Road Cycling - Handheld GPS reviews from actual users ?

I know there has been a few threads on handheld GPS on this forum but as technology changes fast (and prices too..), also it seemed that many feedbacks were from new users, I would be interested in reading some reviews from bikeforums' members on pros/cons of handheld GPS you've been using, particularly from road bikers as this will be my primary use, then probably some occasional trail/hike.

Here are some of the models I have been looking at: Foretrex201/Forerunner201, Geko201, eTrex, anyone satisfied with the mapping capabilities or the eXplorist200, SporttrakMap and the like ? How good are the mapping sw on remote back roads ? etc.

I am equally interested in the navigation as well as the other features that can replace my bike computer &+.

Sorry if all this sounds like homework :o . Thanks in advance !

I have the Geko301. I can't give much of a comparison review because it's the only one I've ever used for any length of time. The reason I chose the Geko 301 for it's various features, but mostly because of the small size.

I use mine 1) to download my rides into my PC mapping software after the ride. I can then email the routes to friends. 2) I program waypoints into the GPS for new rides before the ride, based USGS maps(mostly mountain bike exploring). 3) as an odometer while cycling. it also has all the features of a cyclo-computer such as speed, max speed, ave speed, trip time and many other features. I find that the GPS speed, distance, and other related measurements are not as accurate as my cyclocomputer. There was a discussion on why this is in bikeforums a few months ago. Essentially, those features are not what a GPS was designed to do. I therefor keep both my cyclocomputer and GPS on the handlebars. If you're willing to live with a certain amount of inaccuracy, you'd be just fine. 4) to impress friends with the track log feature while we're on rides.

The Geko and "Fore-" series does not have any expandable memory, and therefore no resident mapping software. I use the National Geographic USGS mapping software to plot the ride when I get home from the ride, or to load in the waypoints I think I'll need before a ride. I can email you samples if you'd like. The Garmin Etrex series, or an even bigger unit, would be the better choice if you're looking to upload actual maps into the GPS unit. I didn't get an Etrex because it was bigger and didn't have the solid feel of the Gekos. I didn't get the Foretrex201/Forerunner201 because I don't think they are WAAS enabled, and they didn't have an altemeter. Now that I've used mine, I realize WAAS isn't an extremily useful feature for cycling. How accurate do you need to be? The 301 has both a barometric and GPS altimeter, but I don't use this feature much because the mapping software gives better elevation plots anyway.

When I demo'd the various GPS units I found that all of the Garmins where very intuitive to use. The buttons are easy to use while road riding.

Good luck, hope that helped, and keep up with that homework before you buy.

I know there has been a few threads on handheld GPS on this forum but as technology changes fast (and prices too..), also it seemed that many feedbacks were from new users, I would be interested in reading some reviews from bikeforums' members on pros/cons of handheld GPS you've been using, particularly from road bikers as this will be my primary use, then probably some occasional trail/hike.

Here are some of the models I have been looking at: Foretrex201/Forerunner201, Geko201, eTrex, anyone satisfied with the mapping capabilities or the eXplorist200, SporttrakMap and the like ? How good are the mapping sw on remote back roads ? etc.

I am equally interested in the navigation as well as the other features that can replace my bike computer &+.

Sorry if all this sounds like homework :o . Thanks in advance !

Whatever you do, make sure the unit has a map. Even if it's not a detailed map but a simple one that is built into the unit. WHY?

There are times when you might REALLY get lost and a map will help you feel secure that your're going in the right direction. This shouldn't happen if you plan your route correctly with waypoints but there are times when you just want to bolt out of the house and ride. With the map, you're never really lost and can easily make a different route along the way instead of having to keep the one loaded.

I use the GPS inconjunction with my commuter rail explorations. I'll take the bike on the commuter rail lines and they'll leave me 20 or 40 miles away from home. I would probably need 3 or 4 maps but the GPS takes me home safely all the time. I never feel lost or have to depend on those large bulky maps again. Just carry an extra set of batteries and you're set.

Keep the bike computer for more accurate readings but keep the GPS and dump the maps.

To be honest, I did get lost one weekend when I got caught in the middle of sprawl. I went to a gas station and purchased a map to help me get around the sprawl. Looking at the map really couldn't help me because it won't show direction or speed of the traffic. Instead, I reset my GPS for a longer route and got home that way.

That's the problem with maps. You can set a route but once you get to a certain road, you'll oftne wish there was an alternative because the traffic can be too fast to your liking. With a GPS, I develope the route along the way and simply have 2 or 4 Way points and head to them on any road where traffic is not going over 45 MPH.

The only thing I regret about the GPS is that I didn't buy one sooner. If I had to give up my bicycle comptuer or GPS, the choice woud be obvious. The GPS would stay.

Whatever you do, make sure the unit has a map. Even if it's not a detailed map but a simple one that is built into the unit. WHY?


Do you find that the built in maps are sufficient for road touring, i.e, do they have enough detail to show back roads? Another reason I didn't get the Etrex is because the built in maps, and for that matter the down loadable maps didn't seem very detailed once you got off the main roads. Not good for mountain biking.

Thanks both, that is really the kind of info I was looking for. About the accuracy, yes I am aware of this but I think I can live with it, especially since I often forget to reset my cyclocomputer for a couple of miles :rolleyes: . Regarding the mapping, I agree and when you mentioned the possibility of building an alternative road, this is exactly what I had in mind (I'm the kind who hates turning back regardless how far the detour can be :o ). Then I was also concerned with the accuracy of the maps available for the lowest priced models, will I really find all the back roads and which sw are best.
Again, thanks ! :beer:

Do you find that the built in maps are sufficient for road touring, i.e, do they have enough detail to show back roads? Another reason I didn't get the Etrex is because the built in maps, and for that matter the down loadable maps didn't seem very detailed once you got off the main roads. Not good for mountain biking.

The Garmin Legend does not have a great built in map and I'm in the process of buying the sofware to to upload more detail into the GPS. (I got ripped of on Ebay again trying to buy the software!) Where I find the map useful is if you really get lost and can't tell north from south. Often times, I'll get stopped by a river and the map will give me an idea on if I can go around or look for a bridge that may cross the water. In my case, the built in map is insufficient and won't have those backroads you're talking about. HOWEVER. I can always tell by the map where I am more or less and where I really want to go.

With this knowledge, I can change directions real quick by making a "Way Point" right on the map and just head in that direction. In another case, I purchased a map from a gas station to locate the direction of an amusement park. I then took the GPS and made a way "Way Point" into that location on the map. I did not have the correct longitude and latitude coordinates but this did not matter since I was heading in the right direction. Once I'm within a mile of the location, I can ask someone where the park is located and I'm there in minutes.

I have a Forerunner 201 that I use for running and cycling. I primarly use it for speed and distance. It does display a map and sets waypoints that you could backtrack. You can download updates and software so that you can monitor your workouts. It would not be as good for mapping out an area as a regular GPS.

I use a gps alot, but rarely for biking. I have a Garmin Etrex and a Garmin Summit. The latter has an electronic compass and altimeter, but both these features need to be reset everytime you change the batteries. For biking: the gps can take a long time to register speed and position, especially if it is cloudy or there is a heavy tree cover. I have a handlbar bracket for the gps but found my cyclometer to be more accurate and faster updating my speed changes etc. than the gps. I guess the routes I ride are too shady. For the most part, I find it useful to lay out routes as home using expertgps (just set routes and waypoints by clicking on a topomap displayed on the screen) and then I download these to the gps. It gives me a paper map that is easy to read and share with others, plus the map is now customized with your route and waypoints and those can be matched to what is displaying on your gps. One important thing to remember though, maps are only two dimensional representations of three dimensional space and are NOT really accurate representations of reality. Nothing brings this home better than use of a gps with maps. In travel to new cities, I found it sufficient to mark our hotel or destination with a waypoint using expertgps at home and use the goto feature to find our way there. As I see it, the real advantage to a gps with internal mapping would be the ability to access maps and plot waypoints in the field and on the fly. The smaller gps's are easiest to carry but the bigger screens are easier to see when reading a map.

Magellan and Garmin differ in their antennas types. One type of antenna is good for receiving signals from satellites on the horizon and the other from overhead (I can't remember which is which). Garmin's seem to be simpler to operate. I geocache with mine -- finding objects as small as a 35mm film cannister in the woods with a gps. www.geocaching.com. I also use a program called expertgps to create maps (virtual and paper and to plot routes for planned trips). (www.expertgps.com) I am currently working on a set of maps of kayaking trails. I download or upload data from the gps to a program called expertgps and then convert the files for use by ArcGIS mapping software to create interactive visuals with linked text. The gps is great for water trails since you ususally have clear sky overhead.

Sorry, I have a Garmin II+ which isn't sold anymore so a review of it won't be helpful. What may be helpful is to take a look at the new Garmin Quest that is supposed to be available this month. It looks interesting for bike touring, expensive though.

I use a GPS on my bike all the time. If you really want to map out routes it takes two elements. I have found the Garmin Etrex Vista to be very good and Garmin to be a great company when it comes to warranty work. They even fixed the unit under warranty after I was hit by a car while working in Aruba last fall. Garmin makes a handlebar clamp that comes with a different battery cover that mates the GPS to the bar clamp very firmly. The car that hit me knocked me off the bars but the GPS stayed in place. I keep one clamp on my road bike and one on my suspension mountain bike. You have to add some maps to the GPS show the places you want to ride. I worked in Ireland and sometimes the map is detailed where you are riding with all the roads and other times you’re just leaving your track on the map as you ride the road that is not on the GPSs map.

Garmin Etrex Vista really has all and more features then all but the most powerful “power/heart rate" units. The only down side is that if you ride in big city the satellite signals bounce off all the glass and your track might just jump a few hundred feet and then back.

The GPS really came to full use for me when I bought the Computrainer bike trainer. the Computrainer uses a computer to control the load generator on you back wheel so you feel a two foot climb over a 20 foot run or it can make you feel the 14% grade of a mountain climb. While you are feeling the load, you have the monitor in front of you and you see a 3D image of the road. I could go on for hours about what it can do. I live in MN and ride outdoors all 12 months but the trainer can push me farther from a training point because it won’t let you slack . It can even show your power at all points of your pedal stroke in live time.

The Computrainer company RacerMate has worked with DeLorme Map company to produce a “DeLorme Topo USA RacerMate Edition" that you have to get from RacerMate.

With that mapping program I have all the topo maps with all roads of the USA. I can highlight a route on the map and load it up to my GPS so I can follow it. Or I can ride a route and send it back to the map program and see a full profile with details such as how many miles were uphill, how many were downhill. We all have those loop routes that are easier one way, now I know just how much easier. If I go single track that won’t be a line on the map but if I have the GPS unit tracking me. I can down load it to the Map and see the data. I can also move the route to the Computrainer and ride it again to see if I can go faster up the hill. Or have a friend put his bike on the trainer and he will be racing me on the computer to see who is better.

I have used the GPS to track trails then download the track to the computer and produce maps for group rides.

The beauty is that while riding it is just capturing or showing me the route. It is less distracting than a regular computer on the bike. It’s only while at home when recording to my training log the details that I’m really working with the data.

I hope this helps.

I already wrote a review for epinions on the one I bought. You can find it here if you are interested... http://www.epinions.com/pr-Garmin_GPSMAP_76CS_GPS_Receiver

I have Foretrex 201 which is a lot of fun, but not something you would buy if you were looking for mapping ability.

There is a website:

www.motionbased.com

that is fairly new and still in Beta and free, that you can upload your GPS data into and they overlay it on a street map, or Topo, or aerial photo.

They will analyze all the data that your GPS stores, and show splits with time, speed, altitude at any point; calculate your average speed, the distance climbed, distance descended, top speeds, etc.

It is really neat if you are a techno-nerd.

You can buy a bicycle mount for the unit, which is very small and light, and provides a lot of detail that you can easily read as you cycle, but if you go under heavy tree cover, you will probably lose the signal for a while.

I have seen other people doing the same routes that I have done, and not lost the signal using the e-trex vista, which is bigger, and has a better antenna I would assume. It is heavier though and not as well-suited to mounting on a bicycle, not to mention more expensive.

The altitude data from all the GPS units is somewhat questionable and I know the guys at the website are working on using USGS altitude data for uploaded routes instead of the GPS data.

I would suggest you go to the website and give it a look, it is a lot of fun.

The Foretrex has a longer battery life than the forerunner, which is useful if you are going to be out 4 or 5 hours.

You can load something like 500 waypoints into it if you want to plan a route. It does not have mapping ability though.

Also, a lot of triathlete types complain that it is not really waterproof.

Hope that helps


Whit

[forgot to hit submit on this a few days ago]

I have a Garmin Forerunner 201 which i bought largely because i'm a geek who likes looking at data. I'm a newbie commuter rather than a backcountry explorer (at this point). The Garmin does produce interesting data e.g. distance, speed, and somewhat fishy altitude data. The limited breadcrumb style mapping stuff (e.g. where you've been) are pretty useless in my application except for route characterization e.g. was this a ride into work or a ride home, did I take any detours, etc.

The garmin is very wide but short -- it takes up a lot of space on a handlebar. I've recently moved mine to the drops which i don't seem to use to get some space back. I might tie it to the bike rack next. Alternatively one of those handlebar extension things might work.

After using it for a few weeks, i'm not convinced this device has any utility to me. The software is a really really barebones logbook with no other user input except downloading from the device. This makes fixing busted rides (hit lap button) or missing rides (forgot to turn it on) impossible.

I have used the Garmin eTrex Vista and the Garmin GPS 60CS. The latter has a slightly larger, color screen which is amazing! The resolution is about the same as the gray-scale Vista but it's so much easier to read, even in bright sunlight. The Vista is nice, though, because it's very small. People think it's just a big "regular" cycle computer. Both units have all the bells and whistles including up-loadable extremely detailed maps. It's better than paper maps because it gives you a sort of dead-reaconing, where you don't have to know where you've been to know where you are now. And you don't have to pull over and unfold anything. The 60CS also has auto-routing which means it will plot out an exact course, following the roads, to get you from point A to point B. When you upload the detailed maps I've found that this gives every single little tiny road you might want to ride on. Also gives you gas stations, restaurants, hospitals, etc... These things are great, especially when riding in unfamiliar territory, such as another country - I've had people stop and ask ME directions! Now I've got my own databse of routes that I've done in my area and abroad and it's easy to duplicate them with friends - just following the line on the screen... Both units are weather/rain proof, get good reception even in rain/snow, and easily attach to the handlebar.

I've been using a Garmin Foretrex 201 for about 3 months. It's not adequate as a substitute for a computer, at least for me, but it's a great navigation aid. It's great if I am in a new town and want to go exploring without worrying about finding my way back home.

Comparing the GPS and my cycle computer (Polar S720), the two seem decently consistent as to speed and distance travelled. However, the GPS is prone to glitches when satellite reception is sub-optimal (see my comments about riding on mountain roads, below) and it can report 60 mile-per-hour jumps into thin air.

For navigating, I usually use mapping software (Nat. Geo. TOPO) to enter waypoints into the GPS, and then print out hard copies of relevant topo maps (there's no substitute for a printed map). The GPS does a nice job of beeping at me when it's time to turn and showing me what direction I should be heading.

My wife has a Garmin GPSMAP 60CS, which has a good barometric altimeter, electronic compass, and color map display. It's a sweet unit, but much larger and heavier than I'd want on my bicycle.

One thing a lot of people don't realize about GPS, which is worth mentioning, is that if you do a lot of riding in mountainous areas, it's often hard to receive enough satellite signals to get a position fix if you're in a valley or on a mountainside. The GPS needs to be able to see at least three satellites by line-of-sight, so if mountains are blocking your lines of sight the GPS may drop out.

This isn't a big problem for most navigation---just get somewhere that you can see the horizon---but if you're wanting to use it as a computer for training purposes, it won't be as good as a regular bike computer. Even riding in my local city park (with mere 500-foot hills), the GPS frequently drops out, killing the reliability of trip distance and max speed records.

One more thing---the Foretrex has built in rechargeable batteries that go for about 14 hours on a charge. This is great for navigating century and greater rides. I wouldn't want a unit that burned through AA batteries every couple of hours, which is something you have to contend with with some of the units with color map displays.