Re: Zumo Compared To 2730 & 2820?
- From: shark572@xxxxxxxxx
- Date: 9 Dec 2006 10:58:16 -0800
On Dec 9, 11:21 am, "B. Peg" <bent_...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"Jack Erbes" wrote:
Can anyone comment on whether or not the Zumo has dumbed down routing
functions compared to a 2730 or 2820?
Thank you.
If you read the online documentation the zumo 550 appears to be a lot
dumber than it really is. I've had some recent discussions with a guy
that installed one on his motorcycle in November and now know that:
1 - The zumo will do multiple destination routing (allowing up to 200 or
so stops on a route).
2 - The zumo will also collect track data.
One the first, read the section in the online manual on creating Saved
Routes, that explains the multiple destination option more clearly. It
may be that if you activate a single destination "goto" route that only a
single stop can be added to it. But the Saved Route (like you would do if
planning a route in advance) clearly allows multiple stops.
On the tracks, when the zumo is connected to a PC it saves what appears to
be the track memory (along with all routes and favorites) to a file named
current.gpx in the /gpx folder in the Zumo's main memory (seen as the
garmin drive, not the SD card which is seen as a Removable Drive).
There are two *.gpx files in that folder, one named current.gpx and the
other named temp.gpx.
I looked at one of the current.gpx files and it had track segments that
went back about a week or so (as long as the unit had been in use). Full
track data was included (lat/long, date/time, and elevation) so it will
allow reconstruction of travel with speeds and distances in MapSource. It
is not the abbreviated track data that is found in Saved Tracks on some
other Garmin models.
The Zumo does not appear to have user controlled track data collection
rate settings (time or distance, and intervals) but on the tracks I saw in
the current.gpx file trackpoints were collected at rates of around 30
points per mile and that seemed to vary a little. The track point
collection rate appears to be something like the "Auto" setting used on my
76Cx it think.
So it looks like the Zumo has all the navigation related essential
features even if they are not clearly spelled out in the documentation.
Some questions remain on the specifics of how the current.gpx and temp.gpx
files work. It is not clear if the files will be overwritten and when and
how that will occur. But it initially looks like if you save that file
off the Zumo once a week or so, you won't lose your track data.
So it looks to me like the Zumo is as capable as the 2730 and 2820. The
differences can be best seen by comparing the three on the Garmin product
comparison page:
http://www.garmin.com/products/comparison.jsp
There are some differences in things like numbers of waypoints, waypointsnot display "ALTITUDE."
allowed in routes, etc. The comparison will say that the "# of
trackpoints" is "N/A" (not applicable) to the Zumo but that is an error.The only function I miss in the Zumo over the 2xxx series is that it does
It does show it in the track log in MapSource, just not when I would like to
see it on the road.
Fwiw, a "temperature display" would be a nice addition too (and log it as
well) on the next Zumo. You listening Garmin?.
B~- Hide quoted text -- Show quoted text -
Here is a dedicated Zumo 550 user forum with good information:
http://razorbiker.com/zumo/viewforum.php?f=2&sid=85ae5117d6518124917a5b2530c4d701
.
- References:
- Zumo Compared To 2730 & 2820?
- From: shark572
- Re: Zumo Compared To 2730 & 2820?
- From: Jack Erbes
- Re: Zumo Compared To 2730 & 2820?
- From: B. Peg
- Zumo Compared To 2730 & 2820?
- Prev by Date: Re: MapSource software version 6.11.6 as of December 7, 2006
- Next by Date: Re: PC based software w/ bird's eye view (like TomTom)
- Previous by thread: Re: Zumo Compared To 2730 & 2820?
- Next by thread: Re: Zumo Compared To 2730 & 2820?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|
