Garmin Etrex 20 - won't upload full routes from Basecamp

[Pichy]

I can see that there are already plenty of posts under the GPS banner and so I hope I am not repeating a question that has already been asked but I wonder if anyone is able to help me with the following problem... I run my Etrex 20 on Garmin Basecamp with a GB map downloaded from VeloMap. So far, so good. Because I am have been using Map My Ride for a few years now, I tend to create future routes on it then stick them across to Basecamp as a gpx. Again, no problem - I can see the complete route appearing on the Basecamp map on my PC. However, when I then upload a rotue from Bc to the Etrex not all of it goes across! As a general rule, if I am trying to upload a 200km audax route it will appear to transfer fine but when I then look at the route on the device it just stops at 98/99km. Weirdly this does not always happen, as I am often able to successfully transfer 100+km routes that other people have created (in MMR and Bikely) on to the device. Just not my own, it would seem.

Is it the case that I have something in my MMR settings that is the problem and/or MMR is notoriously unreliable? Is there a better route planning site online? Or am I just being an A1 goon? I have a massive SD card in the device (although I guess that Basecamp is uploading the route to the internal memory) but, as it is, I always delete tracks from the current and archives folders on the device once I have got completed rides across to Strava so I can't believe that memory is an issue.

I am total luddite when it comes to technology and it is this sort of experience that keeps putting me off embracing the electronic age more fully! Any suggestions anyone could make to how I might sort this would be greatly received.

[hexhome]

Check how many via points the route has in Basecamp, this may be the problem. More here http://medialoft.co.uk/viapoints.html (requires quickplayer)

[Pichy]

Dear hexhome,

Many thanks for replying to what is probably a village idiot question. I didn't manage to view the via points page on medialoft - told you I was technologically challenged - but it did lead me to investigate the 'filter' button in BC. It would seem that the device can only handle 10000 via points per route. Everything seem to be good now.

Pichy

[Feanor]

10,000 points for a Route sounds like nonsense to me.
That's way, way too many.  Like several orders of magnitude too many.
Whatever created that kind of a 'route' needs adjusting with a large hammer.
I've seen routes created by these kind of websites before, and I no longer use them and simply create routes manually in Mapsource ( or Basecamp, if you prefer ).

I think these websites basically create Tracks ( a breadcrumb trail ), and if you ask for a route, they just change the name and call the same thing a route.

Tracks could have many points, but routes should be much more sparse.

I've just looked through some stored routes for Audaxes I've done in the last year.
The most via-points I've found is about 60 for a 100k section, and that's probably excessive.
Generally, it's less then 20 via points per 100k.

[hexhome]

10,000 points for a Route sounds like nonsense to me.
That's way, way too many.  Like several orders of magnitude too many.
Whatever created that kind of a 'route' needs adjusting with a large hammer.
I've seen routes created by these kind of websites before, and I no longer use them and simply create routes manually in Mapsource ( or Basecamp, if you prefer ).

I think these websites basically create Tracks ( a breadcrumb trail ), and if you ask for a route, they just change the name and call the same thing a route.

Tracks could have many points, but routes should be much more sparse.

I've just looked through some stored routes for Audaxes I've done in the last year.
The most via-points I've found is about 60 for a 100k section, and that's probably excessive.
Generally, it's less then 20 via points per 100k.

10,000 is the maximum, I doubt that any cycle route would need that many. The important point is that with too few via points, the device might take a different route to the one pre-planned. Basecamp will produce a route with only 2 via points if left to auto route between 2 waypoints.

[Feanor]

Well, quite!
As I say, it's perfectly possible to constrain the routing to your pre-planned route using a few tens of via points per 100k.
Thousands is silly.

I thought the problem had been diagnosed as the route was exceeding a 10,000 via-point limit, but perhaps I mis-understood.

[contango]

10,000 points for a Route sounds like nonsense to me.
That's way, way too many.  Like several orders of magnitude too many.
Whatever created that kind of a 'route' needs adjusting with a large hammer.
I've seen routes created by these kind of websites before, and I no longer use them and simply create routes manually in Mapsource ( or Basecamp, if you prefer ).

I think these websites basically create Tracks ( a breadcrumb trail ), and if you ask for a route, they just change the name and call the same thing a route.

Tracks could have many points, but routes should be much more sparse.

I've just looked through some stored routes for Audaxes I've done in the last year.
The most via-points I've found is about 60 for a 100k section, and that's probably excessive.
Generally, it's less then 20 via points per 100k.

10,000 is the maximum, I doubt that any cycle route would need that many. The important point is that with too few via points, the device might take a different route to the one pre-planned. Basecamp will produce a route with only 2 via points if left to auto route between 2 waypoints.

Are you talking about a route, or a track?

It might sound like semantic nitpicking but a route will typically consist of a number of waypoints linked together so the GPS will determine the routing from one point to the next, whereas a track will be a series of points that define the precise route you want to take (i.e. a route determined in detail in advance). A route will tell you when to turn so you can display "distance to next turn" whereas a track will not. If you're following a track you get to figure out for yourself when to turn, as the GPS doesn't know which road you're using or even if you're using a road at all - in theory a track log could take you literally through someone's house, through their back garden, use a boat to cross the river and then carry on cycling.

10,000 points in a track log is surprising unless you're talking a huge distance. If it's still a problem MapSource had a feature to filter a track to reduce the number of points and I'd be surprised if BaseCamp doesn't have something similar. I've got a track log for a 315km route I've been working on that contains 5800 points and it wouldn't be hard to reduce that quite significantly if I needed to.

[Ningishzidda]

A gpx exported from BikeHike can have typically >1200 points for a 40 km route.

10,000 points over 200 km does not surprise me if the road goes up and down and has lots of bends in it.

Microsoft Autoroute 2011 is a good tool for thinning out and rearanging waypoints in a BikeHike generated gpx.


Split the 200 km into manageable sections ( between controls ) and trim the waypoint count to around 40.

A strange thing that happened years ago was I constructed a 100 km route 'all in one'. When the Garmin saw there was a 'short cut' between Waypoint 2 and Waypoint 89, it directed me to go to Waypoint 89.
The reason for this was the depart and arrivee was along the same road out of the HQ.

[mcshroom]

A gpx exported from BikeHike can have typically >1200 points for a 40 km route.

Bikehike is pretty good at reducing the number of points if you ask it to though. I often use it to cut down track points before uploading tracks to my Geko (and now Etrex 20).

I don't tend to use routes, but just stick the track on a map and just watch the map on the screen. The 20 does seem to be able to do some estimation of the time to the next waypoint/turn even from a track, but I wouldn't rely on it.

[frankly frankie]

There's sloppy terminology here - and some of the planning sites are the worst culprits, for example BikeRouteToaster only generates Tracks or Courses - not Routes.  Shabby!

I recommend -
route  (nb lower-case r, as used in the thread title) == "a way of getting from one place to another"
Route (nb uppercase R) == "a list of Routepoints (Via points) to be visited in order"
Track == "a list of Trackpoints (that form a wiggly line on a map)"
track == a place you don't want to take your best bike.
Course == a Track, often circular, with embedded timestamps and elevation.
Tracklog == the Track you record on your GPS

The figure 10,000 invariably relates to a Track.  And on older GPSs the limit is 500.
Routes are limited to 250 points, or 50 if you expect to autoroute  (or 'follow road')
These figures are ample, for up to 200km.
As noted above, circular routes can be problematic - see my definition of 'route' above, "from one place to another"

[Ningishzidda]

Itinerary == "a list of Waypoints to be visited in order"

[DrMekon]

There's sloppy terminology here - and some of the planning sites are the worst culprits, for example BikeRouteToaster only generates Tracks or Courses - not Routes.  Shabby!

I recommend -
route  (nb lower-case r, as used in the thread title) == "a way of getting from one place to another"
Route (nb uppercase R) == "a list of Routepoints (Via points) to be visited in order"
Track == "a list of Trackpoints (that form a wiggly line on a map)"
track == a place you don't want to take your best bike.
Course == a Track, often circular, with embedded timestamps and elevation.
Tracklog == the Track you record on your GPS

The figure 10,000 invariably relates to a Track.  And on older GPSs the limit is 500.
Routes are limited to 250 points, or 50 if you expect to autoroute  (or 'follow road')
These figures are ample, for up to 200km.
As noted above, circular routes can be problematic - see my definition of 'route' above, "from one place to another"

It would be easier if I could just download your GPS knowledge in a correctly formatted xml file.