Tracks to Routes Confusion

Just download the track to your 62 as you would a route. Select it in Track Manager on your 62 or press Find, select the track and press Go (see page 10 of the manual). Then follow it :)

OK then, more simple than I thought. Thanks for the heads up.

Cheers

That's what I suspected. Unfortunately unless you can establish what maps, with what routing capability etc etc these tracks were from I don't believe BC will be able to accurately turn them into a route.

It works fine. Tracks are totally independent of the underlying map, they can be overlaid over any map in any GPS that supports them and they don't change. That's why they're so popular with off road motorcyclists running rallies, they'll work in any GPS/map configuration as long as the GPS supports tracks.

Turning them into a route is easy, but the resulting route is dependent on the map set used, the avoidances, and preferences set in the software. The generated route is also subject to any inaccuracies in the auto-routing capable map set used to generate them. This is further complicated by the fact that almost all modern Garmin units insist on re-calculating any imported route using the preferences and map on the device. This was not always the case.

Many of my tracks were created using older non-routing maps or 3rd. party TOPO maps. If these tracks are imported into BaseCamp and viewed overlaid on City Navigator they still display properly. In some instances they also point out inaccuracies in one or more of the maps. They will also convert to a route accurately, even though the maps they were created with are not installed in BaseCamp.

As you've pointed out though, if you don't need the navigation aspects of a route and your GPS supports them, following tracks can be the best idea.

As you've pointed out though, if you don't need the navigation aspects of a route and your GPS supports them, following tracks can be the best idea.

In that sense, what are the useful parts of route generation, given a historical track that is suggested as being "successful"? And yes, I'm talking about something different than "I am here, I want to go to this waypoint 60 km away, take me there on my bike."

I find routes to be a suggestion from the "experience" inside either BaseCamp and my GPSmap 62stc. The ideas in both might differ, depending on what parameters I enter into both. They might think different ideas as well, as per your information. A track, to me, is recorded human history.

In that sense, what are the useful parts of route generation, given a historical track that is suggested as being "successful"? And yes, I'm talking about something different than "I am here, I want to go to this waypoint 60 km away, take me there on my bike."

I find routes to be a suggestion from the "experience" inside either BaseCamp and my GPSmap 62stc. The ideas in both might differ, depending on what parameters I enter into both. They might think different ideas as well, as per your information. A track, to me, is recorded human history.

Ah, the evolution of the GPS... according to Garmin. Please excuse me... Long winded reply to follow. :D

In the beginning routes were where you wanted to go and tracks were where you'd been.

I've been recording tracks of motorcycle adventures for many years, at a very fine resolution. I use these tracks as a resource. For example, because the time stamp between track points allows speed between individual points to be calculated, I can track my cornering speeds through a series of corners and, if I've ridden this road before, compare these speeds from trip to trip. A bicyclist could compare his progress on a challenging series of hills during training using the same information. Tracks also give you the exact amount of time a specific distance took to travel. Using this information I've been able to tailor my MapSource program to accurately reflect the total time needed to navigate a route. BaseCamp has yet to incorporate this functionality, but I have hope. I've recently started using BaseCamp's ability to Geotag using tracks. For some, graphing elevation changes is the reason they record tracks. Personally, I never use them to navigate.

General navigation using tracks is a relatively recent development, brought on in part by the newer generation of GPS units that insist on ignoring your route and creating their own. Tracks have become the necessary method of sharing experiences between different GPS models. Tracks that I receive are almost always converted to routes where possible. In the past, routes could be used this way but not so much anymore. So, why use routes?

Device limitations for one. All units have a limit to the number of track points they can handle, some don't support the loading of tracks. But then again many current Garmin GPS units cannot accept routes. :confused: A custom route may contain as few as 2 user generated points but could contain many hundred software created shaping or route points that do the heavy lifting during route creation. These points don't generally have a limit in the GPS, or if there is one it's much more than the track point or waypoint limit. This allows longer routes to be saved on the device, and in general more of them. On a device that supports custom routes, these instructions are followed to the letter as long as the map set used to create the route is exactly the same as the map in the GPS. The resulting route in the GPS is displayed exactly as it was in BaseCamp or MapSource, it is (was) never recalculated. The fact that routes are now recalculated by almost every current Garmin GPS is the reason tracks are becoming more popular for on road routing.

The biggest reason many of my friends and I use routes, is the information available to us through our GPS units. Voice guidance for instance. Distance/time to the next waypoint, time of arrival at destination, distance to destination, and in my case, an easily accessible weather synopsis and forecast based on the next waypoints along my route. :)

The other thing is that you can create and edit routes easily. It's quite simple to select a start and end point and then using the editing tools create "what ifs". I frequently will load variations of routes that encompass what I want to experience that vary due to circumstances I may encounter. For example, is the construction at point "C" going to be complete by the time I get there, and If not, what's the best route I can take that still includes points "D" and "F" that still has me arriving at my destination within an allowable time frame. For planning this is very valuable.

Tracks can be drawn, but it's a relatively slow process, unless you just want to indicate turns and following the roads on the map underlay accurately isn't important.

There's more of course, everyone has a different use and method.

Hey, nice summation :)

Killtimer, I want to reply, but I'm into several beers in a part of the world that I've never been to before, with a huge day tomorrow. Thanks for the reply...I will answer when I'm biologically possible. Until then...SKOL! :D

Today's Route

OK, here's today's route. I'm up early, reviewing the route.

Benicassim, Spain, to Peniscola, Spain.

Google Maps - 56 km along the N-route down by the water.

BaseCamp - 104 km, which routes way up north. Double the distance.

BaseCamp set to Bicycle Touring.

Avoidances set to avoid Interstates, Major Highways, using the fastest time.

Will report back later, if I survive.

Took the short route, which was an N-route. Single lane each way, and shoulders. Was a good day, in fact. Some hills at the beginning, but that put me above my destination.

Not sure why it chose another route that was twice as long.

Took the short route, which was an N-route. Single lane each way, and shoulders. Was a good day, in fact. Some hills at the beginning, but that put me above my destination.

Not sure why it chose another route that was twice as long.

You may be running into an interpretation issue. Some "N" roads in Italy and Spain are seen as major highways by BaseCamp. I've run into this before. I've found BaseCamp preferences and avoidances to be less accurate with CN Europe than it's NA brother.