Garmin maps

[+sundogranch]

Garmin base maps have proved to me to be highly inacurate. If they can't even get the position of a major interstate highway right how do you expect their other maps to be any better?

IMHO- junkit...

Garmin users have suffered here (GCH224)

[barnabasbenn]

Garmin base maps have proved to me to be highly inacurate. If they can't even get the position of a major interstate highway right how do you expect their other maps to be any better?

IMHO- junkit...

Garmin users have suffered here (GCH224)

 

 

???????

[+hogrod]

Garmin base maps have proved to me to be highly inacurate. If they can't even get the position of a major interstate highway right how do you expect their other maps to be any better?

IMHO- junkit...

Garmin users have suffered here (GCH224)

 

All Basemaps suck, doesn't matter brand of GPS receiver. When you install Garmins city navigator 2008 software all of a sudden the roads are shown where they should be, not off like on the basemap. Most users use the compass screen and distance to next data field to get to ground zero of any cache, you will get much closer than using the map as long as the coordinates for the cache are good.

 

You learned a good lesson, don't use maps for anything other than reference or you could end up being one of those common sense lacking people of urban legend that follow their gps & drive off cliffs.

 

After reading for your post on this cache(GCH224) I see this happened back in January, why post this now?

[dogwalkers2]

After reading for your post on this cache(GCH224) I see this happened back in January, why post this now?

January 2006, no less.

[+hogrod]

After reading for your post on this cache(GCH224) I see this happened back in January, why post this now?

January 2006, no less.

 

WOW, I didn't even catch that....

[+fratermus]

Garmin base maps have proved to me to be highly inacurate. If they can't even get the position of a major interstate highway right how do you expect their other maps to be any better?

 

Please post your own cartography where you have stuffed a large continent into a few MB of space.

 

If it is an improvement, I will load it over the Garmin basemap.

[+embra]

Imagine you have a high quality jpg photograph of the US taken from space...the photo is a couple of megabytes in size. Looking at the photo in its entirety, it will look pretty darn good. But suppose you're going to zoom in on a section close enough to determine whether a cache is 100 feet this side or that of a road. You'll find that the quality of the composition breaks up so much as to be nearly unrecognizable.

 

Hogrod is right, all basemaps suck for detail work. They're only intended to give you a sense of location when zoomed way, way out. This is why we need detail maps. I know on the face of it, it would seem that if someone is going to place a highway on a map, why not put it in the exactly correct position...but it takes detail (read: memory storage requirements) to record that placement. One just can't expect too much from a 10MB base map.

[SandyGarrity]

Do they not produce paper maps on that side of the pond?

 

A GPS is a navigation tool not the total system. Map and compass first and the skill to use them then a GPS.

[+Indotguy]

I'm not a Garmin user but I expect their base maps are about as good as any. That splash screen navigation disclaimer wasn't put on your GPS just to annoy you.

[+poohstickz]

Garmin base maps have proved to me to be highly inacurate. If they can't even get the position of a major interstate highway right how do you expect their other maps to be any better?

IMHO- junkit...

Garmin users have suffered here (GCH224)

 

From garmin's FAQ, for the GPSMAP 60 family, fwiw:

 

Question: Why is my position on the map screen not accurate?

Answer: The basemap in your unit has been drawn from a map with a scale of 1:1,000,000. You can expect an accuracy of .25 miles (1,320 feet) from a map of this scale.

 

Additionally, when you view your position on the GPS map page, you will notice that a circle displays around your current position. This circle shows the area you can expect your actual position to fall within. The less accuracy the unit has at the time, the larger the circle will be. The diameter of this circle considers both your GPS accuracy and the accuracy of the map to which you are trying to plot your position.

 

 

City Navigator, which is a more detailed mapping program, has an accuracy of about 40 feet. Therefore, you would see a smaller circle around your actual position (assuming you have a good GPS position fix), than you would using a basemap.

 

 

So, as far as the basemap goes you're right as it would be unrealistic to expect anything else.

[+sundogranch]

How come I can use the maps on my Cobra to go right to it? Only the Garmin maps are way off here on a major interstate. I have 3 GPS recievers and the garmin is the one I will use for trac-logs...Nothing else- especially close cache hunting or placing - it really sucks at that.

[+fratermus]

How come I can use the maps on my Cobra to go right to it? Only the Garmin maps are way off here on a major interstate. I have 3 GPS recievers and the garmin is the one I will use for trac-logs...Nothing else- especially close cache hunting or placing - it really sucks at that.

 

I can't tell if you are willfully misunderstanding, or a troll. Either way, I will leave it to others to play in this sand box.

[Motorcycle_Mama]

Not sure why you would need to post this 2.25 years AFTER it happened. But if your point is to tell people not to rely on their basemaps for pinpoint accuracy, I'm pretty sure that most people already know that.

 

And I would think that most people who only have the basemap on their GPS units use the map to get them to the general area and then use the COORDINATES (which are independent from the maps) to get them to the cache location.

 

Seems like a NewsFlash from the Land of DUH!

Edited March 22, 2008 by Motorcycle_Mama

[Glenn W]

How come I can use the maps on my Cobra to go right to it? Only the Garmin maps are way off here on a major interstate. I have 3 GPS recievers and the garmin is the one I will use for trac-logs...Nothing else- especially close cache hunting or placing - it really sucks at that.

 

Maybe Cobra spent too much money on their basemap and not enough on ads

 

"Cobra Electronics Corporation COBR, a leading global designer and marketer of mobile communications and navigation products, today announced a major change in its mobile navigation strategy, ceasing all future development of mass marketed products. Instead, the company will limit its efforts to unique mobile navigation products sold into niche markets with specialized and focused distribution. Additionally, when such products are launched, the company plans to employ lower cost sourcing arrangements, utilizing the Performance Products Limited ("PPL") platform or that of other qualified vendors.

 

The company's decision to discontinue future development of mobile navigation products for the highly competitive mass market is based upon rapid technological change, price deflation that has been faster than anticipated, continuing high development costs and substantial delays in introducing new products that have adversely affected profitability and customer relations. Cobra will continue to fully support all of its mobile navigation products that are currently in the marketplace, including retail promotions, technical support for consumers and normal warranty service claims. In conjunction with today's announcement, Cobra will write off the intellectual property associated with its proprietary software platform. Additionally, the company's inventories of earlier generation mobile navigation products are being written down to anticipated market value and reserves are being increased to accommodate the disposition of product returns by means other than returning them to vendors for credit against new products. In total, the charge against earnings for the fourth quarter is anticipated to be approximately $7.4 to $7.7 million, although the company emphasized that this is an estimate based on information currently available to management and that these estimates will be refined prior to the company reporting earnings for the fourth quarter.

 

"Cobra has not achieved profitability in the mobile navigation category for several reasons. The competitive environment for portable navigation devices has intensified and thus further pushed out prospects for positive returns on our investment," said Jim Bazet, Cobra's President and Chief Executive Officer. "Drastically lower selling prices are being driven by the largest competitors attempting to gain market share, along with emerging players struggling for shelf space and exiting players liquidating inventory. Moreover, consumers are still struggling to adopt this technology, as characterized by high return rates for the overall category. The result of these high return rates is significant back-end costs to manage and resell returned products. Finally, Cobra has experienced difficulties in adapting our platform, resulting in higher than anticipated development costs and significant delays in getting new products to market. While these challenges may have been surmountable, they are exacerbated by the pending acquisitions by our competitors of the two principal content providers to the mobile navigation industry, Navteq and TeleAtlas, which are likely to create further competitive disruptions, both in pricing and features. It has become increasingly clear that participants in this mass market category will require scale and significant capital to compete effectively. As a result, Cobra will no longer develop mobile navigation products designed to compete in these channels."

 

The Cobra segment's financial results have been adversely impacted by the GPS and mobile navigation product lines. Through the third quarter of 2007, the segment had a loss from operations of $2.4 million but would have had operating income of $907,000 if not for the losses incurred in mobile navigation. In 2006, the segment reported an operating loss of $2.4 million; absent the losses incurred in the mobile navigation and GPS product lines, Cobra would have had operating income of $2.0 million. "It is evident that the challenges of the mobile navigation business have obscured the health of Cobra's other product lines," said Mr. Bazet. "The profitability of Cobra's core business is a reflection of our leading market positions and continued innovation in each of our other lines."

 

The anticipated charge to earnings will be comprised primarily of the book value of intellectual property that it is estimated will be on the books as of December 31, 2007. Additionally, Cobra will establish reserves to account for both lower selling prices required to accelerate the sales of existing in-house inventories of earlier generation, or end-of-life products, and the disposition of product returns that will occur in the ordinary course of business but will now be disposed of through liquidation rather than through a return to vendor program for credit against new units.

 

Although comprised primarily of non-cash items, the charge to earnings resulting from the actions announced today would have resulted in a violation of certain covenants in Cobra's loan agreement absent a waiver that was received from the company's lenders. The company and its lenders have agreed to review and, as necessary, restructure the existing loan agreement by mid-February 2008.

 

Mr. Bazet concluded, "While Cobra has made a strategic decision to discontinue development of mobile navigation products for the mass market using our proprietary platform, we will pursue profitable niche opportunities involving products derived from those marketed successfully by PPL or those sourced from other vendors. This strategy will entail lower development expenses, product features that are appropriately valued by the target consumer and sold through channels with lower anticipated return rates. As we look to the future, we expect that the profitability and cash flows of our core business lines will provide the opportunity to pay down debt, invest in new product opportunities and pursue selected acquisitions. Our goal is to unlock greater value for our shareholders from the assets behind the Cobra brands -- category leadership, broad distribution channels, and now an expanding operating base of European operations."

[+sundogranch]

I am lamenting on the fact that I bought a GPSr with crappy maps. What use is an inaccurate map? If you have a Garmin most people seem to agree you shouldn't use the maps...and they pay money- real cold hard cache for maps that are very inacurate...more so than other cheaper GPS recievers that come with free maps that show where the cache is and don't have a stupid "circle of unacuracy."

[TheMadMapper]

I would be curious to know what the two other GPS you have.

I would agree that the basemap provided should not be used (under 20km).

 

However the Garmin maps I have are accurate detailed and simply excellent.

Cant comment on your other receivers having more accurate maps but If compared to City Navigator I suspect there just as accurate/inaccurate.

[Motorcycle_Mama]

I am lamenting on the fact that I bought a GPSr with crappy maps. What use is an inaccurate map? If you have a Garmin most people seem to agree you shouldn't use the maps...and they pay money- real cold hard cache for maps that are very inacurate...more so than other cheaper GPS recievers that come with free maps that show where the cache is and don't have a stupid "circle of unacuracy."

Perhaps you should go back and re-read post #10 in this thread. It accurately explains the level of accuracy of of the basemap. Research BEFORE one purchases any product is usually advisable. It's unfortunate that you are disappointed, but this information is readily available before a purchase is made that that you are able to make an information decision.

 

And I didn't know that we could pay for our GPS units with cold hard cache. I will have to try that the next time I need to buy one.

[Tomas4x4]

Perhaps you should go back and re-read post #10 in this thread. It accurately explains the level of accuracy of of the basemap. Research BEFORE one purchases any product is usually advisable. It's unfortunate that you are disappointed, but this information is readily available before a purchase is made that that you are able to make an information decision.

 

And I didn't know that we could pay for our GPS units with cold hard cache. I will have to try that the next time I need to buy one.

I agree with lament about precision of the base map. Base map should be limited in amount of information, but not in the precision (except for aproximation). There is no reason why Garmin can't use better source for their base maps (City Navigator for example). The map is digital and capable of being very precise.

 

I understand that the base map is not for 'real' use and only contains basic stuff, but I don't see why unit capable of 3-4m precision must come with base map two orders of magnitude less precise. I think it is bad marketing move from Garmin. Base map should be an example of what the unit can do instead of showcase of how bad map from Garmin can be. For the same reason I can't understand why Garmin chose to replace routable base map from previous models [76CSx for example] with non-routable one. Instead letting new users test routing capabilities and tempting them to buy routable map with more detail, it only disappoints them.

 

However the Garmin maps I have are accurate detailed and simply excellent.

Cant comment on your other receivers having more accurate maps but If compared to City Navigator I suspect there just as accurate/inaccurate.

As for the 'quality' of the other maps, happy to hear that City Navigator is rather precise (can't say because I don't have it) but US TOPO 2008 is so terrible that it is almost unusable: See here

[+Chuy!]

...As for the 'quality' of the other maps ... US TOPO 2008 is so terrible that it is almost unusable.

Most buyers purchase Topo for the contour lines, which are accurate.

 

Most buyers of handheld GPS' understand base maps are basic, and that they must purchase the optional mapping software for detailed mapping.

 

All other buyers are mostly misinformed and/or bug-eyed when purchasing these awesome little electronic devices.

[+Chuy!]

Okay, I was a little harsh with Topo. The Garmin website does indicate you get streets with Topo. I didn't expect the maps, but I can see people ordering it thinking they'll get topo lines and, at least, non-routable detailed maps.

[cobra-ak]

With WAAS and Google Earth there is no reason the entire world sat view with terrain shaded relief cannot be done.

[kingBLAOW]

Except, as far as I understand it, WAAS is only available in Canada, USA and Mexico.

[andylphoto]

 

I understand that the base map is not for 'real' use and only contains basic stuff, but I don't see why unit capable of 3-4m precision must come with base map two orders of magnitude less precise. I think it is bad marketing move from Garmin. Base map should be an example of what the unit can do instead of showcase of how bad map from Garmin can be. For the same reason I can't understand why Garmin chose to replace routable base map from previous models [76CSx for example] with non-routable one. Instead letting new users test routing capabilities and tempting them to buy routable map with more detail, it only disappoints them.

 

 

That was already explained in at least one post above. The basemap is on a scale of 1:1,000,000. An accuracy of .25 miles is all that can be achieved, if I remember the numbers correctly. The more detail you put in the map, the larger the size is.

 

I think with the prices of technology coming down quickly, a higher quality/better scale base map is something they should look at. However, it is what it is, and they're not trying to trick anyone. It's for general reference only. I used mine for two years with only the basemap, and was never disappointed. It has always done what it was advertised to do. Remember, there are also units out there with no maps at all. People use them every day, and aren't disappointed.

 

Remember, you get what you pay for. If you want highly accurate maps, then buy them and install them. Yeah, Garmin could just start pre-installing City Navigator on every unit sold, and hike up the cost. Then people would complain about having to pay for maps that they don't need. People will *always* find something to complain about.

[rusty2ceu]

I quickly stopped ussng base maps as in my area it showed nothing at all just the major highways that are 60 miles away. On the base map it would show me withing 100ft of highway. Now I topo map that shows roads and it shows me right on the roads instead if 100 ft away from them.

 

I bought a Garmin etax Legend HCx abd was wondering about accuracy?

 

One quick question about GPS in general. My gps locks on sats and says accuracy 9ft. is that 9ft mean it is 9ft in the 50ft radus of being accruate? I am new to GPS and do not understand it very much. Maybe this is not the right place to post this. I do not have the WAAS turned on as I do not get it up in Nova Scotia. I think I read somewhere that it only works more south?

 

If I am wrong about WAAS. if I turn it on how do you know if you are getting the WASS signal?

 

Thanks.

Rusty

[andylphoto]

If you enable WAAS, on a Garmin unit, it will show a D at the bottom of each satellite bar that has a WAAS correction.

 

The circle on your screen is a projected accuracy based on not only the expected accuracy of the unit, but also the accuracy of the maps that are installed. The 9 feet shown on the screen (I assume you mean the display on the satellite screen?) means that if you're standing somewhere and your GPS reads out a set of coordinates, the actual precise location of those coordinates should be within a nine-foot radius of where you're standing.

 

Or vice-versa: you should be standing within a nine-foot radius of those coordinates. Either way, you should be within nine feet of where your GPSr says you are, if the projected accuracy is correct.

[+coggins]

How come I can use the maps on my Cobra to go right to it? Only the Garmin maps are way off here on a major interstate. I have 3 GPS recievers and the garmin is the one I will use for trac-logs...Nothing else- especially close cache hunting or placing - it really sucks at that.

Because the Cobra 1000 came with mapping software and you didn't get any mapping software for your Garmin and continue to use the basemap in the Garmin. For the cost of the cobra, you could have had the Garmin maps and would be over the whole thing by now.

[+poohstickz]

Man, despite some great replies in this thread it seems that some of the posters are still misunderstanding what it is that their GPS is reporting to them.

 

First, the location that the GPS is capable of reporting to the user is independant of the maps that are loaded in the unit. In other words, you could be standing at the Equatorial Monument in Quito with a map of Tierra del Fuego loaded and the position your GPS thinks you are at will be same as if you had loaded a map of Beijing, Tokyo, London, or no map at all. You are where you are -- You are "here" (there).

 

So, if one is finding that caches are consistently a considerable distance away, then the most likely answer is "user error". This may be mis-matched coordinate systems, incorrectly entered coordinates, telling the GPS to project the location to be close to some reference point (trying to go off-road with on-road settings, for example), errors in the coordinates for the cache, or any of a number of boo-boos. The point is that a GPS receiver doesn't need a map to tell you where you are, it's telling you where you are in a coordinate system and then possibly projecting that position onto a map in order to provide you with a visual reference of your location. On the map, you may "appear" to be the wrong side of a road, or in a river, but the knowledge of your location (and a cache, for example) is probably more accurate than you are appreciating; this is the subtle issue with your location versus the accuracy displayed on a map.

 

The detail and the accuracy of the maps that are loaded depends on many things. Simply put, and this is very simply put so apologies for being somewhat lax, the more detailed a map is, the larger it will be. Note that a map does not have to be large to be accurate though. For example, take a coin out of your pocket and trace its outline on a piece of paper. The map that you drew of the outline of that coin is tiny yet way more accurate than any map you are likely to load into your GPS receiver. However, for detailed maps to be useful for our purpose they do tend to need to cover a reasonable surface area and, hence, need to be large or larger. This is a simplified version of the issue with the basemap.

 

Until quite recently, the basemap in a consumer-oriented GPS receivers was quite small yet needed to cover a large area. Hence, both by scale and detail couldn't possibly perform to the accuracy that the GPS receiver could achieve. So, when you add in the margin of error of the receiver and the accuracy of the scale of the map, you couldn't possibly expect the projected position on the map (ref circle of accuracy) to always be spot on. If you did, then you almost certainly didn't understand the problem.

 

The issue is confused when you consider newer GPS receivers that come with huge (mapping level) basemaps that exceed the granularity possible with earlier generation loaded maps or GPS receivers that come bundled with mapping software but that's when we get into the issue of comparing Apples with Oranges and saying that "Brand X did better than Brand Y or Model A vs Model B".

 

So, bottom line. It's not a Garmin thing, it's a GPS and a mapping thing. If one keeps going to a particular set of coordinates and finding that the cache is always so many hundred feet away then the answer is likely that the GPS receiver is set up incorrectly, is being used incorrectly or for a purpose / mode that it wasn't intended for, or that the coordinates are wrong. However, in terms of the error in distance being that the basemap "sucks", that's almost certainly not the problem.

[rusty2ceu]

If you enable WAAS, on a Garmin unit, it will show a D at the bottom of each satellite bar that has a WAAS correction.

 

The circle on your screen is a projected accuracy based on not only the expected accuracy of the unit, but also the accuracy of the maps that are installed. The 9 feet shown on the screen (I assume you mean the display on the satellite screen?) means that if you're standing somewhere and your GPS reads out a set of coordinates, the actual precise location of those coordinates should be within a nine-foot radius of where you're standing.

 

Or vice-versa: you should be standing within a nine-foot radius of those coordinates. Either way, you should be within nine feet of where your GPSr says you are, if the projected accuracy is correct.

 

Thanks, I was under the understanding that the 2 WAS sats were over the equator and therefore not able to be recieved in Canada. But I did notice a D on most of the sats shown. so I must be able to get it.

 

Thanks for your help.

 

Rusty

[+Renegade Knight]

Garmin base maps have proved to me to be highly inacurate. If they can't even get the position of a major interstate highway right how do you expect their other maps to be any better?

IMHO- junkit...

Garmin users have suffered here (GCH224)

 

All maps are "off" The problem is not unique to Garmin. Garmin and all others have the same issues. For maps to be accurate they would have to be rectified to the datum and would probably cost more money.