GPS question: Track vs. Route

[10-K]

I've got a Garmin eTrex Vista Hcx.

Heretofore (love that word) I've always moved a track from my software (Basecamp) to the GPS and when I turned on the GPS the track automagically appears on the screen and I'm ready to go.

This time I've created a route instead of a track and copied it to the GPS. I've never used the route feature before.

When it comes to navigating with the GPS what is the difference between a route and a track?

[SassyWindsor]

A Route is what you create prior to travel , a track is where you, and gps, have already traveled.
Note: Carry a compass, even a zip, the Vista Compass has a reputation of problems.

[Wise Old Owl]

Sassy's got the right answer, and the data is less laden, meaning that to set up a route one only has to put in a few waypoints and the Garmin will nail them for you..


Example setting up a route to cross a bay on a kayak - when you get across a huge body of water - the one point is to find the mouth to a river or a canal just some 2o feet amongst miles of inland coast.... the system will show deviation from route and point for correction of travel to nail the canal's location.

[SassyWindsor]

I would like to add, that you can, with Mapsource, create and edit TrackLogs which can then be uploaded into the GPS. I would still call this a route, of sorts, especially if you intend on using it in the future. I have used these edit tools on actual TrackLogs to reduce the "clutter" that happens when the unit is left on. I would also recommend to anyone who plans on using a GPS to really, really, get to know the unit and practice in an area you know. Know it's limitations and still carry a map and compass.

[10-K]

Yeah, I'm going to take the GPS on the Art Loeb Trail Wednesday and I made a route out of the GPX file and uploaded it to the GPS.

In the past I've just uploaded the gpx file to the GPS but for some reason I couldn't get the ALT track to upload properly even though there were less than 1000 track points (the unit will handle up to 10,000).

The ALT route is on the GPS....

Bottom line is that I'll have the Nat Geo map and my compass as well - I just wanted a way to confirm I had picked the right trail. I don't need a turn-by-turn track - I just want to know if I'm going in the general right direction.

[SassyWindsor]

A GPS is nice to have, especially cross country and evacuation in an emergency. Great care is needed when using one in the field, especially using maps in conjunction with the unit, (correctly setting datums, grids etc). I would also like to point out that your tracks(electronic breadcrumbs) behavior can be programmed in the GPS to stop or to delete and add to the end. Have a brother who walked cross-country only to find out he could only retrace 1/2 his trip. To eliminate these type problems I always lay down waypoints for remarkable places (car park, camps, water sources, etc). I rarely carry a GPS on a well established trail, unless I have food/water caches to contend with.

[ChinMusic]

I really appreciated my GPS on my trip last week in Yosemite. Snow covered some sections. My GPS allowed me information to know if the trail was under me to the left or right. It made route finding a breeze.

[Wil]

A GPS... Great care is needed when using one in the field, especially using maps in conjunction with the unit, (correctly setting datums, grids etc).Agreed. But in my experience (a lot of bushwhacking) juggling USGS topos at 1927 CONUS and most other backpacker-oriented resources at WGS84 I find those differences (within, say, the area of a quad) minor compared with other factors. On occasion for some reason I don't fully understand, sustained spurious inaccuracies of the GPS's themselves of 10-15 feet BEYOND their projected +/- variation (typically 10-15 feet) even after letting them "settle down" or average a location.

What it comes down to is that where you are according to the GPS may typically be 30 feet away, and even a good map may add another 15-20 feet of error. These, in total, _exceed_ typical datum and grid differences over the area of a quad! And in deep thick brush this may make a faint trail trace or a tiny spring trickle virtually unfindable. A bad map, including many of the Garmin topos, can typically add another 20 feet of error and in some cases hundreds of feet.

GPS's can frequently, maybe even usually, get you within a few feet of where you want to be, and that's a wonder of the modern world. But I count on them only as a tool to get you into a general half-acre or so area; for that valuable function they are very dependable and very useful.

[Don Newcomb]

GPS's can frequently, maybe even usually, get you within a few feet of where you want to be, and that's a wonder of the modern world. But I count on them only as a tool to get you into a general half-acre or so area; for that valuable function they are very dependable and very useful. GPS is indeed a wonder of the age but I would never trust a handheld, even with WAAS, to plus or minus a few feet. RTK sure, plus or minus centimeters, but not a handheld.

[SassyWindsor]

The GPS is a high tech toy that can really get you lost, never depend on just it. Carry a map, learn to read them and how to use a compass with said map.

[ChinMusic]

I my life were at stake and I had a choice between map/compass or GPS, I would take GPS in a heartbeat.

[Don Newcomb]

The GPS is a high tech toy that can really get you lost, never depend on just it. Carry a map, learn to read them and how to use a compass with said map.GPS is a tool. A compass is a tool and so is a map. Just like wrenches and hammers, these tools are appropriate for some uses and inappropriate for other uses.