Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 20
IndyJpr

Garmin Colorado 400t - First impressions / info / topo comparison

Recommended Posts

I believe I read that the Colorado is based on Garmin's chip set -- not the Sirf. So far I haven't noticed any issues with reception and lock but it is the dead of winter around here (MA) which normally isn't a problem anyway! GO$Rs
The issues were with the odometer not reading at slow speeds. I think the current firmware on the HCX still won't read below 1.1mph. This normally isn't a big deal but if you are using detailed topos then you could be climbing steep mountains and going very slow. There also seems to be an issue with max speed being glitchy. Some people have done hikes where their max speed was reported as high a 90mph. So maybe you can check this stuff out. It's very possible that the Colorado could be using a newer version of the chip that addresses all of those issues. I was thinking that is was a hardware issue all along.

 

Interesting - I'll definitely keep an eye on this, as these are stats/values I often pay attention to. I had noticed, out caching with a Magellan user, that our units (Garmin 60CSx / Magellan Explorist 600) consistently read significantly different odometer / trip meter readings, both when hiking on foot, as well as a day in and out of the car. Of course, minor differences would be expected - but these were often signficant, to the difference of more > 10%.

 

Since I'll be carrying the 400t alongside a 60CSx for awhile, I can do some side-by-side comparisons of track logs and trip computer calculations - thus comparing both the hardware and algorithms/logging in both units.

Share this post


Link to post
I believe I read that the Colorado is based on Garmin's chip set -- not the Sirf. So far I haven't noticed any issues with reception and lock but it is the dead of winter around here (MA) which normally isn't a problem anyway! GO$Rs
The issues were with the odometer not reading at slow speeds. I think the current firmware on the HCX still won't read below 1.1mph. This normally isn't a big deal but if you are using detailed topos then you could be climbing steep mountains and going very slow. There also seems to be an issue with max speed being glitchy. Some people have done hikes where their max speed was reported as high a 90mph. So maybe you can check this stuff out. It's very possible that the Colorado could be using a newer version of the chip that addresses all of those issues. I was thinking that is was a hardware issue all along.

 

Interesting - I'll definitely keep an eye on this, as these are stats/values I often pay attention to. I had noticed, out caching with a Magellan user, that our units (Garmin 60CSx / Magellan Explorist 600) consistently read significantly different odometer / trip meter readings, both when hiking on foot, as well as a day in and out of the car. Of course, minor differences would be expected - but these were often signficant, to the difference of more > 10%.

 

Since I'll be carrying the 400t alongside a 60CSx for awhile, I can do some side-by-side comparisons of track logs and trip computer calculations - thus comparing both the hardware and algorithms/logging in both units.

Thanks! I guess the 60csx and the 76csx are the only models to use the Sirf chip.

Share this post


Link to post
I believe I read that the Colorado is based on Garmin's chip set -- not the Sirf. So far I haven't noticed any issues with reception and lock but it is the dead of winter around here (MA) which normally isn't a problem anyway! GO$Rs
The issues were with the odometer not reading at slow speeds. I think the current firmware on the HCX still won't read below 1.1mph. This normally isn't a big deal but if you are using detailed topos then you could be climbing steep mountains and going very slow. There also seems to be an issue with max speed being glitchy. Some people have done hikes where their max speed was reported as high a 90mph. So maybe you can check this stuff out. It's very possible that the Colorado could be using a newer version of the chip that addresses all of those issues. I was thinking that is was a hardware issue all along.

 

I was watching the odometer this morning and I don't remember seeing any issues even at slow speeds, but I really wasn't looking for trouble either. I'll have to do a comparison between my 60cs and the Colorado tomorrow.

 

GO$Rs

Share this post


Link to post
I believe I read that the Colorado is based on Garmin's chip set -- not the Sirf. So far I haven't noticed any issues with reception and lock but it is the dead of winter around here (MA) which normally isn't a problem anyway! GO$Rs
The issues were with the odometer not reading at slow speeds. I think the current firmware on the HCX still won't read below 1.1mph. This normally isn't a big deal but if you are using detailed topos then you could be climbing steep mountains and going very slow. There also seems to be an issue with max speed being glitchy. Some people have done hikes where their max speed was reported as high a 90mph. So maybe you can check this stuff out. It's very possible that the Colorado could be using a newer version of the chip that addresses all of those issues. I was thinking that is was a hardware issue all along.

 

I was watching the odometer this morning and I don't remember seeing any issues even at slow speeds, but I really wasn't looking for trouble either. I'll have to do a comparison between my 60cs and the Colorado tomorrow.

 

GO$Rs

TrailGators is misinformed (and widely spreading that misinformation). It's almost certainly not a hardware issue. The newest Vista HCx chipset update (2.6) fixed the slow speed threshold. I've seen speeds of 0.7 km/h reported, which is excruciatingly slow. The odometer bug was all tied up with the speed threshold, and now it almost seems like Garmin overdid it and the odometer is overreporting distance now. It seems to be a matter of fine-tuning anyway. The max speed issue was one person's report, and the circumstances surrounding it are not fully known. There are still some outstanding issues with the HCx such as correctly reporting total elevation change, but Garmin has a long history of fixing firmware bugs, so I'm confident these issues will be resolved.

Share this post


Link to post
I believe I read that the Colorado is based on Garmin's chip set -- not the Sirf. So far I haven't noticed any issues with reception and lock but it is the dead of winter around here (MA) which normally isn't a problem anyway! GO$Rs
The issues were with the odometer not reading at slow speeds. I think the current firmware on the HCX still won't read below 1.1mph. This normally isn't a big deal but if you are using detailed topos then you could be climbing steep mountains and going very slow. There also seems to be an issue with max speed being glitchy. Some people have done hikes where their max speed was reported as high a 90mph. So maybe you can check this stuff out. It's very possible that the Colorado could be using a newer version of the chip that addresses all of those issues. I was thinking that is was a hardware issue all along.

I was watching the odometer this morning and I don't remember seeing any issues even at slow speeds, but I really wasn't looking for trouble either. I'll have to do a comparison between my 60cs and the Colorado tomorrow. GO$Rs
TrailGators is misinformed (and widely spreading that misinformation). It's almost certainly not a hardware issue. The newest Vista HCx chipset update (2.6) fixed the slow speed threshold. I've seen speeds of 0.7 km/h reported, which is excruciatingly slow. The odometer bug was all tied up with the speed threshold, and now it almost seems like Garmin overdid it and the odometer is overreporting distance now. It seems to be a matter of fine-tuning anyway. The max speed issue was one person's report, and the circumstances surrounding it are not fully known. There are still some outstanding issues with the HCx such as correctly reporting total elevation change, but Garmin has a long history of fixing firmware bugs, so I'm confident these issues will be resolved.
Ever heard of an opinion? Let's keep these forums friendly. They are nothing but opinions including yours. We don't work at Garmin so there is no way either of us can know. Anyhow, the Sirf chip works perfectly. So they wrote the firmware correctly for the first high sensitivity GPS and then botched it up on the next generation? I bet there's more to it than that. Anyhow, it was simply my "observation" that these firmware fixes on the HCX are probably compensating for a hardware spec differences on the new chip that the Sirf chip didn't have. If it was just a firmware issue they would have fixed it a long time ago. However, if the new hardware has limitations that the Sirf chip didn't have then the firmware might not be able to compensate. It doesn't sound like it's completely fixed yet based on feedback in this thread. Anyhow, hopefully they can dial in the firmware. It will be interesting to see how the Colorado performs. Edited by TrailGators

Share this post


Link to post
I believe I read that the Colorado is based on Garmin's chip set -- not the Sirf. So far I haven't noticed any issues with reception and lock but it is the dead of winter around here (MA) which normally isn't a problem anyway! GO$Rs
The issues were with the odometer not reading at slow speeds. I think the current firmware on the HCX still won't read below 1.1mph. This normally isn't a big deal but if you are using detailed topos then you could be climbing steep mountains and going very slow. There also seems to be an issue with max speed being glitchy. Some people have done hikes where their max speed was reported as high a 90mph. So maybe you can check this stuff out. It's very possible that the Colorado could be using a newer version of the chip that addresses all of those issues. I was thinking that is was a hardware issue all along.

 

I was watching the odometer this morning and I don't remember seeing any issues even at slow speeds, but I really wasn't looking for trouble either. I'll have to do a comparison between my 60cs and the Colorado tomorrow.

 

GO$Rs

TrailGators is misinformed (and widely spreading that misinformation).

that's a bit much, don'tcha think?

Share this post


Link to post
Having the cache data in hand (in a single, compact, WATERproof unit), rather than digging into my pack and pulling out the Palm - is a HUGE benefit. I know, our Magellan brothers have had this feature for years, but - it's new to Garmin.

Actually, this is only partially true. The Magellan eXplorist shows some of the trivial cache data (diff, terrain, container size, hider, hint) but not the cache description or the logs. If would be impossible to find a multi-cache with the only the data on an eXplorist. Also, it has a limit of only 200 geocaches, which is really to few for my liking. Today, on the spur of the moment, I found a multi-cache with just the info on my Colorado. That is pretty cool to me.

 

--Marky

Share this post


Link to post

Ever heard of an opinion? Let's keep these forums friendly. They are nothing but opinions including yours. We don't work at Garmin so there is no way either of us can know. Anyhow, the Sirf chip works perfectly. So they wrote the firmware correctly for the first high sensitivity GPS and then botched it up on the next generation? I bet there's more to it than that. Anyhow, it was simply my "observation" that these firmware fixes on the HCX are probably compensating for a hardware spec differences on the new chip that the Sirf chip didn't have. If it was just a firmware issue they would have fixed it a long time ago. However, if the new hardware has limitations that the Sirf chip didn't have then the firmware might not be able to compensate. It doesn't sound like it's completely fixed yet based on feedback in this thread. Anyhow, hopefully they can dial in the firmware. It will be interesting to see how the Colorado performs.

Sorry if I was harsh. There's been a lot of hype and overreaction about issues with the Vista HCx, when it's a very good unit that is a great choice for a lot of people. Certainly the chips are different and the GPS chipset firmware will necessarily be different, too. I'm guessing the vendor's reference implementation firmware was much better for Sirf than for the MediaTek (or whatever chip they're actually using now), so now Garmin's having to go back and fix it, which is likely not trivial. The signal analysis is probably done by DSP, which would be controlled by software (most likely that's what the GPS chipset software is--DSP code).

Share this post


Link to post

Ever heard of an opinion? Let's keep these forums friendly. They are nothing but opinions including yours. We don't work at Garmin so there is no way either of us can know. Anyhow, the Sirf chip works perfectly. So they wrote the firmware correctly for the first high sensitivity GPS and then botched it up on the next generation? I bet there's more to it than that. Anyhow, it was simply my "observation" that these firmware fixes on the HCX are probably compensating for a hardware spec differences on the new chip that the Sirf chip didn't have. If it was just a firmware issue they would have fixed it a long time ago. However, if the new hardware has limitations that the Sirf chip didn't have then the firmware might not be able to compensate. It doesn't sound like it's completely fixed yet based on feedback in this thread. Anyhow, hopefully they can dial in the firmware. It will be interesting to see how the Colorado performs.

Sorry if I was harsh. There's been a lot of hype and overreaction about issues with the Vista HCx, when it's a very good unit that is a great choice for a lot of people. Certainly the chips are different and the GPS chipset firmware will necessarily be different, too. I'm guessing the vendor's reference implementation firmware was much better for Sirf than for the MediaTek (or whatever chip they're actually using now), so now Garmin's having to go back and fix it, which is likely not trivial. The signal analysis is probably done by DSP, which would be controlled by software (most likely that's what the GPS chipset software is--DSP code).

No problem. I was just curious. Stuff like that is interesting to me. The forums make things seem a lot bigger than they really are. I bet most people didn't even notice the issue.

Share this post


Link to post
The rumor is that these can handle raster maps - if true then eventually will able to see digitized USGS topos on the unit....

 

Is there more information regarding the rumor that the Garmin Colorado may have raster map capability (hopefully 1:24k quads)?

 

It does appear the Colorado is capable of storing photographs. The feature may be more multimedia oriented than navigation.

 

However, I have heard that people can upload custom raster maps to the unit.

Share this post


Link to post

<from another source>

 

Except Garmin in the only source (they do a have 24k National Parks), unless you want Colorado or want to create your own.

I was parroting a comment made earlier in this thread (or maybe another of the Colorado 400t threads) about other sources for maps. I haven't had a chance to investigate those links yet.

 

Patty

Share this post


Link to post

Sorry if I was harsh. There's been a lot of hype and overreaction about issues with the Vista HCx, when it's a very good unit that is a great choice for a lot of people. ....

There has been no overreaction!! :huh::(:(

The odometer of the HCX had big problems. - And the newest firmware still has problems.

now it shows to much kilometers - but the calculation has been improved - still not corrected

 

 

Is the colorado display more colorful than the CSX-Display?

The HCX has a very clear and colorful display compared to the CSX.

Share this post


Link to post

Does anyone think that the 400 with maps loaded on a SD card will be loaded differently or faster so that start times are quicker? I have the 2008 topo already so I am considering the less expensive 400 and just buying a big SD card.

Share this post


Link to post

Provided the card is reasonably fast, not an antique one, it's probably equivalent.

 

I don't see the startup time to be any issue. You only do it once, before you go out, right? It takes me longer to tie my shoelaces than it takes for the Colorado to get ready.

Share this post


Link to post

Sorry if I was harsh. There's been a lot of hype and overreaction about issues with the Vista HCx, when it's a very good unit that is a great choice for a lot of people. ....

There has been no overreaction!! :):):)

The odometer of the HCX had big problems. - And the newest firmware still has problems.

now it shows to much kilometers - but the calculation has been improved - still not corrected

Have some patience. Garmin has shown that they're willing to work on the problem. It may take a few iterations, but the most recent firmware has gone a long way to fix it. Don't forget that the eTrex H series may be competing with the Colorado for developers' time.

Share this post


Link to post

I haven't seen anyone mention a limit on mapsegments that can be loaded. I believe it was 2024 on the 60CX CSX. If this limit still exists for the Colorado a 4 mg card would not be that valuable. If there is not limit or a much larger limit I would be more interested in the 300 and purchase a large enough card to load City Navigator and Topo 2008. The 40 second startup seems a bit long in my opinion, but then I travel for work and use my 60CX to get my to and from work in all the strange place the railroad sends me. I start up my 60CX when I start the car and start driving. Normally by the time I get out of the parking lot it is ready for me to find my recent finds so I can get directions. If it took 40 seconds to boot I would already be on the freeway and have missed my first turn.

Share this post


Link to post

Caches shown on the map - in my case, both the POI ones w/ custom icons, as well as the closest 1000 waypoints, send via MapSource, with the treasure chest icon. They show different information when "moused over" or clicked on, with waypoints showing more/better formatted information than the POIs.

 

The ideal functionality (IMHO) would be linking from the custom icon on the map, directly to the "geocaching data" (e.g. entire description, logs, diff/terr, hint, etc) - with an easy way to get back (there doesn't seem to be the notion of a "quit" (/escape/back/triangle) button, as there have been on all previous units? Except when one of the softkeys changes to "done" - but that's a little different, I think.

With regards to the ability to click on a POI on the screen by moving the cursor over it, that didn't get fixed on the 60C(S)x until after several iterations of firmware updates which step by step made POI's easier to use, but it did get fixed eventually so I think it's safe to assume that it will get fixed on the Colorado too.

 

By the way, the 60C(S)x and other units have the ability to turn off some of the maps sets so the units doesn't spend time drawing maps that lies underneath other maps, you could turn off entire map sets or individual tiles, something like that might make the Colorado more responsive and perhaps faster to start.

 

ProsperoDK/René

Share this post


Link to post

Something like that already exists on the Colorado. But I don't think it makes any difference when it comes to startup time.

Share this post


Link to post

 

Actually, this is only partially true. The Magellan eXplorist shows some of the trivial cache data (diff, terrain, container size, hider, hint) but not the cache description or the logs. If would be impossible to find a multi-cache with the only the data on an eXplorist. Also, it has a limit of only 200 geocaches, which is really to few for my liking. Today, on the spur of the moment, I found a multi-cache with just the info on my Colorado. That is pretty cool to me.

 

--Marky

 

INTeresting! There's a little detail I never realized - and suddenly, my eXplorist envy over that feature is somehow diminished. As to finding the multi with nothing but information on a single unit: NICE! Now that's what I'm talking about... :)

Edited by SnoWake

Share this post


Link to post

By the way, the 60C(S)x and other units have the ability to turn off some of the maps sets so the units doesn't spend time drawing maps that lies underneath other maps, you could turn off entire map sets or individual tiles, something like that might make the Colorado more responsive and perhaps faster to start.

 

ProsperoDK/René

 

Yes, the Colorado has this feature, as well - though, it seems to behave a bit differently? As you mentioned - in the 60-series, there was a 'hierarchy' of maps, and if you had multiple layers turned on (most notably, Topo and then, say, City Navigator) - you would waste a tremendous amount of time as the unit would draw the topo screen - and then simply "overwrite" it with the CN map.

 

Well, on the Colorado, I can turn map sets on/off still - but, they seem to sort of be 'concurrent' - for example, if I have both CN2008 and the built-in topo maps turned on - I still see the DEM-shaded topo map detail - and yet, the unit can perform turn-by-turn auto-routing. Haven't quite figured it out yet, though...

 

Similarly, I'm not sure I fully comprehend the changes around the different Guidance Method and Off Road Transition settings - even after reading the manual, and some brief experimentation. I've got enough questions/observations about that, it's probably worthy of a post of its own.

Share this post


Link to post

Guidance modes are for autorouting. Priority for faster or shorter road?

 

Transitions for off-road regards how you want to let the unit change over to pointing to the next waypoint, when you follow a route with several. You can do it automatically or manually.

Share this post


Link to post

Here's a basic functionality question I've yet been able to uncover:

 

Does the Colorado store daily tracklogs, in GPX format, somewhere (uniquely) accesible? Clearly, they're in there, somewhere... but, not like on the 60CSx, where, in USB mass storage mode, there was just a directory full of:

 

<datestamp>.GPX

 

files, one for each day I had the unit turned on. VERY convenient for use in geotagging digital photos - or even just for fun, to look at a day's travels on Google Earth, etc.

 

Based on other hints (e.g., the message displayed when attaching the USB cable) - I would guess tracklogs are somewhere inside the file:

 

<device>:\Garmin\GPX\Current\Current.GPX

 

But if that's the case - what a pain! Of course, that feature wasn't immediately available when the 60CSx shipped - so this is the kind of item I can hope to be fixed in subsequent firmware releases. Time to go add it to the list in that thread...

 

Or: Am I just missing something obvious, and it's right there in front of my face? I've checked the setup:

 

Shortcuts-> Setup -> Tracks

 

Configured as follows:

 

Track Log: On

Record Method: Auto

Interval: Normal

Show on Map: On

 

I did see, from this page, under the Options menu:

 

Archive Current Track

 

Which allows me to select start/end points of the current track, and save it as a file (filename defaults to the current date). This resulted in the tracklog GPX file being written to:

 

<device>:\Garmin\GPX\2008-01-20 79468.gpx

 

Not sure what the additional 5-digit number represents - but at least this is a workable, MANUAL solution. But - that means I have to proactively remember to perform this task, when I might want to use the tracklog - as opposed to just going to the folder and picking out the file (date) I'm interested in.

Edited by SnoWake

Share this post


Link to post

Interesting - I'll definitely keep an eye on this, as these are stats/values I often pay attention to. I had noticed, out caching with a Magellan user, that our units (Garmin 60CSx / Magellan Explorist 600) consistently read significantly different odometer / trip meter readings, both when hiking on foot, as well as a day in and out of the car. Of course, minor differences would be expected - but these were often signficant, to the difference of more > 10%.

 

Since I'll be carrying the 400t alongside a 60CSx for awhile, I can do some side-by-side comparisons of track logs and trip computer calculations - thus comparing both the hardware and algorithms/logging in both units.

 

I compared my 60cs and 400t odometers today on 3-4 geocaching hikes between .5 and 1 mile long and I never saw much more than 5% difference. On the road trip to/from which was about 30 miles I saw a difference of <1%.

 

GO$Rs

Share this post


Link to post

Thanks. Are assumptions being made that Garmin plans to add all these missing geocaching features or has Garmin stated that they would?

 

You didn't mention the brightness. I demoed a unit in Las Vegas (for Wherigo only) and it seemed dim to me in sunlight compared to the 60 series. Also unless the internal memory reads much faster, the memory is a non-factor to me, since memory is so cheap these days. Finally does this GPS have the Sirf chip or the knockoff? I've been reading about all kinds of bugs with the knockoff on the HCX models.

 

After living outside with the 400t along side my 60cs I'll say that there is definitely a difference in brightness. Under some light conditions I feel it is quite bad (you really have to tilt the screen to see it). The screen doesn't seem to be nearly as reflective as the 60cs.

 

I'm going to play with it a bit more and hope that maybe there is a screen brightness that can be changed (at the cost of battery life I'm sure), but this one might be a show stopper for me.

 

GO$Rs

Share this post


Link to post

 

After living outside with the 400t along side my 60cs I'll say that there is definitely a difference in brightness. Under some light conditions I feel it is quite bad (you really have to tilt the screen to see it). The screen doesn't seem to be nearly as reflective as the 60cs.

 

I'm going to play with it a bit more and hope that maybe there is a screen brightness that can be changed (at the cost of battery life I'm sure), but this one might be a show stopper for me.

 

GO$Rs

 

Interesting - and I've had similar experiences. Here's one aspect I find odd - even AFTER I realized the backlight settings weren't "sticky":

 

It seems that somehow, backlight brightness is not only controlled by the setting - but also, by battery voltage (to a more significant degree than I've noticed in past units). What I mean to say is:

 

With fresh batteries, the unit was useable with the backlight only at 50%. However, as the batteries waned (both with Alkaline and NiMH), the backlight seems to dim (at the same setting) - until I had it cranked up to 100%, which eventually was too dim to read. I guess that's when you know you need to slap in a freshly-charged set... ;-)

Share this post


Link to post

Another question about start up time. While it is loading the maps is it getting a fix on your location or is that done after the 40s start up?

Share this post


Link to post

Here's a basic functionality question I've yet been able to uncover:

 

Does the Colorado store daily tracklogs, in GPX format, somewhere (uniquely) accesible? Clearly, they're in there, somewhere... but, not like on the 60CSx, where, in USB mass storage mode, there was just a directory full of:

 

<datestamp>.GPX

 

files, one for each day I had the unit turned on. VERY convenient for use in geotagging digital photos - or even just for fun, to look at a day's travels on Google Earth, etc.

 

Based on other hints (e.g., the message displayed when attaching the USB cable) - I would guess tracklogs are somewhere inside the file:

 

<device>:\Garmin\GPX\Current\Current.GPX

 

But if that's the case - what a pain! Of course, that feature wasn't immediately available when the 60CSx shipped - so this is the kind of item I can hope to be fixed in subsequent firmware releases. Time to go add it to the list in that thread...

 

Or: Am I just missing something obvious, and it's right there in front of my face?

Yes, the current.gpx file does contain the current track log, i.e. the most recent 10000 points or so. I don't see the pain in accessing them from there? On the contrary, you don't need to know which particular date a log was stored, as you can open the whole file at once, in Mapsource for example, then see the list of different tracks that are stored in the file.

 

But the Colorado has more tricks up its sleeve. Instead of using the old method you know from the 60 CSx, where you have to have a card in the unit, and have to configure it to save tracks to the card, the Colorado does it automatically, and in a better way.

 

If you are familiar with the Zumo, then this is the same thing. When the active track grows near 10000 points, the oldest activity (single track, as shown in Mapsource) is move to an archive file, then deleted from the active track. The Zumo repeats this process until the active track is down below 8000 points.

The archived tracks are stored in \Garmin\GPX\Archive, with filenames 1.gpx, 2.gpx and so on. Filenames aren't ever reused, so you can simply copy these files into a folder on your PC, if you like, and continue building a log archive for as long as you like. As the Colorado has a lot of internal memory, you don't need any card to take advantage of this function. The archive files are filled until they reach about 1 MB, so you don't get as many files as you do on the 60 CSx either. Far less to point out to a geotagging program. When there are 20 files in the archive folder, or if you get low on internal memory, you have to remove the oldest archive files to make room for new ones.

 

If you then open any of these files in Mapsource, you can easily check, edit and then resave the track to the Colorado, where it ends up as a saved track, respecting the color setting you did on your PC.

 

Those who are used to the 60 CSx, and that unit only, sometimes think this is a bad idea. But get used to it and you'll probably change your mind as well. My Zumo 550 does this, and it's superior to everything else I've seen along these lines.

Share this post


Link to post

....If you then open any of these files in Mapsource, you can easily check, edit and then resave the track to the Colorado, where it ends up as a saved track, respecting the color setting you did on your PC.

Anders, again thank you for all the insight into the Colorado you have provided! I await delivery of my 300 and have been reading all these great tips.

 

One question on saving the track data as you describe from the archive folder. Upon saving, does it also retain ALL the active track data like my 60Cx does such as: Time/Altitude/Leg Length/Leg Time/Leg Speed/Leg Course/Position?

Share this post


Link to post

All data is archived. I haven't checked if the Colorado does as the Zumo tries to, though. On the Zumo, tracks that typically are collected at the kitchen table (low speed, erratic movement over a small area) are discarded from archiving, as they are obviously not real activities.

Share this post


Link to post

apersson, perhaps you have commented in this before. I have been following these posts closely, but I may have missed one. I was wondering if you have seen your Colorado lock up or take a long time to scroll through the cache descriptions? I have seen one or two posts that mention this and am a bit concerned.

 

Again, thanks! I know you have been busy in other forums as well as this one answering questions.

Share this post


Link to post

I don't think it has ever locked up while doing that. But it takes a noticeable time to format the description and display it.

It couldn't properly format at least one cache description, generated by a PQ at the Groundspeak site. I don't know why.

I've tried with about 2600 caches installed, max.

 

I've had other lockups, but they are being taken care of as they are discovered.

Share this post


Link to post
The rumor is that these can handle raster maps - if true then eventually will able to see digitized USGS topos on the unit....

 

Is there more information regarding the rumor that the Garmin Colorado may have raster map capability (hopefully 1:24k quads)?

 

It does appear the Colorado is capable of storing photographs. The feature may be more multimedia oriented than navigation.

 

However, I have heard that people can upload custom raster maps to the unit.

 

The 400c and 400i use satellite imagery for their worldwide basemap, so yes...the Colorado platform can handle raster imagery.

 

The most I could get out of tight-lipped Garmin staff at the Consumer Electronics Show, re: future capabilities, was that they recognize there is strong demand for high resolution satellite imagery. No word on 24K maps.

 

Pure speculation, but I say watch for what happens with Topo 2009.

Share this post


Link to post

Good News everyone! If you load BOTH TOPO2008 maps AND City Nav2008 Maps and have them both selected in the "select maps" menu, the DEM from TOPO2008 can be seen under the City Nav 2008 streets! SWEET! This means that a new City Nav with DEM information is irrelevant!

 

So far, I'm lovin' My Garmin 300'

 

I have added many new screen backgrounds. Check out this Elk! Slick!

 

http://lampropeltis.googlepages.com/918.bm...-full;init:.bmp

Edited by yogazoo

Share this post


Link to post

yogazoo, I just noticed you are from Missoula. I have been there twice and thought the area was incredible!

 

apersson, do you think that the slow speed at which cache descriptions is viewed is something fixable via a firmware update? I t sounds as though you have an ear at Garmin, and like you, I tend to have quite a few caches loaded on my GPS at a time so that I can easily cache when I am out. From what I have heard so far, the few users of the Colorado that are out there seem to like them.

 

thanks again!

Share this post


Link to post

I don't think it has ever locked up while doing that. But it takes a noticeable time to format the description and display it.

It couldn't properly format at least one cache description, generated by a PQ at the Groundspeak site. I don't know why.

I've tried with about 2600 caches installed, max.

 

I've had other lockups, but they are being taken care of as they are discovered.

 

apersson, I have a small single cache .gpx file which will freeze the 400t. It has something to do with the logs in the description of this particular cache, but I'm not sure exactly what. With this gpx file loaded into the unit if I go the Geocache page, select Options->Show Description the unit will completely freeze. Battery removal is required to get started again.

 

If you know someone at Garmin who would be interested contact me through my profile and I'll send it along to them.

 

GO$Rs

Share this post


Link to post

Another fairly major point:

 

So, I picked up a 2GB SD card yesterday - figuring, there was no point in needing 4GB (at least, currently) based on the following reasoning:

 

-2GB SD cards are CHEAP - got mine for $15 @ Fry's, and I'm sure they can be had for even less.

 

- With the ~3GB of topo maps already loaded - I could City Navigator2008 data for the entire continental US - plus tidal data/marine services, National Park 24K topos, and even SnowRanger ski resort maps - all in less than 2GB (still leaving plenty of internal memory available, as well - say, I wanted to load up some Blue Chart maps, etc.).

 

Or - so the theory went. Until I tried it...

 

I assembled all the maps into a 1980MB dataset in MapSource, and sent it to the external SD card. It crunched (somewhere on the order of 5 hours) building the mapset and index files, then pushing the data... but in the end, it appeared to be successful.

 

Until I tried to use the unit. So far, I've been unable to get it to complete a Power On cycle - just gets to the "Loading Maps" stage, and hangs. I know, it took a LONG time here already - but now, I'm talking about waiting 20-30 minutes... and nothing. Have to take the batteries out to resume.

 

But wait - it gets worse (?): The device also will not complete going into Mass Storage mode when connected to the computer. Gets as far as the:

 

"Saving all waypoints, routes, and triplog information in GPX format: 1% complete"

 

and just hangs. Again - battery removal required to reset the unit.

 

So, I removed the SD card, and tried again. WHEW! The device was 'back to normal'.

 

No idea if it was a matter of the shear volume of maps/data, or some particular mapset, or combination - or even the fact that they were written to the SD card. Warrants further investigation - but for now, I think the best approach is to load JUST the data I anticipate needing (it's not like I take unexpected trips to North Dakota, for example) - all of which easily fits within the ~1GB of available internal memory. So - who needs an SD card (at least, until the unit can cope with that volume of data)?

 

More to follow...

Share this post


Link to post

Good News everyone! If you load BOTH TOPO2008 maps AND City Nav2008 Maps and have them both selected in the "select maps" menu, the DEM from TOPO2008 can be seen under the City Nav 2008 streets! SWEET! This means that a new City Nav with DEM information is irrelevant!

 

So far, I'm lovin' My Garmin 300'

 

I have added many new screen backgrounds. Check out this Elk! Slick!

 

http://lampropeltis.googlepages.com/918.bm...-full;init:.bmp

 

He's correct, check out the screenshot:

 

customdem.png

Share this post


Link to post

Add to the list the ability to function with Motionbased or Garmin Connect. Apparently this is planned when Garmin consolidates MotionBased with Garmin Connect, but it is baffling why this simple functionality wasn't provided from the start.

 

These two sites aren't directly related to geocaching, but would integrate with it nicely. They have been used with Garmin fitness products for a while. Basically, you upload your tracks (along with other data such as heart rate, cadence, etc) onto a public website. You can view them there on Google maps, as well as analyzing other data. Perhaps most interesting is the ability to search other people's outdoor adventures--comparing hikes, or ski tours, or bicycle rides etc. ULtimately, I'd love to be able to look at hikes or bike rides that include geocaches along the way. The Colorado now works with Garmin Heart rate monitors, but so far I've seen no real way to look at that data except during the actual activity.

Share this post


Link to post

Thanks for the information. I've added a Fitness page to the FAQ and highlighted the Garmin Connect/Motionbased issues in the Issue List.

 

GO$Rs

Share this post


Link to post

Thanks for the information. I've added a Fitness page to the FAQ and highlighted the Garmin Connect/Motionbased issues in the Issue List.

 

GO$Rs

 

I'm also using this heart rate monitoring.

It would also be nice if the Colorado could be supported by Garmin TrainingCenter.

 

Currently works neither the windows nor the mac version.

 

This should also be a "quick-made" fix for Garmin !

Edited by Vaucluse

Share this post


Link to post

I have a garmin 205 and dont see the point in training while carrying another gps? If I wanted to know where geocaches were and also how fast I am moving I could use the standard gps. I just dont see the need to wear the receiver on your wrist or bike and then have another bigger receiver there while you train.

Share this post


Link to post

Thanks for the information. I've added a Fitness page to the FAQ and highlighted the Garmin Connect/Motionbased issues in the Issue List.

 

GO$Rs

 

I'm also using this heart rate monitoring.

It would also be nice if the Colorado could be supported by Garmin TrainingCenter.

 

Currently works neither the windows nor the mac version.

 

The should also be a "quick-made" fix for Garmin !

 

Contrary to my earlier post of today, and while Garmin support didn't seem to know about it, I have found a way to use the MotionBased agent (no luck with Training Center yet) to upload files to MotionBased. Can't do it directly or easily (yet) but it works something like downloading full Geocache GPX files in reverse---you use My Computer to go into the Colorado, go into "current" files where the recent tracks are stored, and double click on the GPX file you want to upload. You then use the "Advanced" "Import Files" option on the Motion Based Agent screen. I found this by accident--it may be that you have to have the Agent up when you open the Colorado from My Computer. But it worked fine for displaying my route and elevation profile on MotionBased.com. Didn't have the heart rate monitor on I'll try that this weekend sometime. The player worked as well. Here's a link that might work:

 

http://trail.motionbased.com/trail/invitat...pkValue=4932915

 

So the functionality appears to be there, it's just well hidden and the manual doesn't give you even a hint that it might be done.

 

Oh and it is possible to delete downloaded geocaches--has to be done from the PC. You simply delete the GPX file you imported into the Colorado from the same place you saved it. The file name is the cache number, so it's easy to do this if you simply connect the colorado when you log your cache find. Still a bug, but a temporary fix. Tried the new unit Geocaching for the first time today (that's what I uploaded to MotionBased) and I must say the inability to see the Geocaches on the map at the same is a really big issue. I know I can load them as waypoints as well, but that is really a pain. All of these bugs seem like they could easily be fixed, and I can't imagine why a company would jeopardize the roll-out of a new product by introducing it before it's ready.

Edited by trekster

Share this post


Link to post

No idea if it was a matter of the shear volume of maps/data, or some particular mapset, or combination - or even the fact that they were written to the SD card. Warrants further investigation - but for now, I think the best approach is to load JUST the data I anticipate needing (it's not like I take unexpected trips to North Dakota, for example) - all of which easily fits within the ~1GB of available internal memory. So - who needs an SD card (at least, until the unit can cope with that volume of data)?

 

More to follow...

 

Now they are shipping 400t's with only 148mb of internal memory, so the SD card is a must.

Share this post


Link to post

Oh and it is possible to delete downloaded geocaches--has to be done from the PC. You simply delete the GPX file you imported into the Colorado from the same place you saved it. The file name is the cache number, so it's easy to do this if you simply connect the colorado when you log your cache find. Still a bug, but a temporary fix.

 

That only works if you've upload one cache per file like Communicator does (which is what I'm assuming your are using). Most of us put several hundred/thousand caches in a single gpx file which makes this kind of hard!

 

GO$Rs

Share this post


Link to post

Thanks for the information. I've added a Fitness page to the FAQ and highlighted the Garmin Connect/Motionbased issues in the Issue List.

 

GO$Rs

 

I'm also using this heart rate monitoring.

It would also be nice if the Colorado could be supported by Garmin TrainingCenter.

 

Currently works neither the windows nor the mac version.

 

The should also be a "quick-made" fix for Garmin !

 

Contrary to my earlier post of today, and while Garmin support didn't seem to know about it, I have found a way to use the MotionBased agent (no luck with Training Center yet) to upload files to MotionBased. Can't do it directly or easily (yet) but it works something like downloading full Geocache GPX files in reverse---you use My Computer to go into the Colorado, go into "current" files where the recent tracks are stored, and double click on the GPX file you want to upload. You then use the "Advanced" "Import Files" option on the Motion Based Agent screen. I found this by accident--it may be that you have to have the Agent up when you open the Colorado from My Computer. But it worked fine for displaying my route and elevation profile on MotionBased.com. Didn't have the heart rate monitor on I'll try that this weekend sometime. The player worked as well. Here's a link that might work:

 

http://trail.motionbased.com/trail/invitat...pkValue=4932915

 

So the functionality appears to be there, it's just well hidden and the manual doesn't give you even a hint that it might be done.

 

Oh and it is possible to delete downloaded geocaches--has to be done from the PC. You simply delete the GPX file you imported into the Colorado from the same place you saved it. The file name is the cache number, so it's easy to do this if you simply connect the colorado when you log your cache find. Still a bug, but a temporary fix. Tried the new unit Geocaching for the first time today (that's what I uploaded to MotionBased) and I must say the inability to see the Geocaches on the map at the same is a really big issue. I know I can load them as waypoints as well, but that is really a pain. All of these bugs seem like they could easily be fixed, and I can't imagine why a company would jeopardize the roll-out of a new product by introducing it before it's ready.

 

No go on the heart rate history. The Track uploads to MotionBased, but no Heart rate data.

Share this post


Link to post

My new 400t:

Space used > 2.65 GB

Free Memory > 148 MB

Total memory > 2.78 GB

 

Serial number > 18Z0017xx

 

Don't know why the knocked the memory from 4GB down to 3GB, but at least I can use an SD memory card in the GPS.

Share this post


Link to post

My new 400t:

Space used > 2.65 GB

Free Memory > 148 MB

Total memory > 2.78 GB

 

Serial number > 18Z0017xx

 

Don't know why the knocked the memory from 4GB down to 3GB, but at least I can use an SD memory card in the GPS.

 

If that's case regarding the memory reduction why not purchase the Colorado 300 + Topo 2008 Maps? At least that way you can have them load on your computer as well... I think Garmin drop the ball with the 400t and this reduction in internal memory. :P

Share this post


Link to post

My new 400t:

Space used > 2.65 GB

Free Memory > 148 MB

Total memory > 2.78 GB

 

Serial number > 18Z0017xx

 

Don't know why the knocked the memory from 4GB down to 3GB, but at least I can use an SD memory card in the GPS.

 

If that's case regarding the memory reduction why not purchase the Colorado 300 + Topo 2008 Maps? At least that way you can have them load on your computer as well... I think Garmin drop the ball with the 400t and this reduction in internal memory. :P

 

I totally agree. This is a bunch of B.S. on Garmins part. There really is no reason to buy the 400t any more. You can buy the 300 and topo for less then the 400t and have almost 400mb of free memory and use topo on your computer too.

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 20

×
×
  • Create New...