- Last Active
- Member, Expert, Moderator
I'm not a fan of the 24k Garmin maps. Also not a fan of the 100k, because in my area they have been very poor. I have a copy of new version that came with my DriveTrack 71. I removed it first thing when I got the GPS and just archived the file on my computer. I put the 3gb of space to better use on the GPS with aerial imagery. One difference with the Overlander is that it has 64gb of internal memory - the most Garmin has ever used. The DriveTrack has 16gb. The Montana 680t (which includes the 100k topo, but not City Navigator) has 8gb, and the Montana 610 (with no maps included) only has 4gb. All Garmin devices can be upgraded with micro SD memory cards but internal flash memory is a little faster to access. As a practical matter, that makes very little difference however.
Regarding the 24k maps, I think they make more sense for somebody with a device like the Montana 610, which doesn't include any maps. The 24k topo will give you standard road POI's (gas stations, restaurants, etc) and turn-by-turn directions just like Garmin City Navigator. So it can be a multi-purpose map for driving and hiking. As for the contour lines, if you're on foot you typically zoom way in since you move more slowly. I think the contours are probably reasonably spaced at the 300 foot map scale, but if you're driving with the map zoomed at to .2 miles, they can make a mess out of the display. :)
Have not looked at the 100k topo for a long time, but if you zoom in to 300 feet, I also suspect that roads and trails with have points that are spaced farther apart than the 24k maps, which would show a bit more detail. But I've never looked at maps of Nevada, so I just don't know. And at driving speed, you zoom father out so fine details don't matter as much.
You can still post photos here the same as always. It's photobucket that changed, not gpsreview. Just find another site that lets you upload photos and link directly to the image files.
Well, in terms of the hardware, that might be accurate. But the software is substantially different. These devices have a special RV mode (which should be the default) and that gives you a bunch of additional things. You should be able to create a vehicle profile that includes its length/width/height/weight and similar data. The device will then use all of that when calculating routes, so (for example) it shouldn't send you down a road with a bridge that is too low for your vehicle or a mountain road with a turn that is too sharp. And it should also warn you about any concerns like this as you drive around.I know its just a 2595 with a bigger screen and faster processor.
Then it should also have some special POI databases related to RV's and trucks, like campgrounds, places that service/tow big vehicles, etc.
Or that's the theory, at least. ;) Anyway - congratulatioins, sounds like you got a nice deal!
That is excellent advice, and could save you a lot of grief in case you do have a problem. See this thread if you don't already know how to do this: http://forums.gpsreview.net/discussion/21019/x/p1/My advice FWIW … do a full backup of your device
But note that you do not need to change the Windows control panel settings as described there. Do this instead.
This may help: https://support.garmin.com/en-US/?faq=i34WV8maJa11t7iwvYnz18
It has nothing to do with the maps. The FM traffic is limited by a very slow data rate - similar to an old 300 baud modem, if you're old enough to remember those days ;) It piggybacks on selected regular FM radio station signals. So there just isn't enough bandwith to provide much data, and it is therefore limited to major roads in your immediate area.
The newer HD traffic still uses FM radio signals and also has a slow data rate, but faster than the old FM system.
The smartphone traffic uses a "real" data connection that can deliver much more data that covers a larger area.
Happy to help. :)
And shame on Garmin for not fixing this major bug that has caused so much trouble for the past 11 months. X(