ZUMO XT2 CONCLUSIONS

[FrankB]

I wonder if this little trick would also keep via points from being moved when converted to shaping points on the XT?

That's a good question. But I have little hope. Here's why:

- The trick to not have the route points is performed in Basecamp.
- Via points that are moved after being converted to Shaping, is something that is done by/on the XT.

But you never know until you test it.

[jfheath]

If you set your maps in Basecamp to an older verison and recalculate your route.
Then you set them back to the maps that you intend to use, and recalculate the route.

Then send your route the the 590, 595 or XT - the route point names do not get altered by the Zumo.

It would be extremely useful to know whether or not that same trick works with the XT2.

I wonder if this little trick would also keep via points from being moved when converted to shaping points on the XT?

Odd you should say that Larry - I was wondering the same thing - so I tested it earlier today. Unfortunately not.
Yesterday, I also tested whether it was another way to avoid RUT behaviour. No that didn't work either.

But having a workable fix for RUT behaviour and for the renamed route points - the XT is beginning to look reliable !!

[lkraus]

But having a workable fix for RUT behaviour and for the renamed route points - the XT is beginning to look reliable !!

After only four years and countless volunteer hours of experimentation...

Thanks, Garmin!

[maciekptk]

Hi guys, newbie from Poland here!

I also did some tests and found out that when creating a route in Tread (or XT2) we can use predefined calculation modes between via/shaping points: Faster time, Straight line, Shortest distance, Adventurous level 1-4 (names might be a bit different - I'm using Polish UI).
And I suspect that sync between Tread and XT2 is using simple GPX file with just via/shaping points and chosen calculation modes but the problem is that there is no distinction between Adventurous levels in that GPX file so XT2 doesn't know about different levels between the points. And it recalculates the route using some defaults (from my observation it looks that 'Adventurous' is treated by the device similarly to 'Shortest distance').

Route created in Tread:

route_tread.png (541.73 KiB) Viewed 162 times

Same route in XT2 (synced with Tread):

route_xt2.png (1.35 MiB) Viewed 162 times

GPX exported from Tread:

gpx_tread.png (386.77 KiB) Viewed 162 times

GPX for the same route exported/shared from XT2 (but already modified in the device) - it's huge, contains thousands of points, rather like a track, not a route:

gpx_xt2.png (1.43 MiB) Viewed 162 times

It seems that Garmin needs to define another way of syncing between Tread and XT2 to get similar results in both.

[jfheath]

First of all - I know nothing about Tread or the XT2.

But I do know a bit about the transfer of routes to a Garmin Device.

It looks like the route from Tread exports juts the Via points, and an indication of the type of routing to be used. On the XT if you were to send it Adventurous - it would use its default setting of Faster Time. I guess that Tread is used by many different devices - just as Basecamp is. Some devices know about certain types of routing some do not.

The only way of finding out is to find a location on the map where you can distinguish between Faster, Shorter, Adventurous levels. That way when you send a route to the XT2, you know which method it has used to calculate the route. Thats what I had to do to establish that the XT defaults to using Motorcycle and Faster time if you send it anything other than what it knows. It only understands Car, Motorcycle, Direct. It only understands Faster, Shorter. Anything else it uses its default.

Perhaps you can set Adventurous on Tread, but the XT2 doesn't recognise it so it uses a default.

The thousands of points. Those are the gpxx route point extensions. They are thousands of individual route points that the Zumo joins up with very short straight lines in order to plot the magenta line accurately. There are two ways of preparing a route. One is to give it the start, end, and any via or shaping points. Let the Zumo decide how it is going to travel from one point to the next. The other is for the program itslef to claculate the route . In order to fix it in place, it has to send thousands of coordinates so that the Zumo can join up the dots with short straight lines. You cant see these points, but they exist. I call them 'Ghost Points'. BAsecamp uses these and whatever you send from BAsecamp - that is the route that the Zumo plots. Precisely. UNLESS - the Zumo decides it has to recalculate the route. In which case it discards them and calcualtes a new route wit new ghost points.

From Basecamp, if you send a route and you want the Zumo to stick to it, you must trun off automatic recalculation - because the XT will find many different excuses to recalculate the route. Maps differ, straying off route, Road closures are a good one - you can't stop those, short of turning your phone off.

MyRouteApp and Basecamp can produce both types of route. For Basecamp, the one without Ghost Points is called a Direct Route - you use the Direct BC profile to create it. Te default is to plot a route with the ghost points.

For MyRouteApp - it can do both as well. gpx v1.1 exports the start, the end, the vias and the shaping points. It does not send any ghost points. The Zumo has to calculate the route.
gpx v1.2 exports the ghost points - it also send the Via Points (hands), but if you have used any shaping points, it does not send those.
For v1.2 in a Zumo, Recalc must be turned off if you have used any shaping points, because when it recalculates, it only has the Via Points to work with.

I didn't know that Tread allowed Point to point routes to be created. I can see you have used Via Points. Does Tread allow the use of Shaping Points?

Nb In Basecamp, you can turn a route into a track. Each ghost point is simply converted to a track point. But in BAsecamp you can see where all of those thousands of track points are, and you can use the track properties to see how far apart they are and select a whole section.

[maciekptk]

Perhaps you can set Adventurous on Tread, but the XT2 doesn't recognise it so it uses a default.

Yeah, I can set Adventurous Level 1 - 4 (not just 'Adventurous') on Tread, and the same on XT2. But the problem - which is suspect - is that sync process uses only 'Adventurous', without specifying additional levels and XT2 is not recognising a route correctly (probably it applies some defaults).

Does Tread allow the use of Shaping Points?

Yes, it does. But it changes nothing - same story with 'Adventurous' without levels.

[jfheath]

Generally speaking, shaping points don't change anything. (That isn't quite the truth, but I won't go into that). Shaping points make the navigation more flexible. You can miss out a shaping point that is plotted (eg road closures, diversions etc) and when you rejoin the magenta line, the satnav will not care that you have missed some points.

Not so with Via Points. If you miss a via point, the satnav will 'generally' take you back to visit it. Really, Via Points whould only be used in places that you know you will definitley pass through.

Again - that is not quite the truth, because on the XT there are a particular set of circumstances when if you deviate from the route, the stanav ignores any route points that you have by-passed. Even Via points. I have been on at Garmin for the last 3 years about this - they seem to not care. I don't know whether or not the XT2 displays the same behaviour.

But my statements in blue, while not completely accurate in every situation, are a pretty good overview of what happens

[Peobody]

Really, Via Points whould only be used in places that you know you will definitley pass through.

I agree, but I believe having some sprinkled judiciously throughout a route is valuable to provide some points that you can select as a destination to navigate to, or set as a starting point in the event of having to restart a route. One example is a group ride where the route has been shared with the group. If the group gets separated, phone communication can spread the word to meet up at a specific via point. Another is a situation where a mid-route recalc changes the route enough to warrant a restart. Having a Via Point somewhere up ahead to select as the starting point may be preferable to using closest entry point, considering CEP could be behind you if you are off-route when you restart it.

[jfheath]

No argument from me about that ! I've always advocated using a Via Point after potential stopping place - on the road that you would take whether or not you visit the stopping place - simply so that if you stop and accidentally end your route while fiddling with the Zumo, you have a point that you can select as the 'next destination' up ahead.

Typically I use two points for an optional stop - a shaping point to mark the cafe and Via just after where I would rejoin the main route. If I don't stop, I rejoin the route before the Via and navigation continues. Whatever - Via Points have to be treated as points that you must pass through, and must be accurately placed on the road.

This was used a great deal with the 590 and 595, as Closest Entry Point didn't exist until the XT on the Zumos.

For XT users - its worthwhile reading the pages in the first two chapters in the pdf - Zumo 590/595 and Basecamp - available for download on the first page in the link below. I explain a lot of this in much more detail than I described in the XT pages.

viewtopic.php?t=521