was within a 10th of a mile. Trouble is, its hard to know if the track was complete or not since I had a few stops during the track I was measuring.

 

As of today I did notice that for a trip on foot, I got 5.55km on the odometer while the track shows 6.93km BUT on the way back to home by car, I got 26.8km trip odo and 26.76km for the track.

 

So close to 25% discrepancy when walking but correct when driving.

The foot trip was in a forest but no loss of signal at all.

 

True that when looking at the track on foot, it is not always a straight line (I wasn't drunk !). I hope the trip computer does not do some linear regression !

 

It is rather puzzling indeed.

[pyt22fr]

As of today I did notice that for a trip on foot, I got 5.55km on the odometer while the track shows 6.93km BUT on the way back to home by car, I got 26.8km trip odo and 26.76km for the track.

 

So close to 25% discrepancy when walking but correct when driving.

The foot trip was in a forest but no loss of signal at all.

 

It is rather puzzling indeed.

 

Similar own experience :

 

Yesterday, on a short hour car driving trip :

 

Saved track : 74.4 km

Odometer : 74.54 km

very acceptable

 

Earlier the same day :

 

Short walk (low speed, sometimes stopped, overall duration approx 2 hours) partly under tree foliage :

 

Saved track : 3.5 km

Odometer : 3.1 km

over 11 % deviation

 

Strange.

 

pyt22fr

[thehikingdude]

I'm happy to see I'm not the only one experiencing the same issue. I was beginning to think I had a faulty unit.

 

I just completed a 3-day backpacking trip which resulted in hiking for approx. 25.5 miles, yet the odometer puts it at 18 miles. On the first day I hiked for 8 miles and it clocked just over 1 mile - way off in my book. It really seems to have something to do with moving at a slower speed in my opinion.

 

This is my first Garmin unit, have older models acted in the same way? I would like to think that this can be fixed in a firmware upgrade - if not I may really have to consider getting something else.

 

-jeff

Portland Oregon Hiking Forum

[bansheegeo]

Anyone have a second gps they can use as a control for a measured hike?

 

FWIW in the car, the 60csx agreed with the odometer to within 2% over 100 miles driving.

[+GOT GPS?]

I noticed nobody said anything about how the Map60CSx compared to the 60Cx.

 

I have the 60Cx without sensors, and the Tracklog was always close to that of the Trip Odometer.

 

Another interesting thing on a side note, is that my eXplorist XL always seems to be spot-on with its Trip Odometer, whereas my other Magellans always came up short on their Trip Odometers when walking.

[+Red90]

No problems here. I did a 23 km hike yesterday with lots of heavy forest bushwacking. The tracklog and the odometer match up. This is a 60Cx.

[8mmag]

Hmmm....

 

This makes me wonder if this has something to do with compass settings now...turn on compass when below x MPH for xx sec... I wonder if the odometer stops counting if the compass activates ????

 

Maybe try a hike with the e-compass disabled and see if that makes any difference.

[+GOT GPS?]

You can set the compass to activate at 10mph, but also turn it OFF when hiking.

 

The Altimeter function I believe is very proccessor intensive causing the Trip Odometer to skip a few heartbeats, like having some teeth missing from the gears in the trip odometer. The GPS units with sensors are more prone to some errors that the non-sensor units, don't have.

 

The only problem is that with my 60Cx, it's elevation profile is all over the place, but other than that, it is more behaved than a GPS with sensors.

[8mmag]

You can set the compass to activate at 10mph, but also turn it OFF when hiking.

 

 

Right, you can turn it off either way. I just wonder if the same odometer/tracklog discrepencies occur with the compass off since Cx users are saying 'not an issue with mine'. The other thing that makes me think this may have something to do with it is myself and others have documented the lack of discrepencies in vehicles...where the compass would not be active much (unless set to activate at some ridiculously high speed of course). Purely my speculation at this point though, I don't have any data to support it.

[+geobc]

I just wonder if the same odometer/tracklog discrepencies occur with the compass off since Cx users are saying 'not an issue with mine'. The other thing that makes me think this may have something to do with it is myself and others have documented the lack of discrepencies in vehicles...where the compass would not be active much (unless set to activate at some ridiculously high speed of course). Purely my speculation at this point though, I don't have any data to support it.

By default, I keep the electronic compass turned off, and the discrepency I encountered a couple of weeks ago occurred while the compass was off.

 

GeoBC

[Suscrofa]

Mine is a 60CX, soft ver 2.9/2.5 and yes I have these discrepancies as stated above.

 

I tried recently a short walk in open air (perfect signals) one leg in a straight line, back going in zigzag, no stop. Trip odo 500m, track log 465m !

So in this case, the track is shorter than the odometer shows !

 

If I measure the logged track on the PC using the ruler of Mapsource, it is consistent with the 465m.

 

This time the odometer shows a bigger distance but this is OK as one consider it accounts for all the small moves the track log doesn't as it built the path as a set of straignt line between points logged according to its logic(I set it up as AUTO).

 

It looks indeed that when the signal is weak (dense forest), or for other (?) reasons, the odometer assumes sometimes one is stopped while we are in fact moving and therefore drop these movements from its computation while the track log store the various points sampled.

 

The tracklog seems in any case the closer to the reality, should show a lower value than realy traveled which consistent with the way points are sampled and stored.

 

As for the trip odo, it depends ! From good to grossly underestimated.

Edited July 11, 2006 by Suscrofa

[Vibramhead]

The bizarre thing about saving the track to the microSD card is that you can't use the GPSr to read a track stored there. You can only download a track from the card to a PC. Consequently, you can't determine when you're out on the trail how long a track on the microSD card is.

 

I am not sure what you are talking about. I have tracks saved to the microSD card and can access them with my GPSr.

 

I don't understand this either. I saved 2 tracks yesterday to my card and I can still delete them without going into USB mass storage mode.

 

I don't know about deleting them, but I can't read them off the card with the GPSr. Garmin apparently confirms this:

 

Thank You for contacting Garmin International!

I am happy to help you with this. The data card acts as a mass storage device when you load the latest version of the software. Those files should be accessed from your computer looking for the drive that is the storage device. When this is called up you should see the files for the track logs. There is a file on this drive that allows you to see the tracks in mapsource. These tracks that are stored on the data card are not accesable by the GPS as tracks.

 

If you have any additional comments or questions, please do not hesitate to contact us via email or at the number listed below.

 

Best Regards,

Bob Betlach

Product Support Specialist

Garmin International

[pyt22fr]

I tried recently a short walk in open air (perfect signals) one leg in a straight line, back going in zigzag, no stop. Trip odo 500m, track log 465m !

So in this case, the track is shorter than the odometer shows !

 

If I measure the logged track on the PC using the ruler of Mapsource, it is consistent with the 465m.

 

This time the odometer shows a bigger distance but this is OK as one consider it accounts for all the small moves the track log doesn't as it built the path as a set of straignt line between points logged according to its logic(I set it up as AUTO).

 

An interesting experiment would be to do the very same walk (straight forward and back in zigzag) with settings to "1 second".

 

This time the tracklog may show back longer than what the trip odometer shows.

 

pyt22fr

[andygriffith]

An interesting experiment would be to do the very same walk (straight forward and back in zigzag) with settings to "1 second".

 

This time the tracklog may show back longer than what the trip odometer shows.

 

pyt22fr

 

How do you set it to "1 second" is that the same as "most often"?

Edited July 11, 2006 by andygriffith

[pyt22fr]

 

How do you set it to "1 second" is that the same as "most often"?

 

Nope.

 

Tracks page.

Setup.

Record method : Time.

Interval : the amount of seconds/minutes/hours you want.

 

pyt22fr

[Suscrofa]

I tried recently a short walk in open air (perfect signals) one leg in a straight line, back going in zigzag, no stop. Trip odo 500m, track log 465m !

So in this case, the track is shorter than the odometer shows !

 

If I measure the logged track on the PC using the ruler of Mapsource, it is consistent with the 465m.

 

This time the odometer shows a bigger distance but this is OK as one consider it accounts for all the small moves the track log doesn't as it built the path as a set of straignt line between points logged according to its logic(I set it up as AUTO).

 

An interesting experiment would be to do the very same walk (straight forward and back in zigzag) with settings to "1 second".

 

This time the tracklog may show back longer than what the trip odometer shows.

 

pyt22fr

 

Good point ! When will you do it ?

 

Er, a 500m walk is quite short, half a km. OK, one looks funny to walk in zigzag and this may bring undue attention !

[pyt22fr]

[

Good point ! When will you do it ?

 

Er, a 500m walk is quite short, half a km. OK, one looks funny to walk in zigzag and this may bring undue attention !

 

No problem. I am still at work, but if I end it up before night I do it.

 

pyt22fr

[TracknQ]

I'm happy to see I'm not the only one experiencing the same issue. I was beginning to think I had a faulty unit.

 

I just completed a 3-day backpacking trip which resulted in hiking for approx. 25.5 miles, yet the odometer puts it at 18 miles. On the first day I hiked for 8 miles and it clocked just over 1 mile - way off in my book. It really seems to have something to do with moving at a slower speed in my opinion.

 

This is my first Garmin unit, have older models acted in the same way? I would like to think that this can be fixed in a firmware upgrade - if not I may really have to consider getting something else.

Jeff ("thehikindude"),

 

I bought my 60CSx at REI in Bend, OR, on March 29th. Garmin replaced my first 60CSx. I returned the replacement 60CSx to REI for a full refund on June 28th. In the three month interval, I had MANY problems with both 60CSx units.

 

Here are four posts that detail my problems.

 

Post #95:

I used my 60CSx when hiking. My many problems are described in previous posts in this thread.

 

Recently, with 2.90/2.60 loaded, my 60CSx showed odometer readings that were much shorter than actual trail distances. When I downloaded my tracks into MapSource, the track lengths were longer than actual trail distances. That was it for me!

 

Today, I returned my 60CSx, MapSource Topo, MapSource City Navigator, NG Topo! and a nylon carrying case to REI. I got a $822.90 refund.

 

I purchased other items from sellers who don't have REI's 100% satisfaction guarantee. I spent/lost about $240 on rechargeable batteries and a battery charger, a 1 GB MicroSD card, a Garmin car power cord, the TopoFusion program, and the cost to ship a prior malfunctioning 60CSx back to Garmin.

 

I agree with everything that iNiq has said. Garmin should be ashamed!

Post #22:

8mmag, sorry to upset you. I guess you and I just see things differently.

 

From my point of view, Garmin markets products without proper pre-market testing and software quality control. That forces customers to deal with glitches and bugs in products that they paid hard-earned money to enjoy free of glitches and bugs. Garmin excuses its rush-to-market-to-maximize-profits by saying: 'What do you expect? We're on the leading edge of technology.'

 

Microsoft has been beta-testing its new Windows Vista operating system for many months. It's delayed its scheduled market date several times to ensure that all bugs and glitches are removed BEFORE Vista is marketed. IMHO, Garmin should follow this much more ethical approach to marketing.

 

Garmin rushed to wed the hypersensitive SiRF chipset with an obsolete algorithm that it's been using in pre-SiRF units. The algorithm contains about 100,000 sentences/processes that are interconnected. Many of the interconnected processes are thrown off by the SiRF chipset's sensitivity. Little Band-Aid fixes aren't going to solve the many major and interconnected problems in the algorithm. The algorithm needs to be totally revamped.

 

Garmin didn't anticipate the problems that the SiRF chipset's high sensitivity would cause. My guess is that it will take many thousand man-hours for Garmin engineers to design a proper algorithm for the 60CSx.

 

You may believe that Garmin will take the time and spend the money to fix the 60CSx. I don't share your faith in Garmin. I'd have much more faith in Garmin if it didn't dump untested products on unsuspecting customers.

 

I agree that Garmin tries to provide excellent customer service. I'd rather not have to send my 60CSx back to Garmin, which I've done. I'd rather be out on a trail, being able to trust that my GPSr will give reasonably accurate readings, not false readings due to bugs and glitches. I'd rather not have to spend time reviewing forum posts to see if others have had the same problems that I've experienced.

Post #26:

SandyGarrity,

 

In case your question was directed to me, I'll answer.

 

My 60CSx is my first GPSr. Including the MapSource U.S. Topo and City Navigator software, a National Geographic Topo! State-series program, rechargeable NiMH batteries, a NiMH battery charger, a 1GB MicroSD card, a screen shield, and a carrying case, I paid $1,002 for my 60CSx.

 

I had to send my first 60CSx back to Garmin because I was getting +98,422 foot and -4,921 foot elevation readings. The replacement 60CSx that Garmin sent me gave the same extremely wrong elevation readings. Garmin also sent me a 60Cx by mistake. I had to return that unit to Garmin before I could get my second replacement 60CSx.

 

When I stop to take photographs or to eat a snack or to have a conversation, my 60CSx keeps adding distance to my track log, because the hypersensitive SiRF chipset causes significant horizontal wanderings. If I turn my 60CSx off to stop the wanderings, I end up with multiple tracks instead of one easily viewable track.

 

When I take a hike with auto-calibration enabled, starting and ending at precisely the same location, my end elevation is

always

higher than my start elevation -- sometimes by as much as 80 feet. I call that "creeping elevation." I suppose, to be more correct, I should call that "vertical wandering."

 

The little rate of ascent/descent indicator, in the left lower corner of my 60CSx's Altimeter Page, constantly fluctuates large feet/mile distances, upward and downward, when I'm standing still. I guess that's "vertical wandering" too.

 

When I take repeated GPS elevation readings, using my 60CSx's Satellite Page > Menu > GPS Elevation option, I get similar large "vertical wanderings."

 

When I'm hiking

down

hill, my 60CSx's total ascent readings continue to climb; and when I hike exactly the same route day after day, I get totally different total ascent readings. From my point of view, the total ascent data field is useless.

 

At sea level, my ambient pressure and barometer readings are frequently 5 millibars apart. By definition, ambient and barometric pressures should be equal at sea level. Others have called this 60CSx malfunction "the barometer bug."

 

With auto-calibration and WAAS enabled and strong satellite signals, my 60CSx has given me elevations at National Geodetic Survey benchmarks that are 60-80 feet too high.

 

When I go through a tunnel with WAAS enabled, my 60CSx will

not

reaquire satellites after I leave the tunnel. I have to turn the 60CSx receiver off and on to reacquire satellites. I have to repeat the off-on steps when I go through multiple tunnels. That creates multiple track logs instead of one easily-viewable track log.

 

Also, if I am climbing or descending while in a tunnel, auto-calibration does not correct for changes in elevation that occurred while I was in the tunnel. Elevation readings are totally incorrect after tunnel passages.

 

During hikes, I've written down elevation readings that my 60CSx displayed. I also recorded where I was when I jotted down the 60CSx's elevation reading. The 60CSx's elevation readings are always different from the elevation readings that my MapSource software displays in track profile segments for the same locations.

 

I've explained all of the foregoing problems to two Garmin higher-ups. Both assured me that my 60CSx is working properly!

 

I'm new to GPS and Garmin. I guess I'm not yet used to the idea that $1,002 should buy me something that doesn't work as advertised but that

may

be made to work

if

Garmin publishes firmware that

may

work. I'd prefer to deal with manufacturers who work bugs out of their products, with pre-market testing, before taking my hard-earned money.

 

Compasses don't cost $1,002. Compasses work flawlessly. Topo maps work too.

 

Both compasses and topo maps can be

trusted

to work properly. After repeated and careful testing, I've learned that my 60CSx can't be trusted at all.

 

I hope I've answered your question.

Post #30:

Intermountain Angler, I'm new to GPS. Unfortunately, I didn't have your extensive military training or experience as a licensed guide. I relied on what Garmin claimed in its

advertising

. Here's part of what Garmin represented as true:

Refreshing a GPS Standard

 

*****

 

In addition, this unit features

a new, highly sensitive GPS receiver that

acquires satellites faster and

lets users track their location in challenging conditions

, such as heavy foliage or deep canyons. The GPSMAP 60CSx also incorporates a barometric altimeter for

extremely accurate elevation data

and an electronic compass that displays

an accurate heading

while standing still.

 

Considered the mainstay among serious outdoor enthusiasts

, ....

I haven't been trying to "micro manage" my 60CSx. Instead, I've been trying to figure out why my 60CSx doesn't perform as Garmin advertised. Using your word, I've been trying to separate what is "real" from what Garmin falsely claimed.

 

Maybe $1,002 is chicken-feed to you, but, for me, $1,002 is a lot of money. I certainly wouldn't have spent that huge sum on the 60CSx, software and accessories if Garmin had honestly stated that the 60CSx only gives 'approximations' and 'trends' and must be 'constantly' recalibrated because auto-calibration doesn't work.

 

Many others, who lack your extensive training and experience, have exhibited the confusion and upset that you ridicule. For example, check out theslowskys' Post #29 above in this "Not Entirely Happy With My GPSMAP 60CSx" thread. Or look at theslowskys' Post #117 in the "60csx Elevation, Anyone ever get elevation '------' ???" thread. Like me, theslowkys is "new to this GPSr stuff." He can't understand why his new 60CSx isn't accurate and wanders so much.

 

Maybe you should use your extensive training and experience to teach Garmin to be more honest.

Good luck, Jeff.

 

TracknQ

[pyt22fr]

 

Good point ! When will you do it ?

 

Er, a 500m walk is quite short, half a km. OK, one looks funny to walk in zigzag and this may bring undue attention !

 

Hi,

 

Well, I got out of work before dark last night, and I did my homework, zigzaging in the plain :-)

 

I got the following interesting results.

 

Bottom line :

 

1) with idoneous tracklog settings, Tracklog matches Trip odometer perfectly.

 

2) all in all, on "easy walks" (no stop, no tree foliage, no backward steps), ODOMETER appears to me to be MORE ACCURATE than tracklog if latter not set up to max performance.

 

3) I haven't managed to get odometer showing shorter distances than tracklog last night ! Indeed, I saw it on a walk last weekend, and I admit that it still needs investigating.

 

Conditions for experiments :

 

1) good sky view, good satellite reception, no heavy tree cover.

 

2) experiments made on 4 short walks.

 

3) 60Csx held in hand.

 

4) each walk at a rather steady walking pace, from slow (3-4 km/h) to somewhat faster (5-6 km/h).

 

5) No stop within a walk.

 

6) Loop shape walks, always progressing, no backward steps at any time.

 

7) Tracklog data read from Track page (max 500 legs) AND from active logs saved on SD Card (amount of legs limited by SD card size ?).

 

First walk :

 

Loop made of 5 walking legs. No zigzaging.

Track log set to Auto.

 

 

Trip odometer : 0,67 km

Tracklog from track page : 662 m, 27 legs.

Tracklog from SD Card : 662 m, 27 legs.

Conclusion : Odometer is 1% ahead of tracklog from Track page.

Comments :

Walk easy to track, so track log distance similar to odometer distance.

Odometer probably in line with reality.

 

Second walk :

 

Loop made of several zigzags. Left half of screenshot doesn't show them clearly because of display scale, but there are.

Amplitude of zigzags : ranging from 5 meters to 25 meters.

Track log set to Auto.

 

 

Trip odometer : 0,54 km

Tracklog from track page : 523 m, 36 legs

Tracklog from SD Card : 524 m, 36 legs.

Conclusion : Odometer is 3% ahead of tracklog from Track page.

Comments :

Tracklog tends to cut out curve angles, so shows shorter distance than reality.

Odometer probably in line with reality.

 

Third walk :

 

Exactly same track as second walk, with different tracklog settings.

Track log set to 1 second.

 

 

Trip odometer : 0,54 km

Tracklog from track page : 541 m, 429 legs.

Tracklog from SD Card : 540 m, 420 legs (on MapSource, I may have wiped away 9 legs by mistake).

Conclusion :

Odometer matches exactly Track page and SD Card distance.

Comments :

Odometer, Tracklogs from Track page and from SD Card probably in line with reality.

 

Fourth walk :

 

Longer walk FULL of zigzags.

Amplitude of zigzags : up to 35 meters.

Track log set to 1 second.

 

 

Trip odometer : 1,40 km

Tracklog from track page : 1,40 km, 126 legs (please note compression on amount of legs, because of 500 limit on saved tracks ?).

Tracklog from SD Card : 1,40 km, 994 legs.

Conclusion :

Odometer matches exactly Track page and SD Card distance.

Comments :

Odometer, Tracklogs from Track page and from SD Card probably in line with reality.

 

Well, that's it.

 

Overall impression :

 

my personal feeling is that I would undoubtdly rely on trip odometer on "easy walks", I mean "non tricky track" walks, and on car trips.

 

Trip odometer logic and reaction stills needs investigating on more difficult tracks : stopping time in open air, stopping time under tree foliage, backward steps, etc.

 

Cheers.

 

pyt22fr

[+GOT GPS?]

I did a hike today that was 8.5 miles long: Clickable image>

 

Seems like the 60Cx is very accurate, and it would be interesting to see how accurate the 60CSx is on a fast hike also. I had kept the GPS vertical and a good view of the sky the whole time this morning, and about the time the sun was comming up.