Delorme PN-40

[+jasonw5846]

Has anyone tried the Delorme PN-40. Is it an outstanding unit? Is the small screen an issue? Any feedback would be greatly appreciated.

 

I've got the PN-40 & have been using for geocaching for awhile and have had great results! It's a "Serious Tool" not only for the hiker, but geocacher. I find it to be quick and easy to use with lots of great features. Screen is just right in my opinion and the high image download ability is awesome. The software takes a little getting used to and has a slight learning curve. I would recommend this unit to the avid hiker daypacker or trail blazer or geocacher alike.

[+clan_Barron]

 

Weaknesses:

Included mapping software is free, but that’s about all it’s worth. ..... Finally, the track recording and logging of the unit is fairly crude when compared to the garmin units designed for hand held use.

 

 

Curious as to why you don't like the TOPO7 software and what you think a "good" mapping software is? I have Magellan, Garmin and Delorme devices and the associated Mapsend, Mapsource and TOPO7 software and I think that TOPO7 is by far the the best of the bunch. Granted the interface takes a little getting used to but as a 12+ year user of the GNU/Linux OS I'm used to "non-standard" interfaces so it was no big deal.

 

Also curious as to why you find the track logging crude as compared to the Garmins?

[stevensj2]

 

Also curious as to why you find the track logging crude as compared to the Garmins?

I cannot speak for anyone else, but due to using a patch sensor, the DeLorme's effectiveness is dependent on how it is positioned (ie level is best).

 

Holding it upright in your hand, in a shirt pocket, or dangling from your neck puts it vertically, which is not the position in which it is most effective.

 

So if you were to toss two units in your bag - a Garmin 60cxs for example and a PN-40 - the Garmin will get the same results every time. The DeLorme will get different results, better or worse depending on how it "falls in the bag."

 

The DeLorme is a fine unit, but for the reason that it cannot even repeat its own results unless carried at a specific orientation each time, I'd be cautious of using it for anything other than recreation. Not being able to add an external antenna to correct this only adds further injury.

 

For geocaching, its not a big deal. For getting back to your vehicle after a day out, no big deal either. Mapping trails, especially for the first time through, and this can become an issue.

 

(And I'm glad to see more Linux users around! If someone can become familiar with the notorious disaster that is the GIMP UI, Topo7 should be a walk in the park. But I doubt everyone has had that torture, erm, I mean, pleasure.)

Edited April 14, 2009 by stevensj2

[+Rockin Roddy]

 

Also curious as to why you find the track logging crude as compared to the Garmins?

I cannot speak for anyone else, but due to using a patch sensor, the DeLorme's effectiveness is dependent on how it is positioned (ie level is best).

 

Holding it upright in your hand, in a shirt pocket, or dangling from your neck puts it vertically, which is not the position in which it is most effective.

 

So if you were to toss two units in your bag - a Garmin 60cxs for example and a PN-40 - the Garmin will get the same results every time. The DeLorme will get different results, better or worse depending on how it "falls in the bag."

 

The DeLorme is a fine unit, but for the reason that it cannot even repeat its own results unless carried at a specific orientation each time, I'd be cautious of using it for anything other than recreation. Not being able to add an external antenna to correct this only adds further injury.

 

For geocaching, its not a big deal. For getting back to your vehicle after a day out, no big deal either. Mapping trails, especially for the first time through, and this can become an issue.

 

(And I'm glad to see more Linux users around! If someone can become familiar with the notorious disaster that is the GIMP UI, Topo7 should be a walk in the park. But I doubt everyone has had that torture, erm, I mean, pleasure.)

 

I don't know about this, I have not had any problems at all and I carry mine pretty much antenna side down toward the ground.

[+TotemLake]

 

Also curious as to why you find the track logging crude as compared to the Garmins?

I cannot speak for anyone else, but due to using a patch sensor, the DeLorme's effectiveness is dependent on how it is positioned (ie level is best).

 

Holding it upright in your hand, in a shirt pocket, or dangling from your neck puts it vertically, which is not the position in which it is most effective.

 

So if you were to toss two units in your bag - a Garmin 60cxs for example and a PN-40 - the Garmin will get the same results every time. The DeLorme will get different results, better or worse depending on how it "falls in the bag."

 

The DeLorme is a fine unit, but for the reason that it cannot even repeat its own results unless carried at a specific orientation each time, I'd be cautious of using it for anything other than recreation. Not being able to add an external antenna to correct this only adds further injury.

 

For geocaching, its not a big deal. For getting back to your vehicle after a day out, no big deal either. Mapping trails, especially for the first time through, and this can become an issue.

 

(And I'm glad to see more Linux users around! If someone can become familiar with the notorious disaster that is the GIMP UI, Topo7 should be a walk in the park. But I doubt everyone has had that torture, erm, I mean, pleasure.)

The patch antenna has been a proven antenna when it comes to the Garmin units... and yet it's a problem with the DeLorme?

 

The method is called adapt, adjust and overcome.

[+Searching_ut]

 

Weaknesses:

Included mapping software is free, but that’s about all it’s worth. ..... Finally, the track recording and logging of the unit is fairly crude when compared to the garmin units designed for hand held use.

 

 

Curious as to why you don't like the TOPO7 software and what you think a "good" mapping software is? I have Magellan, Garmin and Delorme devices and the associated Mapsend, Mapsource and TOPO7 software and I think that TOPO7 is by far the the best of the bunch. Granted the interface takes a little getting used to but as a 12+ year user of the GNU/Linux OS I'm used to "non-standard" interfaces so it was no big deal.

 

Also curious as to why you find the track logging crude as compared to the Garmins?

 

Why do I dislike Delormes TOPO? Simple really, maps are only as good as the data on which they are based, and the ability to which they allow you to navigate and visualize your surroundings and location. In this area, be it street data or Terrain data, Delormes TOPO comes up way short. To give you an example of what I’m referring to, check out this part of a web page I made years ago. Maps The delorme TOPO pretty much uses the same DEM and POI data that the Magellan Mapsend topo product was using, at least that’s how it appears to me from the observations I’ve made. There are a lot of errors in this data, and it is of such a nature that a deep ravine in southern Utah for instance won’t even show as a small dent On Delormes TOPO. The street data Delorme uses appears to be a slightly updated version the Tiger map data I detailed somewhat on the street map sections of the web page. The newer NavTeq data both Garmin and Magellan now use is light years ahead of the old Tiger stuff for both accuracy, and currency. The older garmin TOPO used actual 1:100,000 scale maps as a base, but the newer ones are DEM data which doesn’t represent the terrain as accurately in my opinion. The latest Garmin 1:24,000 scale maps are quite good based on my limited experience with them but I’ll hold out on saying for sure.

 

As for the interface, it’s useable, but lacking in strength and stability. My favorite TOPO mapping software to date is National Geographics, which I’ve used for planning purposes for years. For track analysis and manipulation I generally use TopoFusion and ExpertGps. Try them and you’ll start to understand my frustration with Delormes mapping.

 

As for the track recording, the garmin units have an automatic function that records track points based on speed, or direction changes. This allows you to record quite accurate representations of your tip without running out of track memory as quickly as when trying to record tracks of the same general accuracy with the PN-40.

[stevensj2]

 

Also curious as to why you find the track logging crude as compared to the Garmins?

I cannot speak for anyone else, but due to using a patch sensor, the DeLorme's effectiveness is dependent on how it is positioned (ie level is best).

 

Holding it upright in your hand, in a shirt pocket, or dangling from your neck puts it vertically, which is not the position in which it is most effective.

 

So if you were to toss two units in your bag - a Garmin 60cxs for example and a PN-40 - the Garmin will get the same results every time. The DeLorme will get different results, better or worse depending on how it "falls in the bag."

 

The DeLorme is a fine unit, but for the reason that it cannot even repeat its own results unless carried at a specific orientation each time, I'd be cautious of using it for anything other than recreation. Not being able to add an external antenna to correct this only adds further injury.

 

For geocaching, its not a big deal. For getting back to your vehicle after a day out, no big deal either. Mapping trails, especially for the first time through, and this can become an issue.

 

(And I'm glad to see more Linux users around! If someone can become familiar with the notorious disaster that is the GIMP UI, Topo7 should be a walk in the park. But I doubt everyone has had that torture, erm, I mean, pleasure.)

The patch antenna has been a proven antenna when it comes to the Garmin units... and yet it's a problem with the DeLorme?

 

The method is called adapt, adjust and overcome.

 

The 60csx, the Garmin to which I compared the pn-40, does not use a patch antenna. Nor does that address the pn-40's lack of external antenna attachment. That is indeed a problem with the DeLorme (IMO) - how big or how small depends on the user and their goals.

 

Adapting, adjusting, and overcoming are great. But if we're needing to adapt to the GPS and overcome it, I'd argue we've got the process wrong.

 

A GPS should be a tool that assists us, not an obstacle to be adapted to or overcome.

 

(I'm not bashing the pn-40. It will likely be my next unit, and I don't see why any criticism of DeLorme is so quick to be challenged on this board (??). No GPS is perfect for all uses, and if the criticisms address that, then they are fair. Credit is due where it is due, and likewise, criticism too. It's a great device, but there are some valid concerns to be had with it.)

Edited April 15, 2009 by stevensj2

[+Rockin Roddy]

 

Also curious as to why you find the track logging crude as compared to the Garmins?

I cannot speak for anyone else, but due to using a patch sensor, the DeLorme's effectiveness is dependent on how it is positioned (ie level is best).

 

Holding it upright in your hand, in a shirt pocket, or dangling from your neck puts it vertically, which is not the position in which it is most effective.

 

So if you were to toss two units in your bag - a Garmin 60cxs for example and a PN-40 - the Garmin will get the same results every time. The DeLorme will get different results, better or worse depending on how it "falls in the bag."

 

The DeLorme is a fine unit, but for the reason that it cannot even repeat its own results unless carried at a specific orientation each time, I'd be cautious of using it for anything other than recreation. Not being able to add an external antenna to correct this only adds further injury.

 

For geocaching, its not a big deal. For getting back to your vehicle after a day out, no big deal either. Mapping trails, especially for the first time through, and this can become an issue.

 

(And I'm glad to see more Linux users around! If someone can become familiar with the notorious disaster that is the GIMP UI, Topo7 should be a walk in the park. But I doubt everyone has had that torture, erm, I mean, pleasure.)

The patch antenna has been a proven antenna when it comes to the Garmin units... and yet it's a problem with the DeLorme?

 

The method is called adapt, adjust and overcome.

 

The 60csx, the Garmin to which I compared the pn-40, does not use a patch antenna. Nor does that address the pn-40's lack of external antenna attachment. That is indeed a problem with the DeLorme (IMO) - how big or how small depends on the user and their goals.

 

Adapting, adjusting, and overcoming are great. But if we're needing to adapt to the GPS and overcome it, I'd argue we've got the process wrong.

 

A GPS should be a tool that assists us, not an obstacle to be adapted to or overcome.

 

(I'm not bashing the pn-40. It will likely be my next unit, and I don't see why any criticism of DeLorme is so quick to be challenged on this board (??). No GPS is perfect for all uses, and if the criticisms address that, then they are fair. Credit is due where it is due, and likewise, criticism too. It's a great device, but there are some valid concerns to be had with it.)

 

It would apprear to me you are criticizing the strong point of the unit, it's accuracy and ability to lock on to signal. Many here have said this is as accurate or more accurate than the 60CSx. I can't attest for deep cover such as canyons and such, but around here, it's flat and tree covered. I've yet to lose signal while out caching in any condition even under tree coverage. I asked once why someone might need an external antenna and I don't recall anyone giving an answer, but I could only imagine the need for the very worst of conditions such as deep canyons? Would it be safe to say a very minimal percentage of users will ever need one?

[+Searching_ut]

 

Also curious as to why you find the track logging crude as compared to the Garmins?

I cannot speak for anyone else, but due to using a patch sensor, the DeLorme's effectiveness is dependent on how it is positioned (ie level is best).

 

Holding it upright in your hand, in a shirt pocket, or dangling from your neck puts it vertically, which is not the position in which it is most effective.

 

So if you were to toss two units in your bag - a Garmin 60cxs for example and a PN-40 - the Garmin will get the same results every time. The DeLorme will get different results, better or worse depending on how it "falls in the bag."

 

The DeLorme is a fine unit, but for the reason that it cannot even repeat its own results unless carried at a specific orientation each time, I'd be cautious of using it for anything other than recreation. Not being able to add an external antenna to correct this only adds further injury.

 

For geocaching, its not a big deal. For getting back to your vehicle after a day out, no big deal either. Mapping trails, especially for the first time through, and this can become an issue.

 

(And I'm glad to see more Linux users around! If someone can become familiar with the notorious disaster that is the GIMP UI, Topo7 should be a walk in the park. But I doubt everyone has had that torture, erm, I mean, pleasure.)

The patch antenna has been a proven antenna when it comes to the Garmin units... and yet it's a problem with the DeLorme?

 

The method is called adapt, adjust and overcome.

 

The 60csx, the Garmin to which I compared the pn-40, does not use a patch antenna. Nor does that address the pn-40's lack of external antenna attachment. That is indeed a problem with the DeLorme (IMO) - how big or how small depends on the user and their goals.

 

Adapting, adjusting, and overcoming are great. But if we're needing to adapt to the GPS and overcome it, I'd argue we've got the process wrong.

 

A GPS should be a tool that assists us, not an obstacle to be adapted to or overcome.

 

(I'm not bashing the pn-40. It will likely be my next unit, and I don't see why any criticism of DeLorme is so quick to be challenged on this board (??). No GPS is perfect for all uses, and if the criticisms address that, then they are fair. Credit is due where it is due, and likewise, criticism too. It's a great device, but there are some valid concerns to be had with it.)

 

Actually, I've never understood the debate on patch vs helix antenna. It appears to go back to the early etrex series, the performance issues of which many attributed to the antenna style instead of the electronics. Having had access to some pretty spectacular antenna design and simulation software, I don't see any significant difference in what you should expect signal strength wise provided correct orientation for the type antenna involved. You can set up a helix antenna to have a wider reception pattern, but it comes at the loss of sensitivity. Too wide a reception pattern sets you up for potential multipath reception problems.

 

As for external antennas that many highly regard, ever notice they are all patch type antennas? By the way, I do sometimes resort to using an external when I'm trying to log tracks, and do wish more of my hand held units would accept them. For the bulk of my hiking adventures though, I can't be bothered with the wires, reduced battery life, and other problems associated with using an external antenna.

[+TotemLake]

, and I don't see why any criticism of DeLorme is so quick to be challenged on this board (??).

Because there has been very fast criticism from some of the Garmin crowd. It's reminiscent of the early Magellan days which it was always considererd a fair game target to be critical of anything not Garmin. That being said, I'll be as fast to be sure there's a balance. So, if you think you're being challenged, you are. And you stepped up to clarify. Thank you.

Edited April 15, 2009 by TotemLake

[+Team CowboyPapa]

 

Weaknesses:

Included mapping software is free, but that’s about all it’s worth. ..... Finally, the track recording and logging of the unit is fairly crude when compared to the garmin units designed for hand held use.

 

 

Curious as to why you don't like the TOPO7 software and what you think a "good" mapping software is? I have Magellan, Garmin and Delorme devices and the associated Mapsend, Mapsource and TOPO7 software and I think that TOPO7 is by far the the best of the bunch. Granted the interface takes a little getting used to but as a 12+ year user of the GNU/Linux OS I'm used to "non-standard" interfaces so it was no big deal.

 

Also curious as to why you find the track logging crude as compared to the Garmins?

I'm guessing that he may not be aware that many of the DeLorme PN-40/Topo USA 7.0 users are availing themselves of the $29.95 annual download subscription whereby one can download unlimited amounts of 1:24,000 USGS 3DTQs including deep canyons of southern Utah and even past Colorado City and down to Mt. Trumbull. I've got all of northern Arizona that lies west of Kanab Creek and north of the Colorado River on a 16GB SDHC card in my PN-40 as I type. (But the USGS is only a few GB, itself.)

[+Team CowboyPapa]

(I'm not bashing the pn-40. It will likely be my next unit, and I don't see why any criticism of DeLorme is so quick to be challenged on this board (??). No GPS is perfect for all uses, and if the criticisms address that, then they are fair. Credit is due where it is due, and likewise, criticism too. It's a great device, but there are some valid concerns to be had with it.)

That's reasonable, but realize that most of the DeLorme bashing is based on hearsay as it comes from those who have never touched one.

 

...... but there are some valid concerns to be had with it.

And, in your personal, hands-on experience, a specific example of such concern?

 

A response to which I would gladly respond based on my personal, dircect, hands-on observations, fair enough?

Edited April 15, 2009 by Team CowboyPapa

[stevensj2]

(I'm not bashing the pn-40. It will likely be my next unit, and I don't see why any criticism of DeLorme is so quick to be challenged on this board (??). No GPS is perfect for all uses, and if the criticisms address that, then they are fair. Credit is due where it is due, and likewise, criticism too. It's a great device, but there are some valid concerns to be had with it.)

 

...... but there are some valid concerns to be had with it.

And, in your personal, hands-on experience, a specific example of such concern?

 

A response to which I would gladly respond based on my personal, dircect, hands-on observations, fair enough?

I'm simply stating there are things to be concerned about (and there are).

 

As a prospective buyer, I'm going to assess the strengths and weaknesses of whatever I'm considering. In all comparisons I've seen, the 60csx typically fared better than the pn-40. Occasionally the reverse was true.

 

Seeing that accuracy could go either way, with either of the units being more accurate than the other under certain conditions or at certain times, the next step one might take is to ask themselves "Is there anything I, the consumer, can do to improve the accuracy of the unit?"

 

The only answer to that is to add an external antenna when such accuracy is necessary. Only one of the above units would allow that to be possible. Is that not a valid concern??

 

As I've mentioned, it all comes down to what one expects from a device, and what activities and purpose they'll take to task with it. For 85%+ of us who geocache, hike, track our mountain bike trails or where we've walked the dog, either unit would suffice and we'd be most satisfied either way.

 

For more cartographic purposes, short of ponying up the cash for a Trimble, a wise buyer ought to weigh out all the options beforehand. And that's precisely what I'm doing (and don't take this as heat on the pn-40 - I give it tough love because its currently in the #1 position of my choice, so I'm becoming increasingly scrutinizing as the time to pull the trigger nears).

 

At any rate, it is good to hear from the experienced owners who use the device daily, and I look forward to more unit-to-unit comparisons and experiments.

Edited April 15, 2009 by stevensj2

[Grasscatcher]

Sure is hard to separate BS opinion from facts here isn't it?

 

Easy fix.......Just simultaneously log a track under difficult conditions with both units. On the Garmin use a high mounted (on your cap) external antenna and on the PN-40 carry it in the "No problems at all " position pointing down at the ground. (I really can't believe he really said that). Make the track an "out and back" type track to check the repeatability of each unit to itself and the other brand.

 

On the Garmin, track logging method use "Auto" and "More often" for frequency.

 

Compare the results of both with Expert GPS by zooming in to the level where map contour lines start to become pixelated and you can see the accuracy of individual trackpoints . That way YOU can tell what is really going on, and separate fact from fiction.

 

I did, with my own HANDS ON, and the results were scary.

 

If you don't have both type of units, borrow a 60 - 76CSx with an external antenna. Then buy a PN-40 at REI with their return policy, because you're going to need that.

[+user13371]

...but realize that most of the DeLorme bashing is based on hearsay as it comes from those who have never touched one.

I wonder what you consider "bashing" and how you quantified that "most" estimate.

 

I think the PN-40 has received a fair amount of realistic criticism from people who DO have one or have at least tested one. Myself. Briansnat. Grasscatcher. Searching_UT. Aud78. Quite a few others. Even the folks like me, who find it praiseworthy in many respects, have noted problems as well.

 

I can think of a few bashers making unfair criticisms -- one mouse-eared bat* with an obsession for open-source maps comes to mind -- but I don't think his screeds amounted to "most" of the negative comments about the PN-40.

 

---

* "Mouse-eared bat" is not idle name calling, it's what the bloke's screen name actually meant.

Edited April 15, 2009 by lee_rimar

[+user13371]

... I carry mine pretty much antenna side down toward the ground.

How do you read the screen? Edited April 15, 2009 by lee_rimar

[+RRLover]

Mirror?

 

Norm

[+Triple Crown]

In my experience, the PN-40 was just as fast and accurate as the 60Csx, it was a little weird having all those digits though (1.35 feet?). Now I'm using an Oregon and I find that its just as accurate...eventually...as the other 2 but when I first arrive at a cache site I end up walking in a lot more circles than I used to. I'm usually showing less than 5' while signing the log, but it just seems a lot slower to nail down GZ.

[+Team CowboyPapa]

...but realize that most of the DeLorme bashing is based on hearsay as it comes from those who have never touched one.

I wonder what you consider "bashing" and how you quantified that "most" estimate.

 

I think the PN-40 has received a fair amount of realistic criticism from people who DO have one or have at least tested one. Myself. Briansnat. Grasscatcher. Searching_UT. Aud78. Quite a few others. Even the folks like me, who find it praiseworthy in many respects, have noted problems as well.

 

I can think of a few bashers making unfair criticisms -- one mouse-eared bat* with an obsession for open-source maps comes to mind -- but I don't think his screeds amounted to "most" of the negative comments about the PN-40.

 

---

* "Mouse-eared bat" is not idle name calling, it's what the bloke's screen name actually meant.

Does this qualify (taken from #65, above)?

Try them and you’ll start to understand my frustration with Delormes mapping.

Yes, I tried a bunch of recorded track editing (splitting a recorded track, deleting a chunk, defining a new portion as a replacement and then joining/splicing it back in) without great difficulty. Yes, it was more involved the first time that I did something similar than buying a book from Amazon.com, but what isn't? Then on successive sessions, I find it no big deal.

 

So, yeah, in my opinion, those that have never accomplished it or even tried it and then disparage it, are bashing it. Furthermore, as I've suggested previously, I'll match step-by-step descriptions of the process with any other handheld and its bundled (bundled: in the same box) software. Or is the difficulty assessment as made not relative, just a random shot?

 

EDIT: On further thought, I retract the offer of the side-by-side as what I did cannot be accomplished with any other handheld and its single source software and data.

You see, the piece that I drew in with the line generating tool was done so by tracing over that which looked like a 4WD track (by a fainter trace across the terrain) on a CDOQQ aerial imagery that I downloaded with my slotted spoon.

So, when that cannot be done otherwise with another handheld - software bundle, any characterization of Topo 7 of difficult, but compared to nothing, is sheer bashing.

When the comparison is not relative to anything, it is not relevant.

Edited April 15, 2009 by Team CowboyPapa

[+Team CowboyPapa]

Mirror?

 

Norm

Reminds me of a song. Guy goes dancing in a honkytonk with a mirror on his shoe.

[+julianh]

Easy fix.......Just simultaneously log a track under difficult conditions with both units. On the Garmin use a high mounted (on your cap) external antenna and on the PN-40 carry it in the "No problems at all " position pointing down at the ground. (I really can't believe he really said that). Make the track an "out and back" type track to check the repeatability of each unit to itself and the other brand.

 

On the Garmin, track logging method use "Auto" and "More often" for frequency.

I use my Summit HC by just putting it in the outside pocket of my backpack, turned on, with "Auto" / "Standard" track logging. I don't worry about whether it is pointing up, down or sideways. Whenever I need to check progress, mark a waypoint, etc, I take it out, wait a few seconds for it to settle, and mark my location, set a new course, etc.

 

Works for me! I don't need (or expect!) 1 metre accuracy for the whole track, and I don't need tracepoints every 5 metres - every 25 - 50 meters, and every significant bend etc is fine for my needs. Used in this way, my outbound and return tracks are pretty much indistinguishable.

[+Rockin Roddy]

Sure is hard to separate BS opinion from facts here isn't it?

 

Easy fix.......Just simultaneously log a track under difficult conditions with both units. On the Garmin use a high mounted (on your cap) external antenna and on the PN-40 carry it in the "No problems at all " position pointing down at the ground. (I really can't believe he really said that). Make the track an "out and back" type track to check the repeatability of each unit to itself and the other brand.

 

On the Garmin, track logging method use "Auto" and "More often" for frequency.

 

Compare the results of both with Expert GPS by zooming in to the level where map contour lines start to become pixelated and you can see the accuracy of individual trackpoints . That way YOU can tell what is really going on, and separate fact from fiction.

 

I did, with my own HANDS ON, and the results were scary.

 

If you don't have both type of units, borrow a 60 - 76CSx with an external antenna. Then buy a PN-40 at REI with their return policy, because you're going to need that.

 

Are you then calling me a liar? Believe what you want, my friend, I wouldn't post BS here or elsewhere for anyone. Now, as to how I carry mine....in my hand, hand is in relaxed position hanging down at my side, palm pointed to the rear (you know, normal walking position???). Now, put the PN-40 in my hand and imagine just where the antenna is pointed and in what position...OK? Or would you care to not believe that as well?? Funny how I never seem to get lost, never lose a signal. Hey, I even put it in my jacket pocket at times (I know, can't believe that either, right??).

 

Since I already own a PN-40 and I'll not need to test your BS theories since I'm more than happy, if you'd like to buy me a 60CSx, I'll do any test you wish...just be prepared I'll sell it when done since returning it won't be an option as it is with the PN series! PONY UP, man with the answers!

 

Someone asked about criticism....we defend because of bashings like this one. You want to put out your opinion, leave the bashing out and maybe people will better receive your criticism.

[+Rockin Roddy]

... I carry mine pretty much antenna side down toward the ground.

How do you read the screen?

 

Well Lee, I think most would see it as a simple procedure: Swing arm upward while twisting hand around so unit is facing upward and....look at it? I don't use the neckstrap since I often forget it on my motorcycle, so I simply carry my PN-40 in the most relaxed position comfortable for me. Ooops, forgot to add: if I get tired of carrying it (seldom) or need both hands for climbing or whatever, I sopmetimes place it in my pocket! When in my pocket, I simply pull it out and view the screen. No tricks, nothing hard about either procedure!

 

I know, hard to believe, but I don't lie, stretch the truth or fabricate (however you wish to say it). I'm just a happy customer willing to take the abuse to report my experiences accurately!

Edited April 15, 2009 by Rockin Roddy

[+Rockin Roddy]

Easy fix.......Just simultaneously log a track under difficult conditions with both units. On the Garmin use a high mounted (on your cap) external antenna and on the PN-40 carry it in the "No problems at all " position pointing down at the ground. (I really can't believe he really said that). Make the track an "out and back" type track to check the repeatability of each unit to itself and the other brand.

 

On the Garmin, track logging method use "Auto" and "More often" for frequency.

I use my Summit HC by just putting it in the outside pocket of my backpack, turned on, with "Auto" / "Standard" track logging. I don't worry about whether it is pointing up, down or sideways. Whenever I need to check progress, mark a waypoint, etc, I take it out, wait a few seconds for it to settle, and mark my location, set a new course, etc.

 

Works for me! I don't need (or expect!) 1 metre accuracy for the whole track, and I don't need tracepoints every 5 metres - every 25 - 50 meters, and every significant bend etc is fine for my needs. Used in this way, my outbound and return tracks are pretty much indistinguishable.

 

Say it aint so!

[+user13371]

I wonder what you consider "bashing" and how you quantified that "most" estimate.

Does this qualify (taken from #65, above)?

Try them and you'll start to understand my frustration with Delormes mapping.

Nope, because it doesn't fit the criteria you gave. It's not a bash from someone who hasn't used the product -- it' a critical comment from someone who DOES have a PN-40 and hands-on experience with it, and went to some lengths comparing T7's map data and features to other packages he uses.

 

BTW, that one line quoted out of context was in post 56, not 65.

 

editted to be shorter and more to the point

Edited April 15, 2009 by lee_rimar

[+user13371]

... Swing arm upward while twisting hand around so unit is facing upward and....look at it?

Well Roddy, that is simple - but I had to ask because your original remark about carrying it "antenna pointing to the ground" could certainly have been read as "I usually carry mine upside down." An amusing image.

 

You do mount it face up on the bars of your bike, I hope?

 

BTW, I don't think antenna "points" towards the top of the unit; I'm told it's behind the displa and is pointed upwards when holding it horizontal to look at the screen. So carrying as you describe really wouldn't point the antenna to the ground -- but it might not get its best reception that way.

Edited April 15, 2009 by lee_rimar

[+Rockin Roddy]

... Swing arm upward while twisting hand around so unit is facing upward and....look at it?

Well Roddy, that is simple - but I had to ask because your original remark about carrying it "antenna pointing to the ground" could certainly have been read as "I usually carry mine upside down." An amusing image.

 

You do mount it face up on the bars of your bike, I hope?

 

BTW, I don't think antenna "points" towards the top of the unit; I'm told it's behind the displa and is pointed upwards when holding it horizontal to look at the screen. So carrying as you describe really wouldn't point the antenna to the ground -- but it might not get its best reception that way.

 

The unit is upside down while I'm walking, but I don't think we're thinking the same way? I imagine you must mean I hold it screen side down (although I cannot for the life of me figure out why anyone would do so or how anyone could think I'm doing this)? Having no idea about where the antenna points but assuming it's like the 60CSx, I just figured the antenna was on the top!

 

I don't mount the PN-40 to my bars but to my tank! I use just as simple a way to fasten it to my bike as I do to fasten it to my dash...velcro with the carry strap used as a safety tether. Simple, safe and cheap. NOTE: I do not use the tether in the Jeep, just so I'm not confusing anyone.

Edited April 15, 2009 by Rockin Roddy

[+Maingray]

Doesn't the PN-40 have a patch antenna so horizontal is the best orientation?

 

That's how I hold my unit anyway (GPS UNITs, pervs).

 

I'm also with the crowd that doesn't really give a flying you-know-what about teeny spikes in track (in)accuracy. Just get me to 1) to the road turn I want or 2) reliably within 20 feet of the cache so i can put the GPS away and start looking with my eyes for the box. The PN-40 did that well, so does the Oregon. And so did the 60. And the Vista HCX. Oh and so did the magellan GPS315.

Edited April 15, 2009 by Maingray

[+Rockin Roddy]

Doesn't the PN-40 have a patch antenna so horizontal is the best orientation?

 

That's how I hold my unit anyway (GPS UNITs, pervs).

 

I'm also with the crowd that doesn't really give a flying you-know-what about teeny spikes in track (in)accuracy. Just get me to 1) to the road turn I want or 2) reliably within 20 feet of the cache so i can put the GPS away and start looking with my eyes for the box. The PN-40 did that well, so does the Oregon. And so did the 60. And the Vista HCX. Oh and so did the magellan GPS315.

 

I don't know Maingray, but I haven't had a problem regardless of how or where I carry my unit (pocket, palm of hand, around neck etc) I assumed since the strap made it so the top pointed up when hanging around your neck, it meant the unit worked best when pointing upward.

 

Yep, get me to the cache and back. If you're hiking a trail so tight that you need to worry if your GPS has you off by a few feet, wouldn't your eyes be able to see any dangers? Even at night, I couldn't imagine a need for 100% accurate trail tracking (but, I can't understand the need for the external antenna either). Now, maybe if you're blindfolded? I'd be happy to hear a scenario showing how an accurate track might be helpful though.

 

I'm likely about the same as 95% of geocachers, get me to the cache and back, then to the next!

[+user13371]

... I imagine you must mean I hold it screen side down (although I cannot for the life of me figure out why anyone would do so or how anyone could think I'm doing this)?

...because you said you were carrying it with the antenna pointing the ground most of the time, which really would be screen side down. An odd notion -- which is why I questioned it, and a few other folks clearly got the joke too.

 

I know you don't lie or intend to mislead, but when you admit you have "...no idea about where the antenna points..." it might be best just to take notes and move on.

Edited April 15, 2009 by lee_rimar

[+Rockin Roddy]

... I imagine you must mean I hold it screen side down (although I cannot for the life of me figure out why anyone would do so or how anyone could think I'm doing this)?

...because you said you were carrying it with the antenna pointing the ground most of the time, which really would be screen side down. An odd notion -- which is why I questioned it, and a few other folks clearly got the joke too.

 

I know you don't lie or intend to mislead, but when you admit you have "...no idea about where the antenna points..." it might be best just to take notes and move on.

 

My guess (and I could be wrong), most understood what I meant even if making light of it was the only reaction!

 

I'm sure asking for clarification is another option....right? I mean, I could just stay in the dark and not ever learn, or I could get the info this way. Of course, those who DO know could be helpful and suggest where to find the info instead of make light of the situation too, but that's not likely in most cases! Being quiet has not been a great way to learn since all I see are complaints without explanations, and until I made that comment, not a sole was saying where the antenna actually is.

[+Maingray]

I took a cross section of the PN-40, but couldn't find the antenna anywhere. What i found certainly explains it's color though.

 

 

Anyway, having searched online, the consensus is that "The antenna is mounted above the display, with the front surface facing out the front of the unit.". Holding horizontally (screen upwards!!) is the best way.

[stevensj2]

 

EDIT: On further thought, I retract the offer of the side-by-side as what I did cannot be accomplished with any other handheld and its single source software and data.

You see, the piece that I drew in with the line generating tool was done so by tracing over that which looked like a 4WD track (by a fainter trace across the terrain) on a CDOQQ aerial imagery that I downloaded with my slotted spoon.

So, when that cannot be done otherwise with another handheld - software bundle, any characterization of Topo 7 of difficult, but compared to nothing, is sheer bashing.

If I recall correctly, the map you've posted in other threads to show off the accuracy of the pn-40 show only a track made by it alone, with no other tracks from another unit to which it can be compared.

 

Which leads me to your statement:

When the comparison is not relative to anything, it is not relevant.

 

You may be familiar with the trail your walking, but those images don't make a strong case when there is no other unit you're comparing them to, especially at such a zoom level (far enough out, and any track will appear spot-on).

 

You've also stated that you retract your offer on the basis that "what [you] did cannot be accomplished with any other handheld and its single source software and data. "

 

Do you mean to suggest that the Gamin's waypoints and tracks cannot be sent to Google Earth? And that these tracks could not be compared to one another to indicate overlaps and mismatches?

 

Although that question was rhetorical, I'd be interested if the pn-40 has any utilities that export its tracks and waypoints as shapefiles that can be loaded into any GIS package (ArcGIS, Quantum, UDig, etc.) for more accurate cartographic comparisons.

 

I know the "other handhelds" can, but I'm not about to say the pn-40 cannot without really knowing.

 

After seeing how easily concerns and fair criticism is labeled "bashing," I think its fair to consider some real, physical comparisons. Those making some of the criticisms have done so and use the results as their basis. I've yet to see anyone defending the DeLorme do the same.

[+Rockin Roddy]

I took a cross section of the PN-40, but couldn't find the antenna anywhere. What i found certainly explains it's color though.

 

 

Anyway, having searched online, the consensus is that "The antenna is mounted above the display, with the front surface facing out the front of the unit.". Holding horizontally (screen upwards!!) is the best way.

 

THANKS for the help Maingray! Sounds like I had the right idea of where the antenna is, just not the best way to hold it! Seems I wasn't too far off with my earlier comment about carrying it antenna pointing to the ground?

[+user13371]

Seems I wasn't too far off with my earlier comment about carrying it antenna pointing to the ground?

Only by 90 degrees

[+Rockin Roddy]

Anyway, having searched online, the consensus is that "The antenna is mounted above the display, with the front surface facing out the front of the unit.".

 

Lee, let's try something...why not, just for kicks, grab your PN-40 and hold it as I said! Now, in the relaxed position I mentioned, where is the screen pointing?? Down at the ground along with the top??? OMG, say it aint so! But, I also assume EVERYONE had already known what I was saying...

 

Looks like I was close enough! People seem to want to get caught up on silliness when they could simply help...or aren't the forums for helping anymore?

[+user13371]

... or aren't the forums for helping anymore?

Roddy, lots of folks here are trying to help you, by imparting information. Today you should have more knowledge than you had yesterday. To recap:

 

Holding the unit vertically, with the top pointed to the ground would mean the antenna is pointed/facing sideways. The antenna is directional, with best reception is when held horizontally, face up. To "point the antenna at the ground" as you originally said would mean holding it horizontally, face down.

 

You might even get slightly better WAAS reception holding it vertically, if the face pointed the general direction of the WAAS sites from your location. Slightly.

 

There - don't you feel better knowing that?

Edited April 15, 2009 by lee_rimar

[+TotemLake]

 

EDIT: On further thought, I retract the offer of the side-by-side as what I did cannot be accomplished with any other handheld and its single source software and data.

You see, the piece that I drew in with the line generating tool was done so by tracing over that which looked like a 4WD track (by a fainter trace across the terrain) on a CDOQQ aerial imagery that I downloaded with my slotted spoon.

So, when that cannot be done otherwise with another handheld - software bundle, any characterization of Topo 7 of difficult, but compared to nothing, is sheer bashing.

If I recall correctly, the map you've posted in other threads to show off the accuracy of the pn-40 show only a track made by it alone, with no other tracks from another unit to which it can be compared.

 

Which leads me to your statement:

When the comparison is not relative to anything, it is not relevant.

 

You may be familiar with the trail your walking, but those images don't make a strong case when there is no other unit you're comparing them to, especially at such a zoom level (far enough out, and any track will appear spot-on).

 

You've also stated that you retract your offer on the basis that "what [you] did cannot be accomplished with any other handheld and its single source software and data. "

 

Do you mean to suggest that the Gamin's waypoints and tracks cannot be sent to Google Earth? And that these tracks could not be compared to one another to indicate overlaps and mismatches?

 

Although that question was rhetorical, I'd be interested if the pn-40 has any utilities that export its tracks and waypoints as shapefiles that can be loaded into any GIS package (ArcGIS, Quantum, UDig, etc.) for more accurate cartographic comparisons.

 

I know the "other handhelds" can, but I'm not about to say the pn-40 cannot without really knowing.

 

After seeing how easily concerns and fair criticism is labeled "bashing," I think its fair to consider some real, physical comparisons. Those making some of the criticisms have done so and use the results as their basis. I've yet to see anyone defending the DeLorme do the same.

Track comparison made between a MeriPlat, a Garmin 60csx and a DeLorme PN-40 when it was asked for way back then. (and the web page was tested against FireFox for you Mozilla users. )

Edited April 15, 2009 by TotemLake

[stevensj2]

 

Track comparison made between a MeriPlat, a Garmin 60csx and a DeLorme PN-40 when it was asked for way back then. (and the web page was tested against FireFox for you Mozilla users. )

Thanks, TotemLake!

 

That's good info indeed.

 

Now the last thing standing between myself and a pn-40 is the detail of the world basemap. My Garmin shows hydrography, which is suprisingly detailed (ie many small and obscure lakes are both present and named), in Canada.

 

But I will research the DeLorme forums for that info - I don't want to distract this thread in numerous directions

[+Team DeLorme]

DeLorme will be releasing Topo USA 8.0 in mid-to-late May and it will include street-level detail for Canada as well as major roads for Mexico. Our Canadian maps show many lakes as well but these are not topographic maps -- not the same as the topo detail we provide in the U.S. No contour intervals. But the route connectivity will be there so someone can route from Mexico City to a street address in Calgary if they want -- all this right out of the PN-Series GPS device package -- nothing extra to buy.

 

We have several world map projects underway and I don't think many people here know that DeLorme is providing a new world base map to the U.S. government and this base map was recently touted by the head of ESRI as the new world standard. That's because it is both seamless of the entire world and also GPS accurate unlike others out there. But to be clear, this base map is not available for PN users yet -- instead we are offering our previous edition, which is still helpful when overseas. But the promise of a better one in the future is there.

 

People who already own a PN-Series GPS or Topo USA will receive emails from us when the product is shipping and will be able to save considerably off the list price as they have in the past.

 

Topo USA 8.0 will also include many other improvements for PN-Series GPS users. More details to follow in the coming weeks. Our Cache Register widget is on track for late April (in fact I believe a beta release for this upcoming weekend). Just check our forums. Lots going on here with more to come. Stay tuned.

 

-- Caleb

 

 

Track comparison made between a MeriPlat, a Garmin 60csx and a DeLorme PN-40 when it was asked for way back then. (and the web page was tested against FireFox for you Mozilla users. )

Thanks, TotemLake!

 

That's good info indeed.

 

Now the last thing standing between myself and a pn-40 is the detail of the world basemap. My Garmin shows hydrography, which is suprisingly detailed (ie many small and obscure lakes are both present and named), in Canada.

 

But I will research the DeLorme forums for that info - I don't want to distract this thread in numerous directions

[+julianh]

Anyway, having searched online, the consensus is that "The antenna is mounted above the display, with the front surface facing out the front of the unit.". Holding horizontally (screen upwards!!) is the best way.

What?! You mean that if I choose to use my GPSr while lying flat on my back staring up at the sky, I might get reduced accuracy?

 

This is outrageous! Why is there no warning on the box about this? How am I supposed to find my way around under my SUV if I can't rely on my GPSr to navigate me accurately to the rear diff?

 

[+julianh]

OK, I have a Summit HC, not a PN-40, but I thought it might help to clear the air a little to provide some evidence that:

 

1. Patch antennas are not necessarily the poor relation to the quad-helix;

 

2. Unless you really NEED the absolute best quality tracks at all times, you don't need to get too fastidious about which way you hold your GPSr (if you have a modern high-sensitivity unit), and you probably don't really need to worry about an external antenna; and

 

3. Not all eTrex "H" series units suffer from the infamous "drift" issue when subjected to less than optional reception conditions.

 

My method was to turn on my Summit HC at home this morning, calibrate the altimeter, and put it in an outside pocket of my backpack. (I didn't notice whether it was facing up, down or sideways! ) I then put my backpack in the boot (trunk) of my sedan car, with the pocket holding my GPSr facing upwards. With the boot lid closed, the only signal it would get was through the front, rear and side glass, and then through the (empty) back seats - a pretty severe reception test, I would think. I then drove to work following my normal route, and on arrival, downloaded the tracklog into MapSource, clipped the start and end segments (for privacy reasons), and saved as GPX for sharing.

 

The result - the tracklog is a darn good fit to the actual route I took, accurate to within about 5 metres on the whole.

 

See for yourself. (Note - we drive on the left in Australia, I am going from west to east, and I was in the left-most lane most of the way, so my actual position was typically at the "top" of the road as viewed in these Google Earth screen captures.)

 

http://www.mediafire.com/?mbzzggz1mld

 

http://www.mediafire.com/?a5mmww3tz0j

 

http://www.mediafire.com/?zyjjtlz04gr

 

(Sorry, I just can't get the hang of embedding images in these forums! I'm afraid you'll have to follow the links to see the images.)

 

GPX file is here for anyone who wants to look in greater detail:

http://www.mediafire.com/?t4cj0ggy5zy

Edited April 15, 2009 by julianh

[+Team CowboyPapa]

Anyway, having searched online, the consensus is that "The antenna is mounted above the display, with the front surface facing out the front of the unit.". Holding horizontally (screen upwards!!) is the best way.

What?! You mean that if I choose to use my GPSr while lying flat on my back staring up at the sky, I might get reduced accuracy?

 

This is outrageous! Why is there no warning on the box about this? How am I supposed to find my way around under my SUV if I can't rely on my GPSr to navigate me accurately to the rear diff?

 

I follow my nose, Julian. Differential lube is the worst smelling stuff in a vehicle.

[robertlipe]

grumpy moderator note Why must the same people drag every thread about these units toward the school playground brawl with the sniping at each other? Guys, please keep it civil. I'm too busy with GeoWoodstock right now to personally discuss each of your feelings about the admonition, so I'm taking out my megaphone and saying "Be Nice!"

[+RRLover]

^^^^^^^ HUH? ^^^^^^^^

Things seem to have simmered down now.

 

@ TotemLake : Nice work on your site, I like it!

 

Norm

Edited April 16, 2009 by RRLover

[+Rockin Roddy]

DeLorme will be releasing Topo USA 8.0 in mid-to-late May and it will include street-level detail for Canada as well as major roads for Mexico. Our Canadian maps show many lakes as well but these are not topographic maps -- not the same as the topo detail we provide in the U.S. No contour intervals. But the route connectivity will be there so someone can route from Mexico City to a street address in Calgary if they want -- all this right out of the PN-Series GPS device package -- nothing extra to buy.

 

We have several world map projects underway and I don't think many people here know that DeLorme is providing a new world base map to the U.S. government and this base map was recently touted by the head of ESRI as the new world standard. That's because it is both seamless of the entire world and also GPS accurate unlike others out there. But to be clear, this base map is not available for PN users yet -- instead we are offering our previous edition, which is still helpful when overseas. But the promise of a better one in the future is there.

 

People who already own a PN-Series GPS or Topo USA will receive emails from us when the product is shipping and will be able to save considerably off the list price as they have in the past.

 

Topo USA 8.0 will also include many other improvements for PN-Series GPS users. More details to follow in the coming weeks. Our Cache Register widget is on track for late April (in fact I believe a beta release for this upcoming weekend). Just check our forums. Lots going on here with more to come. Stay tuned.

 

-- Caleb

 

 

Track comparison made between a MeriPlat, a Garmin 60csx and a DeLorme PN-40 when it was asked for way back then. (and the web page was tested against FireFox for you Mozilla users. )

Thanks, TotemLake!

 

That's good info indeed.

 

Now the last thing standing between myself and a pn-40 is the detail of the world basemap. My Garmin shows hydrography, which is suprisingly detailed (ie many small and obscure lakes are both present and named), in Canada.

 

But I will research the DeLorme forums for that info - I don't want to distract this thread in numerous directions

 

This is GREAT news! Can't wait to see the CR beta, should really make the PN-40 AWESOME!!

[+Rockin Roddy]

OK, I have a Summit HC, not a PN-40, but I thought it might help to clear the air a little to provide some evidence that:

 

1. Patch antennas are not necessarily the poor relation to the quad-helix;

 

2. Unless you really NEED the absolute best quality tracks at all times, you don't need to get too fastidious about which way you hold your GPSr (if you have a modern high-sensitivity unit), and you probably don't really need to worry about an external antenna; and

 

3. Not all eTrex "H" series units suffer from the infamous "drift" issue when subjected to less than optional reception conditions.

 

My method was to turn on my Summit HC at home this morning, calibrate the altimeter, and put it in an outside pocket of my backpack. (I didn't notice whether it was facing up, down or sideways! ) I then put my backpack in the boot (trunk) of my sedan car, with the pocket holding my GPSr facing upwards. With the boot lid closed, the only signal it would get was through the front, rear and side glass, and then through the (empty) back seats - a pretty severe reception test, I would think. I then drove to work following my normal route, and on arrival, downloaded the tracklog into MapSource, clipped the start and end segments (for privacy reasons), and saved as GPX for sharing.

 

The result - the tracklog is a darn good fit to the actual route I took, accurate to within about 5 metres on the whole.

 

See for yourself. (Note - we drive on the left in Australia, I am going from west to east, and I was in the left-most lane most of the way, so my actual position was typically at the "top" of the road as viewed in these Google Earth screen captures.)

 

http://www.mediafire.com/?mbzzggz1mld

 

http://www.mediafire.com/?a5mmww3tz0j

 

http://www.mediafire.com/?zyjjtlz04gr

 

(Sorry, I just can't get the hang of embedding images in these forums! I'm afraid you'll have to follow the links to see the images.)

 

GPX file is here for anyone who wants to look in greater detail:

http://www.mediafire.com/?t4cj0ggy5zy

 

THANKS for the info Julianh. While not the PN-40, it does show how the antenna works in good detail for those who don't know...like myself! Actually I did know the antenna wasn't a step down from the QH!

 

As for pics...you need to send the pics to a host site (or post them to a cache or TB page...I use an archived cache), then you copy the URL and hit the link with the tree picture in it in the menu across the top of the comment screen. A box should open asking for a URL (if you have a blocker on, you may have to temporarily allow) paste it in and hit OK and there you have it!

[+Rockin Roddy]

While carrying my unit with the screen pointed to the ground (as discussed previously), I was able to lock WAAS last night. Even though the unit wasn't in an optimal position and I was under somewhat thick tree coverage, the WAAS locked and stayed locked until about 2 hours later while velcroed to my dash!

 

My track was pretty smooth and seemed spot on even though I only carry the one unit and have nothing to compare to! A long and winding walk in search of the perfect hiding locations for 9 caches!

[+TotemLake]

^^^^^^^ HUH? ^^^^^^^^

Things seem to have simmered down now.

 

@ TotemLake : Nice work on your site, I like it!

 

Norm

Thanks. I'm in process of making it Firefox friendly with the use of Lightbox for the pictures instead of the ActiveX controls. I'm also going to try to get Cooliris running on it.

[+TotemLake]

OK, I have a Summit HC, not a PN-40, but I thought it might help to clear the air a little to provide some evidence that:

 

1. Patch antennas are not necessarily the poor relation to the quad-helix;

 

2. Unless you really NEED the absolute best quality tracks at all times, you don't need to get too fastidious about which way you hold your GPSr (if you have a modern high-sensitivity unit), and you probably don't really need to worry about an external antenna; and

 

3. Not all eTrex "H" series units suffer from the infamous "drift" issue when subjected to less than optional reception conditions.

 

My method was to turn on my Summit HC at home this morning, calibrate the altimeter, and put it in an outside pocket of my backpack. (I didn't notice whether it was facing up, down or sideways! ) I then put my backpack in the boot (trunk) of my sedan car, with the pocket holding my GPSr facing upwards. With the boot lid closed, the only signal it would get was through the front, rear and side glass, and then through the (empty) back seats - a pretty severe reception test, I would think. I then drove to work following my normal route, and on arrival, downloaded the tracklog into MapSource, clipped the start and end segments (for privacy reasons), and saved as GPX for sharing.

 

The result - the tracklog is a darn good fit to the actual route I took, accurate to within about 5 metres on the whole.

 

See for yourself. (Note - we drive on the left in Australia, I am going from west to east, and I was in the left-most lane most of the way, so my actual position was typically at the "top" of the road as viewed in these Google Earth screen captures.)

 

http://www.mediafire.com/?mbzzggz1mld

 

http://www.mediafire.com/?a5mmww3tz0j

 

http://www.mediafire.com/?zyjjtlz04gr

 

(Sorry, I just can't get the hang of embedding images in these forums! I'm afraid you'll have to follow the links to see the images.)

 

GPX file is here for anyone who wants to look in greater detail:

http://www.mediafire.com/?t4cj0ggy5zy

 

THANKS for the info Julianh. While not the PN-40, it does show how the antenna works in good detail for those who don't know...like myself! Actually I did know the antenna wasn't a step down from the QH!

 

As for pics...you need to send the pics to a host site (or post them to a cache or TB page...I use an archived cache), then you copy the URL and hit the link with the tree picture in it in the menu across the top of the comment screen. A box should open asking for a URL (if you have a blocker on, you may have to temporarily allow) paste it in and hit OK and there you have it!

Instead of polluting a cache or TB with non-related pics, use your profile to upload pics. You can then right click on the pic to get the url to post as an image.