Best trail OSM. Panning and zooming.

I don't get why wooded areas are shown at all.

Bbike shows a sample screen but it probably isn't enough.

Outside of that (if it's even provided), you are stuck creating a small map and using it.

Since the 520 doesn't let you pan the map, it's not the best device for doing that (the 520 is not a good choice if one is really interested in using maps).

You can view the maps on a PC using Garmin's Basecamp.

That might give you some idea of how it will look but it won't be very close. Some of the maps are rendered in Basecamp's default style, which would be of no use.

The maps use a "style sheet" (TYP file) that indicates how different things are drawn. It's not completely ridiculous to change how some things look with that (especially, areas). Changing road/path styles is a little more complicated since they are reused at different zoom levels.

There are programs that will extract the TYP file and replace the TYP file in a map file (the map files are kind of like zip archives). There's a free TYP file editor.

If you want to eliminate things on the map, you have to compile your own maps using mkgmap with editing its style files (which use a basic programming language). It can be complicated to change how roads/paths are displayed because that can effect routing.

I've​ been learning to compile maps so that I can eliminate weird/confusing clutter, like the names of churches, dams, and basketball courts. And the useless wooded areas.

I'm not really sure why the maps are created the way they are. A map that might be fine to use in Basecamp might have too much clutter for the tiny screens on the Edges.

============================

I doubt an IQ app like you want is even possible.

It seems unlikely that Garmin would want people to muck with their UI (it wouldn't be reliable) or even commit to an API for it (which would make it hard for Garmin to change anything).

...I doubt an IQ app like you want is even possible...

Yeah. Probably not, though IQ apps can show complete different pages, as well as different data fields. I figured that if they could show a complete page, maybe they could show a complete map page with improved functionality...but maybe not.

I do have an 820, which has the functionality I want, but there are so many bugs and the touch screen is so erratic I find it practically unusable. I am drawn to the 520 by its buttons.

I did try to look at the map with Basecamp was but was unable to get Basecamp to see my map. As you point out, it likely won't be of much value anyway.

I did try to look at the map with Basecamp was but was unable to get Basecamp to see my map. As you point out, it likely won't be of much value anyway.

I don't quite follow.

There are a few ways to get Basecamp to see maps. It can read them from a device but that's kind of slow.

It looks for maps in a \Garmin folder on a removable drive. I use a virtual disk. http://www.ltr-data.se/opencode.html/

It's a little bit useful but more useful (in terms of what this thread is discussing) when compiling maps.

I don't quite follow..

I have a osm downloaded to the 520 that displays on the 520. I had the 520 plugged in to my computer, started Basecamp, and BC recognized the 520 but didn't list the 520's map. I've never really used BC so am not familiar with its unusual (IMO) layout and UI, but poking around I could not find the 520's map or anyway to display it.

Basemap lists maps it finds in the "map" menu at the top or in a list in the left panel.

Basecamp might be ignoring maps named gmapbmap.img (since it uses it's own base map).

You probably need to use a virtual disk and, maybe, use another name for the map to use the map in Basecamp.

Hey, that worked! I renamed the map file on the 520 and Basecamp recognized it and was able to display it. It did take a while to upload from the 520 to BC. You're also right that BC renders it differently than the 520 so seeing it BC doesn't completely help in figuring out how it will look on the 520, which is what I was after in the first place. FWIW, the map looks great on BC and I'd be happy if that's how it looked on the 520. Unfortunately, the 520 doesn't do as good a job as BC.

Can I save the map in BC so I don't need to upload it from the 520?

You mention using a virtual disc, something I'm not familiar with. I seem to recall being able to view maps on uSD cards plugged into my PC with BC. Could I put a map on a uSD, or perhaps a thumb drive and view it with BC?

I guess these are really BC and not 520 questions at this point.

FWIW, the map looks great on BC and I'd be happy if that's how it looked on the 520. Unfortunately, the 520 doesn't do as good a job as BC.

The small Garmin screens can't do as well as a big computer screen.

You mention using a virtual disc, something I'm not familiar with. I seem to recall being able to view maps on uSD cards plugged into my PC with BC. Could I put a map on a uSD, or perhaps a thumb drive and view it with BC?

Yes, that will work. Make sure the map is in \Garmin.

Yep. Putting the map in a Garmin directory on a thumb drive and naming it something relevant worked and was way faster to access than the map on the 520. At a given location and zoom on a map you can quickly switch between maps and compare how they look, though again, they don't look the same in BC as they do on the 520.

What I'm comparing between the map as displayed in BC vs on the 520 is the clarity of trails, roads and other features based on their color, width and the color of the backgrounds. The rendering in BC is much better than on the 520 when set to similar scales where an area of the computer monitor equal to that of 520's display covers about the same map area. I'm talking about the rendering itself independent of monitor size or resolution.

The rendering in BC is much better than on the 520 when set to similar scales where an area of the computer monitor equal to that of 520's display covers about the same map area. I'm talking about the rendering itself independent of monitor size or resolution.

The resolution matters. And the brightness. Color on the monitor is better too.

Using Basecamp to view maps is more useful if you are compiling maps.

The resolution matters. And the brightness. Color on the monitor is better too.

Using Basecamp to view maps is more useful if you are compiling maps.

The fundamental way features are depicted are different allowing for the differences between the displays. For example, on the 520, power lines totally obscure the underlying trails which doesn't happen in BC at similar scales.

At any rate, for the purposes of using BC to preview maps created for the 520, BC has some value in that you can see the extent of the map and what is shown on the map, things you can't really do on the 520 since it can pan, but you can't rely on BC to show how things will be depicted on the 520. So far, the only way I know how to do that is to actually travel to the feature, say power lines in the example above, and look at it on the 520's display.