GPS for cyclists

tom said:

http://www.garmin.com/pressroom/outdoor/083105.html

And on the end of a fair number of "not useful when you look at the feature
set, just use one of the ordinary models instead" comments on
sci.geo.satellite-nav (the main GPS newsgroup).

I'm quite content with a Vista-C on my bicycle (GPS bought primarily for
mountain area walking).

- Nigel

--
Nigel Cliffe,
Webmaster at http://www.2mm.org.uk/

[snip]

Quoted message said:

I'm quite content with a Vista-C on my bicycle (GPS bought

primarily for

Quoted message said:

mountain area walking).

- Nigel

I've been thinking about getting a GPS.

As I see it, I want it for two purposes

1. to record where I have been, so I can transfer the information to
a map. Ideally it would record altitude as well, so that I could
draw graphs of the heights throughout the trip, like the French do
for the Tour de France stages. The Garmin Forerunner that also
includes pulse rate sounds neat, but perhaps designed only for some
rich person who has to have the latest fad. With my GPS I would
gradually collect a map of everywhere I had been, perhaps not only by
bike. I might also see how much of an effort those hills, or even
that headwind, had actually been

By "transferring to a map" I mean, essentially, a new layer in some
graphics computer program.

2. To tell me where I am. Here it would need to give me a grid
reference, so that I can find myself on an OS paper map. Ideally it
should do the same for most other countries, with their own grids,
and you should be able to tell it what equation to use to define the
shape of the earth.

I don't want the GPS's advice on where to navigate next, and I don't
want to look at a postage stamp sized map on a screen

I have lived in the USA which, being a democracy, considers that data
collected by the government, such as map data, belongs to the people.
I therefore am outraged by the extortionate OS. I suppose I couldn't
possibly, though, break the copyright laws by scanning in maps.

However, I seem to recall hearing that somebody has scanned OS maps
old enough to be out of copyright, and is selling them on CD at a
reasonable price. Does anyone know details?

Going back to GPS units, I get the impression that Garmin is most
popular, and the basic Garmin is the e-trex. If data can be
extracted from this to a computer, it sounds adequate for my purpose.
Is it?

Furthermore, I understand that the e-trex begat the Foretrex,
essentially a wristwatch style e-trex, and the Foretrex begat the
Forerunner, designed for runners and cyclists. Pay enough, and the
Forerunner measures pulse rates as well. Does this mean that the
Forerunner still does everything that the e-trex does, or did stuff
get left out when other stuff got added for runners. Most of the
runner oriented stuff sounds useless. Is it?

Can people please comment on whether all this makes sense, on where I
have been misinformed, and, especially, on all the vital points that
I have forgotten

many thanks

Jeremy Parker

"Jeremy Parker" <[email hidden]> writes:

[...]

Quoted message said:

I've been thinking about getting a GPS.

[...]

Quoted message said:

2. To tell me where I am. Here it would need to give me a grid
reference, so that I can find myself on an OS paper map. Ideally it
should do the same for most other countries, with their own grids,
and you should be able to tell it what equation to use to define the
shape of the earth.

I've asked this question on uk.rec.gps with much the same requirements
as you, and although I'm not sure about the technical aspects of the
point I quoted here, the general opinion was that the Garmin Geko 201
was just the thing.

--
Keith Willoughby http://flat222.org/keith/
I don't know that atheists should be considered citizens,
nor should they be considered patriots.
This is one nation under God." - GHWB

Quoted message said:

[snip]

Quoted message said:

I'm quite content with a Vista-C on my bicycle (GPS bought primarily for
mountain area walking).

Quoted message said:

Furthermore, I understand that the e-trex begat the Foretrex,
essentially a wristwatch style e-trex, and the Foretrex begat the
Forerunner, designed for runners and cyclists. Pay enough, and the
Forerunner measures pulse rates as well.

Forerunner 101 - AA batteries, no PC connection
Forerunner 201 - Lithium rechargeable, PC connection via serial
Forerunner 301 - Lithium rechargeable, PC connection via USB, HR
monitor.

Quoted message said:

Does this mean that the
Forerunner still does everything that the e-trex does, or did stuff
get left out when other stuff got added for runners.

The Etrex and the Foretrex store multiple Waypoints and have the
facility to build routes, the Forerunner does not have this

Quoted message said:

Most of the
runner oriented stuff sounds useless. Is it?

No, not if your a runner! Distance covered, stopwatch with auto pause
facilty, pacing, auto lap times..all good stuff.

The only problem I find with the Forerunner is the way it can lose GPS
signal in cloudy conditions or under tree cover. The functionality of
teh unti however does enable the 'no signal' areas to be joined up
automatically.

Quoted message said:

Can people please comment on whether all this makes sense, on where I
have been misinformed, and, especially, on all the vital points that
I have forgotten

many thanks

Jeremy Parker

--
Mark
______________________________________
Nerves of Steel, Heart of Gold, Knob of Butter

Looks like a really bad idea - no speed/distance sensor, it uses the
GPS instead. And GPS is just not accurate or reliable under trees, etc.

If you don't want the track log (record of where you've been), all the
GPS part gets you is a very short battery life.

--
Peter Headland

"tom" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

http://www.garmin.com/pressroom/outdoor/083105.html

Get lost!!

:o)