confirmed vista HCX speed filter problem

[Smac999]

with a vista CX in one hand and a HCX in the other I walked to the end of block. down the open street. both GPS less then 10m accuracy. adjusting speeds from very slow to decently fast.

 

the CX give me a trip distance of 55m and a moving time of 2 mins. the HCX gave me a disatance of 17m and a time of 30 secs...

 

under about 1.5-2 km/h the HCX doesn't count time or distance.

 

as far as I'm concerned. the trip meter of the HCX is 100% useless for hiking.

 

I really hope they can fix this via firmware.

Edited September 13, 2007 by Smac999

[+DENelson83]

with a vista CX in one hand and a HCX in the other I walked to the end of block. down the open street. both GPS less then 10m accuracy. adjusting speeds from very slow to decently fast.

 

the CX give me a trip distance of 55m and a moving time of 2 mins. the HCX gave me a disatance of 17m and a time of 30 secs...

 

under about 1.5-2 km/h the HCX doesn't count time or distance.

 

as far as I'm concerned. the trip meter of the HCX is 100% useless for hiking.

 

I really hope they can fix this via firmware.

How were you holding the units? They need to be held with the display facing the sky's zenith to maintain a good satellite lock. Just because your units continually display an accuracy figure of 10m or better doesn't necessarily mean they're maintaining continuous locks on the satellites.

[gallet]

A few people have reported this problem independently so it probably is an issue, but surely it is a firmware fix. It does not seem reasonable to suspect that the H lost satellite reception while the non H didn't.

[Alphawolf]

Last week, I did a 35 mile backpacking trip in Yellowstone National Park. About half of it was "no trail" bushwhacking. Very slow going, with incessant stepping over dead fall logs. I will absolutely confrim what you just said about the trip odometer being worthless for hiking. It just doesn't register at slow speeds.

[leog]

You can tell when it's not recording: put up your speed in one of the display windows. When it says 0mph, it's not tracking/recording...

[Smac999]

You can tell when it's not recording: put up your speed in one of the display windows. When it says 0mph, it's not tracking/recording...

 

yes I know. the HCX stays at 0 untill you get up to around 2km/h were as the CX would show 0.8km/h or so

 

both GPS's were held the same. one in each hand. palm's up. out in front of me. so I could read the trip screens with moving time, stop time, and speed.

[SiliconFiend]

I know this issue has gotten a fair amount of airtime in this forum, but has anyone raised the issue with Garmin? Do they even know that it's a problem that needs to be addressed?

[wera172]

I just called Garmin about it, and I read post #1 to the rep on the phone - she did know about it, although this particular rep was more aware of a drift issue when the unit was stationary, as opposed to a lack of registering speed & distance when the unit is actually moving.

 

The rep told me that the cutoff/activation point for the HCx models to register speed is 2.2 mph; she did not know of any firmware fix to correct it. Perhaps if enough of us call, a fix can be made?

 

In the case of the drift issue, she stated that turning the compass off should correct it(?).

(I just sold my 'ol blue Legend and haven't purchased my HCx replacement yet, so I can't verify this info).

[BuckyBuck]

In addition to the Vista HCX I got a few days ago, I also have a Mio 310x that I believe has the same SIRFstar III chipset. Its chipset has a feature called Static Navigation that apparently keeps the display from jumping around when a vehicle is sitting still. Is this what is causing the problem you describe in the HCX?

 

If so, I would hope there's a simply firmware fix that will give you the option to disable it when walking. I know that there are a number of utilities available for PocketPC-based GPS units like the Mio that allow you to switch Static Navigation off and on on-the-fly.

[Smac999]

I did send an email to surport. not sure how far it will make it.

 

2.2mph cutoff is rediculas for a "hiking" GPS. a walk in the park is more then that. but not a real moutainous trail.

 

here is a few points from a vista CX from last weekend. it went down to as low as 0.1km/h! I climbed 2000ft in under 2 miles so it wasn't fast going!. the HXC wouldn't have recorded any of this into the trip meter. (hopefully it still would have loged tracks though??? maybe not if tracking by distance? but should by time?)

 

101 2194 ft 0:01:30 1.1 km/h

104 2215 ft 0:02:20 0.7 km/h

105 2221 ft 0:02:08 0.6 km/h

109 2276 ft 0:01:54 0.4 km/h

115 2376 ft 0:04:25 0.1 km/h

133 2638 ft 0:07:01 0.7 km/h

134 2792 ft 0:03:10 0.6 km/h

137 2948 ft 0:06:32 0.6 km/h

141 3344 ft 0:05:55 0.4 km/h

143 3499 ft 0:12:01 0.4 km/h

144 3501 ft 0:06:24 0.2 km/h

149 3665 ft 0:07:36 0.5 km/h

151 3958 ft 0:06:35 0.9 km/h

157 4155 ft 0:01:09 0.7 km/h

158 4160 ft 0:04:54 0.6 km/h

Edited September 13, 2007 by Smac999

[wera172]

^^^^ Nice data - must have been one heckuva' hike!

 

I agree that 2.2 mph is ridiculous for a gps unit whose target market is hikers and outdoor adventurers. Hopefully, Garmin will receive enough feedback and offer up a fix.

[Smac999]

^^^^ Nice data - must have been one heckuva' hike!

 

I agree that 2.2 mph is ridiculous for a gps unit whose target market is hikers and outdoor adventurers. Hopefully, Garmin will receive enough feedback and offer up a fix.

 

yah that was only 2kms out of the 16. but the rest was alot flatter

 

I was really hoping to have the HCX for the trip as well but it showed up 2 days after.

Edited September 14, 2007 by Smac999

[Rhialto]

In addition to the Vista HCX I got a few days ago, I also have a Mio 310x that I believe has the same SIRFstar III chipset.

 

H models use Mediatek chipset...

[Smac999]

ok what I was afraid of came true.

 

track set to track by distance. set to 10 meters (smallest amount)

 

walked 100 meters down the street fast. came inside. it tracked points every 10-15 meters

 

walked 100 meters down the street slowly. trip meter said 0m. moving time said 0 secs. and 0 tracked points!.... so it will not track unless it thinks you are moving. even though the pos is moving.

 

tracking by time works fine. it tracks weather you are moving or not. so if you are hiking and want tracks. set to time and not distance!...

[wera172]

^^^^ Well there's a nice "work-around". Thanks for checking it out and posting - I guess I can feel better about my plans to purchase one now.

[Smac999]

it's looks like it tracks in auto as while. since I just got a bunch of tracks while sitting on the table.

 

so the unit will save tracks. which you can transfer into mapsouce. which will cacl the distance traveled.

 

but the stoped time, moving time, and distanced traveled on the unit itself will be messed up.

[Smac999]

double post

Edited September 14, 2007 by Smac999

[Smac999]

updates from today. hiked a slow going backcounty trail yesterday into a campsite, and today back out.

 

I don't think the moving / stoped times are quite right on the CX either. I don't think stoped time should have been more then 30 mins or so on the way out. however the CX is ALOT better then the HCX. the distance on the HCX is a joke.

 

I'm still alittle confused on the total distance though. all 4 tracks (2 units x 2 ways) give me around 4.5km in mapsoure. the cx gives me 4.5km each way on trip meter. but the markers at the trail head say 5.5km.

 

pic from the hike in...

 

 

 

pic from the hike out.

 

 

pic from mapsource of the HCX

 

Edited September 17, 2007 by Smac999

[wera172]

You should call Garmin and be yet another consumer expressing dissatisfaction and confusion about their latest products. Get the email address of the person you are talking to, and then email him/her a link to this thread.

 

The more negative feedback they hear, the better the chance of a solution.

[Smac999]

You should call Garmin and be yet another consumer expressing dissatisfaction and confusion about their latest products. Get the email address of the person you are talking to, and then email him/her a link to this thread.

 

The more negative feedback they hear, the better the chance of a solution.

 

I sent an email last week to surport. if I don't get anything by mon / tues I'll call.

[fujitsu]

Hi,

 

The Etrex Legend and Vista HCx has the feature Velocity: 0.1 meter/sec (steady state) however the GPSMAP 60 Cx has Velocity: 0.05 meter/sec (steady state). Could this explain the difference between this two units? Does anyone know what is tje meanig of this feature?

 

Thanks

 

AA

[jmundinger]

You should call Garmin and be yet another consumer expressing dissatisfaction and confusion about their latest products.

 

I sent an email last week to surport. if I don't get anything by mon / tues I'll call.

 

After my experience and reading posts that others had the same issue, I also sent an email. In mine, I referenced the discussion that we were having here.

[Smac999]

I got this reply today. I just replyed with the pics I posted above.

 

Thank you for contacting Garmin International,

 

I"d be happy to help you. Thank you for bringing this to our attention. We have had numerous accounts of this happening and we are currently looking in to this to see what the issue might be. Hopefully, there will be a software update to fix this issue at some time.

 

Please let me know if there's anything else I can help you with.

 

 

With Best Regards,

 

Debbie B

 

Product Support Specialist

[wera172]

^^^^ Excellent Smac! Thanks for taking the time not only to gather & compare data, but for keeping us updated as well.

 

Let's see what they do with it!

[freeday]

I have also reported this problems to Garmin already on 31. Juli 2007

please look here:

http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php...9653&hl=hcx

 

And i am still waiting ....

 

It is like "Waiting for Godot"

[freeday]

You should call Garmin and be yet another consumer expressing dissatisfaction and confusion about their latest products. Get the email address of the person you are talking to, and then email him/her a link to this thread.

 

The more negative feedback they hear, the better the chance of a solution.

I already did THIS (with a link) in july 2007.

http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php...9653&hl=hcx

without any new firmware until today

[John E Cache]

The GPS odometer has always been useless because of random position errors. If you didn't filter the errors at slow speed, you could put the GPS on the ground and the odometer would would increase because errors cause your position to change randomly. If you wanted to know the actual distance, couldn't you load the track into Google Earth? The position error for each given point in the track would be small compared to the track length.

[freeday]

The GPS odometer has always been useless because of random position errors. If you didn't filter the errors at slow speed, you could put the GPS on the ground and the odometer would would increase because errors cause your position to change randomly. If you wanted to know the actual distance, couldn't you load the track into Google Earth? The position error for each given point in the track would be small compared to the track length.

Then you never ever had a good GPS

[Rhinomike]

I have never owned a GPS before. I am excited to buy one and start my hunting. I was all set to buy a Etrex Vista HCX today. However now after reading this I am rethinking it. Does this have any affect on looking for a cache? That is going to be the primary use of my GPS. Should I purchase my second choice which is a Etrex Legend HCX? I am confused can some please clarify this for me. Is there a problem with the Vista HCX or not? Thanks guys.

[+Prime Suspect]

The GPS odometer has always been useless because of random position errors. If you didn't filter the errors at slow speed, you could put the GPS on the ground and the odometer would would increase because errors cause your position to change randomly. If you wanted to know the actual distance, couldn't you load the track into Google Earth? The position error for each given point in the track would be small compared to the track length.

Sounds like you've got a broken GPS. Modern GPSs calculate speed by determining the signal's Doppler shift, not by position change. So "position errors" shouldn't affect the speed readout.

[wera172]

Modern GPSs calculate speed by determining the signal's Doppler shift, not by position change. So "position errors" shouldn't affect the speed readout.

 

No offense, but I believe this to be a misleading statement. Perhaps I am interpreting your statement incorrectly? At any rate, I am going to oversimplify things and keep it basic, but will hopefully explain and differentiate my understanding of the GPS concept.

 

GPS positioning works based upon the concept of triangulation - solving an equation for one unknown position (you with your GPSr in hand) by receiving, interpreting, and correcting a series of known positions (the GPS satellites). The satellites transmit their positioning information via the almanac data, along with a DoD maintained atomic time stamp and a "pseudo random code" to identify one satellite from another.

 

Your GPSr obviously receives this known positioning information. Since it knows where the satellites are (almanac data), what time the positioning information was sent (atomic clock synchronization), which satellite it came from (pseudo random code) - and how long it took to receive this information, it can then calculate and display your position and movement. Your unknown and variable position is computed upon this series of known satellite positions, rather than the Doppler shift effect of a given signal; the positions and signals are essentially fixed, you aren't.

 

Once a satellite "lock" is achieved, your position is known and updates are then calculated depending on GPS settings (ie, "battery saver" mode calculates your position less often). The known satellite positioning data is always there for interpretation.

 

I don't believe this concept should be confused with Doppler shift, which is based upon a frequency change of a given signal as the source or observer moves in relation to the other; rather GPS uses known exact positions and a continuously broadcast (and corrected) signal without frequency change.

 

Best,

WERA172

[Newb888]

Modern GPSs calculate speed by determining the signal's Doppler shift, not by position change. So "position errors" shouldn't affect the speed readout.

 

No offense, but I believe this to be a misleading statement. Perhaps I am interpreting your statement incorrectly? At any rate, I am going to oversimplify things and keep it basic, but will hopefully explain and differentiate my understanding of the GPS concept.

 

GPS positioning works based upon the concept of triangulation - solving an equation for one unknown position (you with your GPSr in hand) by receiving, interpreting, and correcting a series of known positions (the GPS satellites). The satellites transmit their positioning information via the almanac data, along with a DoD maintained atomic time stamp and a "pseudo random code" to identify one satellite from another.

 

Your GPSr obviously receives this known positioning information. Since it knows where the satellites are (almanac data), what time the positioning information was sent (atomic clock synchronization), which satellite it came from (pseudo random code) - and how long it took to receive this information, it can then calculate and display your position and movement. Your unknown and variable position is computed upon this series of known satellite positions, rather than the Doppler shift effect of a given signal; the positions and signals are essentially fixed, you aren't.

 

Once a satellite "lock" is achieved, your position is known and updates are then calculated depending on GPS settings (ie, "battery saver" mode calculates your position less often). The known satellite positioning data is always there for interpretation.

 

I don't believe this concept should be confused with Doppler shift, which is based upon a frequency change of a given signal as the source or observer moves in relation to the other; rather GPS uses known exact positions and a continuously broadcast (and corrected) signal without frequency change.

 

Best,

WERA172

 

Looking at the comparison track data between the 60 and Vista HCx I see a difference between the two so it appears to me that there may be more than just a speed filter problem. Hopefully it is software related and not related to the chipset: http://www.naviboard.de/vb/showthread.php?t=21730

Edited September 19, 2007 by Newb888

[John E Cache]

The GPS odometer has always been useless because of random position errors. If you didn't filter the errors at slow speed, you could put the GPS on the ground and the odometer would would increase because errors cause your position to change randomly. If you wanted to know the actual distance, couldn't you load the track into Google Earth? The position error for each given point in the track would be small compared to the track length.

Sounds like you've got a broken GPS. Modern GPSs calculate speed by determining the signal's Doppler shift, not by position change. So "position errors" shouldn't affect the speed readout.

The odometer shows the distance you move not speed. I'm guessing that the GPS doesn't multiply average speed times time to get distance. I think it computes the distance between track points. On my old GPS the odometer went up and the speed was non-zero when you were standing still. I'm talking before SA was turned off and before geocaching started. The HCX odometer is clearly broken for walking. The dppler shift is interesting because your speed relative to the sats changes when you are standing still. The sats aren't going in a straight line and neither are you(earth's rotation).

[+hogrod]

The odometer shows the distance you move not speed. I'm guessing that the GPS doesn't multiply average speed times time to get distance. I think it computes the distance between track points.

 

Both my 60CX and vistaCX both show different distance on the trip computer VS the track log distance. If the receiver was using the track log to compute the distance I would think the numbers would be the same.

Edited September 19, 2007 by hogrod

[+Prime Suspect]

Modern GPSs calculate speed by determining the signal's Doppler shift, not by position change. So "position errors" shouldn't affect the speed readout.

 

No offense, but I believe this to be a misleading statement. Perhaps I am interpreting your statement incorrectly? At any rate, I am going to oversimplify things and keep it basic, but will hopefully explain and differentiate my understanding of the GPS concept.

 

GPS positioning works based upon the concept of triangulation - solving an equation for one unknown position (you with your GPSr in hand) by receiving, interpreting, and correcting a series of known positions (the GPS satellites). The satellites transmit their positioning information via the almanac data, along with a DoD maintained atomic time stamp and a "pseudo random code" to identify one satellite from another.

 

Your GPSr obviously receives this known positioning information. Since it knows where the satellites are (almanac data), what time the positioning information was sent (atomic clock synchronization), which satellite it came from (pseudo random code) - and how long it took to receive this information, it can then calculate and display your position and movement. Your unknown and variable position is computed upon this series of known satellite positions, rather than the Doppler shift effect of a given signal; the positions and signals are essentially fixed, you aren't.

 

Once a satellite "lock" is achieved, your position is known and updates are then calculated depending on GPS settings (ie, "battery saver" mode calculates your position less often). The known satellite positioning data is always there for interpretation.

 

I don't believe this concept should be confused with Doppler shift, which is based upon a frequency change of a given signal as the source or observer moves in relation to the other; rather GPS uses known exact positions and a continuously broadcast (and corrected) signal without frequency change.

 

Best,

WERA172

 

"GPS receivers typically calculate velocity by measuring the frequency shift (Doppler shift) of the GPS D-band carrier(s). Velocity accuracy can be scenario dependent, (multipath, obstructed sky view from the dash of a car, mountains, city canyons, bad DOP) but 0.2 m/sec per axis (95%) is achievable for PPS and SPS velocity accuracy is the same as PPS when SA is off.

 

Velocity measured by a GPS is inherently 3 dimension, but consumer GPS receivers only report 2D (horizontal) speed on their readout. Garmin's specifications quote 0.1mph accuracy but due to signal degredation problems noted above, perhaps 0.5mph accuracy in typical automobile applications would be what you can count on."

 

- NAVSTAR GPS User Equipment Introduction document Section 3.7

[John E Cache]

The odometer shows the distance you move not speed. I'm guessing that the GPS doesn't multiply average speed times time to get distance. I think it computes the distance between track points.

Both my 60CX and vistaCX both show different distance on the trip computer VS the track log distance. If the receiver was using the track log to compute the distance I would think the numbers would be the same.

Very interesting! How do you check the track log distance? I guess I will have to RTFM for my 60csx. I wonder what happens when you leave your GPS in one spot for a long time. On the old GPS the track used to wander around and you looked at the cloud to do waypoint averaging.

[jmundinger]

]Very interesting! How do you check the track log distance?

 

I've done it two ways. The easiest is to download the track into MapSource and then look at the track profile - if you select the entire track, it will give you the sum of the legs.

 

I also have downloaded tracks into AllTopo and then traced the track to measure the distance.

[+Grinch & Gremlin]

I have never owned a GPS before. I am excited to buy one and start my hunting. I was all set to buy a Etrex Vista HCX today. However now after reading this I am rethinking it. Does this have any affect on looking for a cache? That is going to be the primary use of my GPS. Should I purchase my second choice which is a Etrex Legend HCX? I am confused can some please clarify this for me. Is there a problem with the Vista HCX or not? Thanks guys.

 

Well, this isn't something you would like to happen, but it won't affect your ability to find a cache. The GPSr will still show you where you are and lead you to the coordinates you've entered. Given the excellent sensitivity of this new chip, it will do those things very well.

 

What it does mean is that, if you want to know how far you've walked, you won't know based on what is on your GPSr screen, because it will not count any distance during which you moved at a pace less than 2.2 mph. This could matter if you're comparing your GPSr readings to your paper map where it would be nice to know that you've traveled 2 miles so you can pinpoint where on the paper map you are. Or, if you're trying to decide whether to go farther that day, and you use the trip page to see how far you've already come in a particular length of time, you'll not have an accurate reading to help you figure out how long the next leg will take.

 

So, overall, it IS a serious issue, one that Garmin has known about since the model was released and one they should have already fixed. But firmware updates have come and gone without a solution so far. I've been waiting to buy this model until they fixed it, but I'm not sure when or if that's going to happen. Of course it's easy for me to wait because I have both a Vista C and a 60CSx to use so I'm not without resources while I wait.

 

If I were in your shoes, I probably wouldn't wait to buy since you're missing out on a great deal of fun in the meantime. I would consider both the 60CSx and the Vista HCx. The two are virtually the same in sensitivity (despite using different chips). The 60CSx is easier to use (more buttons and labeled with words), it is larger and has the antenna sticking up. The Vista is smaller and more pocketable, but has these issues (which are probably temporary, but you can't know for sure). Personally, I think you should just pull the trigger and choose one because they're both excellent units and the most important thing is to get out there and find those caches.

[Rhinomike]

I have never owned a GPS before. I am excited to buy one and start my hunting. I was all set to buy a Etrex Vista HCX today. However now after reading this I am rethinking it. Does this have any affect on looking for a cache? That is going to be the primary use of my GPS. Should I purchase my second choice which is a Etrex Legend HCX? I am confused can some please clarify this for me. Is there a problem with the Vista HCX or not? Thanks guys.

 

Well, this isn't something you would like to happen, but it won't affect your ability to find a cache. The GPSr will still show you where you are and lead you to the coordinates you've entered. Given the excellent sensitivity of this new chip, it will do those things very well.

 

What it does mean is that, if you want to know how far you've walked, you won't know based on what is on your GPSr screen, because it will not count any distance during which you moved at a pace less than 2.2 mph. This could matter if you're comparing your GPSr readings to your paper map where it would be nice to know that you've traveled 2 miles so you can pinpoint where on the paper map you are. Or, if you're trying to decide whether to go farther that day, and you use the trip page to see how far you've already come in a particular length of time, you'll not have an accurate reading to help you figure out how long the next leg will take.

 

So, overall, it IS a serious issue, one that Garmin has known about since the model was released and one they should have already fixed. But firmware updates have come and gone without a solution so far. I've been waiting to buy this model until they fixed it, but I'm not sure when or if that's going to happen. Of course it's easy for me to wait because I have both a Vista C and a 60CSx to use so I'm not without resources while I wait.

 

If I were in your shoes, I probably wouldn't wait to buy since you're missing out on a great deal of fun in the meantime. I would consider both the 60CSx and the Vista HCx. The two are virtually the same in sensitivity (despite using different chips). The 60CSx is easier to use (more buttons and labeled with words), it is larger and has the antenna sticking up. The Vista is smaller and more pocketable, but has these issues (which are probably temporary, but you can't know for sure). Personally, I think you should just pull the trigger and choose one because they're both excellent units and the most important thing is to get out there and find those caches.

 

I just placed an order for the Vista HCX with Amazon.com. I got it for $ 217.00 and free shipping. Well kind of. The shipping was free but I am so excited to get started that I paid the extra 20 bucks for overnight shipping. Thank you to everyone for all of the help. I am sure I will have more questions once I receive the unit and I am ready to get started. Thanks again.

[nrcooper]

This problem isn't specific to Garmin. I have a Magellan Explorist 210 and I have the exact same issues with my trip odometer. It is grossly inaccurate compared to trail documentation or signage, but downloading the trip to my computer gives results very similiar to the trail documentation or signage. I understand from another thread that it is common in most of the Explorist's series, but Magellan doesn't seem to want to acknowledge the issue. At least Garmin acknowledges the problem.

[BelchFire]

I just placed an order for the Vista HCX with Amazon.com. I got it for $ 217.00 and free shipping.

 

I ordered mine from Amazon and it was $243.xx (free shipping) I just checked to see, and it's showing as $239.85. Where do you find it (at Amazon) for $217?

[Rhinomike]

I just placed an order for the Vista HCX with Amazon.com. I got it for $ 217.00 and free shipping.

 

I ordered mine from Amazon and it was $243.xx (free shipping) I just checked to see, and it's showing as $239.85. Where do you find it (at Amazon) for $217?

 

This is where I got mine ......

 

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B00...ractiveda742-20

[SiliconFiend]

I just placed an order for the Vista HCX with Amazon.com. I got it for $ 217.00 and free shipping.

 

I ordered mine from Amazon and it was $243.xx (free shipping) I just checked to see, and it's showing as $239.85. Where do you find it (at Amazon) for $217?

 

This is where I got mine ......

 

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B00...ractiveda742-20

Umm... If you bought from that link, I hope you know you got the Legend HCx, not the Vista HCx. That's not a problem if you don't care for the electronic compass and altimeter.

[Rhinomike]

You are correct. I just clicked on the link and it is the Legend. However I double checked my Invoice and it states Vista HCX. I will receive it today so I gues I will find out shortly. Thank you for pointing that out.

[knowschad]

Is this just with the Vista HCx, or does the Legend HCx have the same issue?

[+allory]

GPS Chipset Type M software version 2.30 as of August 28, 2007

 

http://www8.garmin.com/support/download_details.jsp?id=3733

 

Might not help with the problem, but might be worth running the WebUpdater and finding out.

[jmundinger]

GPS Chipset Type M software version 2.30 as of August 28, 2007

 

http://www8.garmin.com/support/download_details.jsp?id=3733

 

Might not help with the problem, but might be worth running the WebUpdater and finding out.

 

I am running firmware 2.30 for the Vista HCx - which shows as the current firmware for this unit on Garmin's site. Also, when running web updater I get the message that I am running the current firmware version.

[freeday]

GPS Chipset Type M software version 2.30 as of August 28, 2007

 

http://www8.garmin.com/support/download_details.jsp?id=3733

 

Might not help with the problem, but might be worth running the WebUpdater and finding out.

 

I am running firmware 2.30 for the Vista HCx - which shows as the current firmware for this unit on Garmin's site. Also, when running web updater I get the message that I am running the current firmware version.

HCX has current GPS SW Version 2.10

There seems to be a new Version called GPS Chipset Type M software version 2.30 as of August 28, 2007

or what could it be?

[knowschad]

Is web updater required to determine the current version I have installed, or is it also displayed somewhere in the unit itself? I can't seem to find it there.

[freeday]

Is web updater required to determine the current version I have installed, or is it also displayed somewhere in the unit itself? I can't seem to find it there.

press

menu-menu-setup-system-menu-software version

on your unit without using any computer

Edited September 20, 2007 by freeday