60csx navigate route

[+flask]

i'm trying to set up a route with a few waypooints but don't really understand whether i can make it route in the order of the points as opposed to next nearest.

 

the manual is a little thin, and searching internet only gives me product reviews.

 

anybody got some help?

[+Redwoods Mtn Biker]

You can select the order of the waypoints in the route.

[+flask]

You can select the order of the waypoints in the route.

 

yes, but then when i hit "navigate", it sends me to the nearest one as opposed to the first one in my route.

[+Redwoods Mtn Biker]

And you're selecting that route to navigate?

 

You can always go into the active route page and select the specific waypoint if its not doing what you want. From there it should be okay.

[xyzee]

See if any of this will work.

When the Saved Routs page opens up, hit Menu, select Off Road Transition, then Route Leg Transition, select Manual, where you can advance to the next Leg. (hard to read the black on the dark background). Also, if you select any one of the waypoints listed, then hit Entr, select Move, you can change it in the lineup. One might also add a temporary waypoint, or subtract one, to make it obey your commands. Keep experimenting, there has to be a way.

[+flask]

so what you guys are saying is that no, nobody knows how to get it to do what i want?

 

i really wanted it to follow the route in the order i put them in the list. it WANTS to do them in the order of proximity, regardless of how i order them.

 

i know how to go from point to point. what i want is to enter a route and then be able to hand the unit to someone who does not know how to competently find waypoints and say "here. follow this route i made for you."

 

after hours of experimenting and searching manuals and test running in my driveway and at the venue, i just couldn't get it to do that.

 

i'm beginning to doubt that there's a way to do it.

[+Redwoods Mtn Biker]

It should be doing it without any problem. If you are at the beginning waypoint, that can sometimes cause problems.

[+flask]

the problem is that when i move along the route, i get directed to the next nearest, instead of the next one on my list.

 

this is important because on the particular route i wanted to use there's a little out-and-back with a loop at the far end and two of the points on the list are closer to the start than points farther in my list.

 

it permits me to manually select a point from the list, but then when i get THERE it keeps wanting me to go to the next closest even from there.

 

it's not so much working to route me, as to keep a list of my points, which i could do on the back of my hand.

 

and if i conveniently name my points with sequential numbers, there's really no point in making a route in the GPS at all, since i could use the find function to manually select them in the proper order.

 

i kind of thought that going to the trouble of assembling a route might mean that the unit would route me to the points in the order i entered them on my list instead of next nearest.

 

otherwise what's the point?

 

(ok, ok, i can see a point to putting together a long and complex linear route, but that's not what i'm trying to do and if that thing can give turn-by-turn directions or play those maze games that, it can jolly well route me to the points in the order i enter them!)

[Bob Morphew]

the problem is that when i move along the route, i get directed to the next nearest, instead of the next one on my list. ....

Does this happen when you are in mid-route or when staring a new route? I know it happens at the Start of a route if one of the later waypoints is closer to the Start than Waypoint #2. I had to work around it by putting an extra waypoint between the Start and WP #2. I've never seen it happen during a route but usually the next waypoint *is* the closest waypoint.

 

It shouldn't be too difficult to do a test route where the next next waypoint is always the closest, and then your actual route with fewer waypoints where the next waypoint isn't the closest. In fact, I've got a 60Cx and a 60CSx so this is interesting enough that I'll try a test myself and see what happens

 

If you want a quick answer, just phone Garmin Tech Support - they know how it works.

 

Bob

[Bob Morphew]

I just tested 2 routes - one that always had the next waypoint as the closest and one covering same path but with fewer waypoints where the next waypoint was *not* the closest. Both the 60Cx and the 60CSx always followed the route in the order the waypoints were set. In fact, I could NOT duplicate the problem I had with my Etrex Legend which would not direct you to WP 2 if a later waypoint was closer.

 

I noticed that you said the when you hit Navigate it immediately sends you to the closest waypoint. That means you have preset your routing options in setup. I set my routing options to "Prompted" as I sometimes want "Follow Road/Faster Time" and sometimes Shorter Distance. When riding Off-Road I need Direct (straight Line) routing so I select "Off-Road". Perhaps you have your GPS set to Shortest Distance?

 

What Version of Firmware are you running? I remember a F/W update a while back that resoved an issue with Navigate/GoTo.

 

I'm certain the these GPS will always follow the prescribed order of waypoints if the appropriate settings are selected. How are your Routing and Off-Road Transition options set?

 

Bob

[roybassist]

i really wanted it to follow the route in the order i put them in the list. it WANTS to do them in the order of proximity, regardless of how i order them.

 

<snip> what i want is to enter a route and then be able to hand the unit to someone who does not know how to competently find waypoints and say "here. follow this route i made for you."

First, I gather we’re talking about Off Road routing, right? If so, press: MENU>MENU>Routes>MENU>Off Road Transition…

 

I’m going to guess your Route Leg Transition is set to Auto. Change Route Leg Transition from Auto to Distance or Manual. For what you’re doing, I think Distance will work great. Set the radius to something small enough that as you progress along a leg of the route, no waypoint other than the one at the end of the leg will be within that radius. When you get that close to the end-of-leg waypoint, it will transition to the next one. You can change not only the radius, but also the units of measurement. Just highlight the units field and hit enter. The default is miles.

 

The Manual setting requires you to go to the active route page and press the OUT or IN buttons to transition to the next or previous waypoint, respectively. If for some reason the Distance setting doesn’t work, you might try Manual; but I think Distance will work, and it would be much less bother.

 

I haven’t used these settings myself (other than a quick test in Demo mode), but I recommended this to a golfer who was having a similar problem, trying to get a route to follow the holes of a golf course in order. My recollection is that he reported back that it worked. Please let me know if it works for you.

i kind of thought that going to the trouble of assembling a route might mean that the unit would route me to the points in the order i entered them on my list instead of next nearest.

 

otherwise what's the point?

The Auto setting works well for routes where you don’t do a lot of doubling back, but not so well for routes where you do. IIRC, the Auto setting doesn’t really route you to the nearest waypoint, though that may be what happens most of the time if you have a route that doubles back. The problem is the criteria it uses to determine if you have passed a waypoint in the route. Realize that due to the possibility of position error, it can’t require that you hit a waypoint exactly before it transitions you to the next route leg. It has to use some logic to decide when you are “close enough”. For an explanation, click here, then scroll down until you see a diagram with three lines labeled with letters A, B, C, and D. The explanation is for the old Garmin III series, but I believe the Auto setting still works this way in the 60 series. Once I saw this explanation, what previously seemed like stupid routing behavior suddenly made much more sense.