Well, after getting all the essential items on my K1100/LT like a Russell seat, fuel cell, dual heat controls for my Gerbing electrics, a Fuel+, CB radio, radar detector and tunes, it was time to work on the navigational aspects of this sport. I don't mean to brag but I have a pretty fair sense of direction, can read maps and get pretty much where I need to go without many mistakes. HOWEVER, when one undertakes a 7000+ mile endurance ride, somewhere in there one is going to get tired and maybe not think as clearly. A well programmed GPS would help in this instance. As well, I do believe that a well programmed GPS can be safer because you do not have to continually look at a map while travelling 70mph.

With this rationale in mind, I procured an eMap in the May timeframe. I took it on a 5800 mile ride to the BMW National, then on to Ottawa Canada and back in early July. The GPS served me well during this time and I thought it would be perfect for the Butt Lite. Another report on my web page discusses that ride. Well, the Butt Lite provided a few unexpected twists when I first started using it on the Butt Lite.

The first twist was that I was laying out a 2 day 1200-2400 mile ride at one time whereas on the 5800 mile ride, I would just set up one day at a time. I should mention that I do us a PC and the Delorme mapping program Map 'n Go to plan the route. I then upload the route into the GPS. One problem. The GPS can only handle 50 waypoints (turns) in any one route. On a couple of the legs, I had 150+ waypoints and every leg exceeded the 50 limit. What I decided I could do was break the ride into multiple routes. This was an easy process.

Once I determined the route, I had MnG calculate the route. I saved this as the master route. I would then count down 50 waypoints and back up to the last bonus preceding the 50th waypoint. I would then set that as the finish of the route, deleting all bonuses beyond that point. I would then open the whole route again, set the last bonus as the start, delete all bonuses already included, recalcuate the route and start all over again. This was very simple, taking about 15 minutes to parse the route into sub-routes.

On the first leg, when I got into the second sub-route, the GPS was sending me to a point that did not make any sense. It took me a while to figure it out but it finally clicked. There was a waypoint in the first sub-route with the same name as a waypoint in the second sub-route. This was because I was travelling on the same highway. MnG used the same name. When you use the same highway twice in the same route the GPS is smart enough to rename the second one to avoid confusion. I guess it does not do that if the same name is used in different routes.

The second problem I encountered was the use of VIA's to force the route over certain roads. If I did not uniquely name the VIA's, the GPS really got confused. Once I figured out these anomalies, it all made sense. HOWEVER, I never did figure out how to solve the same highway name. On the last leg of the Butt Lite, I did not run into this problem and the GPS navigated me through the route perfectly.

The waypoint limitation is a problem with the eMap but it is aggravated with the StreetPilot and the GPS III+. The reason is that the eMap can accommodate 50 waypoints per route whereas the others can only handle 30. Therefore the other guys would have to subdivide a route into more sub-routes and the naming convention problem could be aggravated. I would be curious to know how others have overcome this problem.

The other difficulty in using the GPS the way I did was that it was difficult to change plans. Once the route was loaded into the GPS, if I needed to change plans and wanted to use the GPS, I would have had to dig out the PC and lay out a new route. I did this on the Baton Rouge to Salt Lake City leg. However, I did that when I stopped for a rest period so it was not a problem. There is a capability to skip waypoints and "goto" a waypoint further down the list. I did this a couple of times. This would work if you were to maintain the same basic route but drop a bonus like I did when I opted to forego Quito. I merely pointed the GPS to the point where I would get back on the original route from Quito and keep going.

Those are the drawbacks. Now how did it help me?

First, it told me the ETA to the bonuses and checkpoint based on my average rate of speed. I found this feature to be extremely beneficial on those tight bonuses and checkpoints. I could tell if I had to speed up or if I could afford an 10 minute Iron Butt nap.

Even though the GPS calculates distance "as the crow flies", it is amazingly accurate on ETA. I think it does the calculation based on the rate of closure to the waypoint, not on the ground speed. By that I mean, if you were travelling at an angle of 45 degrees to the waypoint and your ground speed is 70mph, your rate of closure on the waypoint would be 35mph. I believe it uses the 35mph to calculate the ETA. HOWEVER, this is only my conclusion. I have not confirmed it with anyone but it makes sense.

The second benefit was in finding gas and accommodation. If I was on an interstate, I could look ahead in the GPS and plan my gas stops based on exit services which are loaded in the GPS. It was also very beneficial in finding a legitimate Denver gas station and accommodation in Idaho Springs CO, right around the corner from Central City and Mother Cabrini bonuses.

The third benefit was that it displayed the sunset time for the daylight bonuses. This was especially beneficial as I tried to make the Independence KS bonus which I did with little time to spare. The fourth benefit is that it did provide some entertainment and helped me think ahead. I normally do this off paper maps but the GPS adds another dimension to the thought process.

I tried running without paper maps on the first two legs but resorted to both on the last two legs. This proved especially beneficial on the last leg when I realized I could not get the super bonus. I was able to quickly determine what I wanted to do because I had a visual representation of the route and could quickly work out alternatives. Paper maps also help me with a feeling of relativity. By that I mean I could visualize where I was on the route. This would allow me to rethink plans as I went. On the first two legs and most of the third, I rode with Bill Thweatt and he had the paper maps. He was continually thinking out the options and that really helped us get up to 9th and 11th at the end of the second leg.

So, in summary, what is my take on this technology? I wouldn't be without it BUTT, I will not depend on it solely. I need both the GPS and paper maps. That is until I figure out how to get a heads-up display on my windshield that can show me the MnG maps on a computer screen. The just announced Street Atlas 8.0 with the Road Warrior version may be something I have to have. If I can figure out a way to let it talk to me (ie. Let it run the mapping program with GPS tracking enabled) while I am going down the road (it will also take voice commands!), I will be one step closer to my optimal routing capability. Then, I will not need the paper maps butt until then......