I hearya, dstock.
My Garmin Montana, a few years old now, works well on both the dual-sport bike, in my SUVs, cars, etc., and in my hand, with both tracks and routes. It has taken a beating. Even though smartphones and tablets work with tracks, I do not believe they are ready yet to replace a backcountry- and outdoors-capable unit like the Montana.
I am curious: Will your 2007 Zumo load and work with tracks (as opposed to "routes")? Every season I must respond to cries for help from folks who want to use their very highway-capable Zumos for backcountry travel.
As this is something I deal with often among clients who are new to GPS-guided backcountry travel, permit me to expound some, and even risk going off-topic some ...
For backcountry use, tracks are consistently the most reliable. Zumos, I believe, automatically convert "tracks" to "routes" upon loading. That is how they are able to reroute "on the fly." I believe older Zumos were oriented to using "routes," and not "tracks."
GPS units cannot reroute when using "tracks," and for backcountry use that is a good thing. That makes tracks the most reliable tool for wildland travel, even though tracks will not provide audible and visual alerts to upcoming turns and such. I always discourage the use of routes, which are dynamic and which the GPS unit can change; in favor of tracks, which are static and which the unit cannot change.
Of course, this assumes that the human who made the track -- either on a computer, or by recording it while traveling -- got it right.
In the wild, it is ill-advised to allow a GPS unit to reroute, unless one really, really knows what is going on and what the risks of doing so are. There are innumerable tales of unfortunate outcomes that occurred when a GPS unit was allowed to reroute a "route" line based on its internal Garmin map product. That is because Garmin's maps -- City Navigator, in particular -- are cartographically unreliable. Garmin is a tech hardware company, not a cartographic company.
In wildland settings, City Navigator (Garmin's primary mapping/routing supplement) is a good tool as long as one is attentive to its limitations. It includes roads that haven't existed in decades, roads that have been in wilderness areas for years and so are now off-limits, roads across posted and gated private land, and roads that fell into disuse decades ago and really don't exist anymore. I deal with these issues continually, every season across many states.
"Route" lines adhere (or not) to lines in the GPS unit's internal maps. To reroute, the unit will use the roads depicted on those internal maps ... even if those roads no longer exist or if the map's road lines have disconnected segments that force the unit to draw a route line in some crazy, non-sensical manner.
"Tracks," on the other hand, do not use the GPS unit's internal map. Tracks are just lines, like lines drawn on a blank sheet of paper. You don't even need an internal map to follow or record "tracks."
"Routes" assume the internal map is accurate, and may be changed by the GPS unit to follow roads that do not exist. "Tracks" stay put, either where the human drew the track at the outset or where the unit drew the track while recording the user's travels.
Again, the context here backcountry use, for which I always urge the use of a track-friendly GPS unit. Best to test before launch.
All of that said, apps for following and recording tracks on smartphones and tablets are so inexpensive -- free, or just a few dollars -- that there is nothing to lose by having one or more loaded. I have several apps on several devices, more to become literate in the topic than actual use. Yet that is the way things are going, and Garmin has to be very concerned.
I hope this is helpful to someone out there ...
