Garmin Drive 51 LMT

[Brian Kirby]

Derek Uzzell - 2019-11-10 5:32 PM

 

Deneb

 

It seems that you have the same windscreen as me (photo of marking attached below). It might be interesting to know if the marking on Brian’s Knaus’s windscreen differs.

This started a bit more of a hare running than I'd expected! :-D Thank you all for your contributions, and for the information about the mid-dash mount. I'll experiment with that.

 

It seems I probably have a "standard" Ducato windscreen, although from the information supplied by Fiat Customer Services, it seems "standard" may be athermic, but not reflective. Definitions, eh???

 

I'll attach a picture of the St Gobain "logo" to see if Bob can cast any further light.

 

I have also contacted St Gobain, and at their request have sent them a copy of the same picture, on the basis that they made it (in Italy) so should know what it is. I know the e-mail has been read, so am hopeful of a reply.

 

Thanks again to all.

[Brian Kirby]

As post above but, just for info, although there is a footnote on the forum saying that up to 200kb files can now be uploaded, it first chucked this out at 150kb, still saying 100kb is the max size - so I had to reduce again to get under 100kb. But, having rejected the image, it still accepted the post! Durrrrrr! :-D

[Brian Kirby]

Deneb - 2019-11-10 12:08 PM...…………………...Brian, does the Drive model have a satellite status and position resolution screen? It's normally accessed by holding a finger on the signal strength icon for a few seconds on many Garmin models...……………………………..

Yes it does, but I hadn't thought of doing anything so obvious, and comparing the reception inside and out to see if there is a notable difference! :-S Thanks for that - I'll try it, to see what the result is.

 

[Deneb]

Same barcode number, Brian, so the same glass at Derek and myself.

 

Other than that, made by St Gobain Sekurit (DOT 37 is their NHTSA assigned manufacturer code)

Complies with standards for windscreen glass (AS1)

M131 is a manufacturer's internal code

Manufactured in Belgium (E6)

Complies with UN standards for European vehicle glass (43R)

Complies with Chinese standards (CCC)

and manufactured in February 2017

 

[Robinhood]

Brian Kirby - 2019-11-11 11:55 AM

 

I'll attach a picture of the St Gobain "logo" to see if Bob can cast any further light.

 

 

Nothing enigmatic here, Brian.

 

I've referred to the site I've referenced here before, which effectively gives access to the up-to-date Fiat ePer details that are generally very difficult to find elsewhere.

 

https://www.fiatdalys.lt/en Which is well worth bookmarking. Searching by VIN is not always fruitful, but use of the model wizard gives full parts breakdowns by model.

 

The particular windscreen page is here, and you can see the various types, and where available, the additional info. Patently, the Fiat part number constitutes the initial digits of the St Gobain number.

 

https://www.fiatdalys.lt/en/catalog/parts/701/55/10/1/4Y/0/0/CC2.3/CMBDS/GDX/wind-screen

 

They are all describes as "Athermic" in the headline, but not necessarily reflective (see additional info). Your number appears to be the pretty standard one, marked as "Non-Reflective", and is the same as fitted to my 'van.

 

Just for info, see the difference in description of a "reflective" one and your/my number here:

 

https://www.guardianautomotiveglass.com/en/windscreen/1676/fiat-ducato-kleintransporter-2006

 

is your and my part number; "tinting green"

 

https://www.guardianautomotiveglass.com/en/windscreen/4342/fiat-ducato-kleintransporter-2006

 

is one digit different, described as "Reflecting" on ePer/Fiatdalys, and as "tinting green absorbing" on this link.

[Derek Uzzell]

Brian Kirby - 2019-11-11 12:03 PMAs post above but, just for info, although there is a footnote on the forum saying that up to 200kb files can now be uploaded, it first chucked this out at 150kb, still saying 100kb is the max size - so I had to reduce again to get under 100kb. But, having rejected the image, it still accepted the post! Durrrrrr! :-D

As far as I can make out, the file size-limit for attachments to postings continues to be 200KB as was stated in this 2018 threadhttps://forums.outandaboutlive.co.uk/forums/Motorhomes/Motorhome-Matters/File-attachment-size-increase/49430/I regularly attach to my postings files larger than 100KB but, just in case something had suddenly changed, I did some testing. I use an iMac that allows very easy adjustment of a file’s size. I increased a .jpg file’s size to 199KB and this attached successfully. I tried this several times without any problems. I then increased the size of the file to 201KB and the attachment process failed with this error message Request object error 'ASP 0104 : 80004005' Operation not Allowed /forums/includes/include-upload.asp, line 51 

https://compote.slate.com/images/8a31f651-97ef-4696-ac29-4b976712a7a1.jpeg?width=780&height=520&rect=4217x2811&offset=176x0

 As you’ve pointed out, even when the attachment process fails, this won’t affect the posting itself. This is because the process is 2-stage, with the posting being ‘loaded up’ first and then any attachment being subsequently appended to that posting.I’ve attached a file to this posting and you’ll see that its size is given as 194KB (though the file is shown on my iMac as having a size of 199KB). And, if you look further up this thread, in my posting of 10 November 2019 9:03 AM you’ll find an attached .png fille with a 155KB file-size.As a forum Moderator I can carry out ‘stealth’ and ‘destructive’ testing using the Admin Quarantine forum as the victim, but this forum is not accessible to non-Moderators. I have no difficulty attaching to my own and anybody else’s forum-postings files of various types provided that the file-size does not exceed 200KB. If you can’t do this, I can’t offer an explanation other than it’s due to the hardware/software you are using, but, as I think you use a PC/Windows set-up that I don’t have, I can’t test that theory.I’ve also carried out some testing with my Garmin Nuvi 2559LM sat-nav using the satellite status method Deneb mentioned above. There is plenty of on-line discussion about the ‘penetration’ capability of GPS signals and I had been under the impression that this was quite limited. As one might anticipate, testing with my Nuvi 2559 proved that the most satellites acquired, the strongest signals and the maximum accuracy was obtained when the sat-nav was in the open air with no obstructions between the device and the satellites. But I was suprised how capable the Nuvi 2559 was in obtaining satellite signals even inside my house and in areas where there were no windows. OK, the number of satellites acquired and the signal strengths reduced, and the accuracy lessened, but the device remained operable. I did notice, though, that in ‘difficult’ locations in the house, the sat-nav became very sensitive and just swivelling the device through (say) 90 degrees could make a big positive or negative difference.So a head-to-head test of your Drive 51 sat-nav against your Nuvi devices may be worth doing, just in case the former is intrinsically less capable than the latter regarding GPS signal reception.

[Brian Kirby]

Robinhood - 2019-11-11 1:16 PM

 

Brian Kirby - 2019-11-11 11:55 AM

 

I'll attach a picture of the St Gobain "logo" to see if Bob can cast any further light.

 

 

Nothing enigmatic here, Brian.

 

I've referred to the site I've referenced here before, which effectively gives access to the up-to-date Fiat ePer details that are generally very difficult to find elsewhere.

 

https://www.fiatdalys.lt/en Which is well worth bookmarking. Searching by VIN is not always fruitful, but use of the model wizard gives full parts breakdowns by model.

 

The particular windscreen page is here, and you can see the various types, and where available, the additional info. Patently, the Fiat part number constitutes the initial digits of the St Gobain number.

 

https://www.fiatdalys.lt/en/catalog/parts/701/55/10/1/4Y/0/0/CC2.3/CMBDS/GDX/wind-screen

 

They are all describes as "Athermic" in the headline, but not necessarily reflective (see additional info). Your number appears to be the pretty standard one, marked as "Non-Reflective", and is the same as fitted to my 'van.

 

Just for info, see the difference in description of a "reflective" one and your/my number here:

 

https://www.guardianautomotiveglass.com/en/windscreen/1676/fiat-ducato-kleintransporter-2006

 

is your and my part number; "tinting green"

 

https://www.guardianautomotiveglass.com/en/windscreen/4342/fiat-ducato-kleintransporter-2006

 

is one digit different, described as "Reflecting" on ePer/Fiatdalys, and as "tinting green absorbing" on this link.

Thanks for this, Bob. Excellent! I had a link to fiatdalys, but it seems it was an out of date link (different format to web page, and wouldn't take any inputs), so I've substituted as your link which works fine. Thanks. Yes, followed the windscreen link and played with the filters and you're right, the screen fitted is non-reflecting. I assume "atherm" is being used merely to denote tinted (so absorbent), rather than any more sophisticated solar reflectivity. Thanks again.

[Brian Kirby]

Derek Uzzell - 2019-11-12 7:53 AM

 

Brian Kirby - 2019-11-11 12:03 PM

 

As post above but, just for info, although there is a footnote on the forum saying that up to 200kb files can now be uploaded, it first chucked this out at 150kb, still saying 100kb is the max size - so I had to reduce again to get under 100kb. But, having rejected the image, it still accepted the post! Durrrrrr! :-D

 

As far as I can make out, the file size-limit for attachments to postings continues to be 200KB as was stated in this 2018 thread

 

https://forums.outandaboutlive.co.uk/forums/Motorhomes/Motorhome-Matters/File-attachment-size-increase/49430/

 

I regularly attach to my postings files larger than 100KB but, just in case something had suddenly changed, I did some testing.

 

I use an iMac that allows very easy adjustment of a file’s size. I increased a .jpg file’s size to 199KB and this attached successfully. I tried this several times without any problems. I then increased the size of the file to 201KB and the attachment process failed with this error message

 

Request object error 'ASP 0104 : 80004005'

 

Operation not Allowed

 

/forums/includes/include-upload.asp, line 51

 

As you’ve pointed out, even when the attachment process fails, this won’t affect the posting itself. This is because the process is 2-stage, with the posting being ‘loaded up’ first and then any attachment being subsequently appended to that posting.

 

I’ve attached a file to this posting and you’ll see that its size is given as 194KB (though the file is shown on my iMac as having a size of 199KB). And, if you look further up this thread, in my posting of 10 November 2019 9:03 AM you’ll find an attached .png fille with a 155KB file-size.

 

As a forum Moderator I can carry out ‘stealth’ and ‘destructive’ testing using the Admin Quarantine forum as the victim, but this forum is not accessible to non-Moderators. I have no difficulty attaching to my own and anybody else’s forum-postings files of various types provided that the file-size does not exceed 200KB. If you can’t do this, I can’t offer an explanation other than it’s due to the hardware/software you are using, but, as I think you use a PC/Windows set-up that I don’t have, I can’t test that theory.

 

I’ve also carried out some testing with my Garmin Nuvi 2559LM sat-nav using the satellite status method Deneb mentioned above. There is plenty of on-line discussion about the ‘penetration’ capability of GPS signals and I had been under the impression that this was quite limited. As one might anticipate, testing with my Nuvi 2559 proved that the most satellites acquired, the strongest signals and the maximum accuracy was obtained when the sat-nav was in the open air with no obstructions between the device and the satellites. But I was suprised how capable the Nuvi 2559 was in obtaining satellite signals even inside my house and in areas where there were no windows. OK, the number of satellites acquired and the signal strengths reduced, and the accuracy lessened, but the device remained operable. I did notice, though, that in ‘difficult’ locations in the house, the sat-nav became very sensitive and just swivelling the device through (say) 90 degrees could make a big positive or negative difference.

 

So a head-to-head test of your Drive 51 sat-nav against your Nuvi devices may be worth doing, just in case the former is intrinsically less capable than the latter regarding GPS signal reception.

Trial of 151kb attachment.

[Derek Uzzell]

Hmmm...

 

Perhaps you should invest in a Mac. ;-)

 

(Are other forum-members unable to attach to their postings files over 100KB in size?)

[Deneb]

Derek Uzzell - 2019-11-12 11:12 AM

 

Hmmm...

 

Perhaps you should invest in a Mac. ;-)

 

(Are other forum-members unable to attach to their postings files over 100KB in size?)

 

Yes, I mentioned it in a fairly recent post where I tried to attach an image under 200KB, but had to reduce it to under 100KB before it would upload.

 

I can't find the post offhand.

 

I'm using a Windows PC and also have the issue where attached images don't display inline within individual posts, but I have to click on the image name link and open it in a separate window.

 

Images display inline if I visit the forum on my Android phone though.

[Keithl]

Derek Uzzell - 2019-11-12 11:12 AM

 

Hmmm...

 

Perhaps you should invest in a Mac. ;-)

 

(Are other forum-members unable to attach to their postings files over 100KB in size?)

So let me try with your speedo photo...

 

Yes, works for me on a Windows PC and file size was 195 kb.

 

One thing to note: the file type MUST be .jpg and NOT .jpeg for the picture to display in the thread.

[Brian Kirby]

Deneb - 2019-11-12 11:47 AM

 

Derek Uzzell - 2019-11-12 11:12 AM

 

Hmmm...

 

Perhaps you should invest in a Mac. ;-)

 

(Are other forum-members unable to attach to their postings files over 100KB in size?)

 

Yes, I mentioned it in a fairly recent post where I tried to attach an image under 200KB, but had to reduce it to under 100KB before it would upload.

 

I can't find the post offhand.

 

I'm using a Windows PC and also have the issue where attached images don't display inline within individual posts, but I have to click on the image name link and open it in a separate window.

 

Images display inline if I visit the forum on my Android phone though.

Same here. (Lenovo Win 10 pro pc.)

 

Attached forum images used to be visible and then, quite a while back, they began appearing as a link, and had to be opened separately. Never found out why. Can open attached images from elsewhere without difficulty.

 

The windscreen image is definitely .jpg, and not .jpeg and, so long as the indicated file size is below 100kb will post (though I still have to open it to see it - even in my own posts), but anything over 100kb just gets the standard "reject" notice after "Submit" is pressed after attaching the file to the post, saying in bold red, that image file sizes must be under 100kb. Odd.

 

I reckon Derek's sabotaged the forum to favour Macs! :-D

[Brian Kirby]

Derek Uzzell - 2019-11-12 7:53 AM...………………….I’ve also carried out some testing with my Garmin Nuvi 2559LM sat-nav using the satellite status method Deneb mentioned above. There is plenty of on-line discussion about the ‘penetration’ capability of GPS signals and I had been under the impression that this was quite limited. As one might anticipate, testing with my Nuvi 2559 proved that the most satellites acquired, the strongest signals and the maximum accuracy was obtained when the sat-nav was in the open air with no obstructions between the device and the satellites. But I was suprised how capable the Nuvi 2559 was in obtaining satellite signals even inside my house and in areas where there were no windows. OK, the number of satellites acquired and the signal strengths reduced, and the accuracy lessened, but the device remained operable. I did notice, though, that in ‘difficult’ locations in the house, the sat-nav became very sensitive and just swivelling the device through (say) 90 degrees could make a big positive or negative difference.

 

So a head-to-head test of your Drive 51 sat-nav against your Nuvi devices may be worth doing, just in case the former is intrinsically less capable than the latter regarding GPS signal reception.

I've since tried Deneb's idea of taking the Drive from outside the van and getting in to see what disappeared. Short answer was nothing noticeable. I started the Drive at the road end of the drive to get as much clear sky as possible and, after it had settled (which I think is slow) it was showing 7 solid bars plus a couple of outline bars. All fluctuate as (presumably) the satellite signals vary in strength. I forget want it claimed accuracy was, but definitely single figure metres. I then walked back to the van, and got in. In essence, nothing changed. I couldn't see that the signal strength bars diminished at all, although they continued fluctuating slightly as when outside, so precision can's be guaranteed.

 

I tried all positions just inside the windscreen, and in the end held the Drive right against the roof which, being of best Fiat steel, I thought must provoke at least a reaction - if not the "lost satellites" announcement. Still nothing changed, with the same number of signals gently fluctuating as before, with no noticeable drop-off in indicated strength. Haven't tried this with the nuvi, but will do so later.

 

I can't do a head to head as I have only a single dashboard 12V cig lighter socket. I tried using the USB socket, which ran the Drive for a few hundred yards, but it then realised it was being cheated and went into "mass storage mode", as when connected to a computer. Unfortunately, there isn't a conversion 12V socket within reach of the screen, so a side by side comparison isn't practical, plus the instances where the Drive loses its marbles are intermittent, and their causes not that readily identifiable, so I'd need to travel a few hundred miles to be reasonably confident of catching one.

 

One instance is where the road forks, when the Drive sometimes thinks we have taken the "other" fork. If the road it then thinks it is on stays reasonably close to the road we are actually on, it happily bumbles along the parallel road (giving turn instructions a sit sees fit) until either the roads diverge, at which point it snaps over to the correct road, or the roads converge again, when it just re-joins the correct road. Fine in open country, when it can be left to sort itself out, but tricky in strange towns! This seems to arise if there is an obstruction (trees, buildings, bridge, etc.) in the vicinity of the junction that temporarily reduces its positioning accuracy, causing it to "think" it is off-track to the same side as the unwanted fork.

 

I haven't experienced these aberrations with the nuvi. When, vary rarely, it gets "lost" it usually just announces it has lost satellites, at which point continuing on route allows it to find the signals again without issue, just as when going through a tunnel.

[Derek Uzzell]

Brian Kirby - 2019-11-12 12:28 PM

 

Deneb - 2019-11-12 11:47 AM

 

Derek Uzzell - 2019-11-12 11:12 AM

 

Hmmm...

 

Perhaps you should invest in a Mac. ;-)

 

(Are other forum-members unable to attach to their postings files over 100KB in size?)

 

Yes, I mentioned it in a fairly recent post where I tried to attach an image under 200KB, but had to reduce it to under 100KB before it would upload.

 

I can't find the post offhand.

 

I'm using a Windows PC and also have the issue where attached images don't display inline within individual posts, but I have to click on the image name link and open it in a separate window.

 

Images display inline if I visit the forum on my Android phone though.

Same here. (Lenovo Win 10 pro pc.)

 

Attached forum images used to be visible and then, quite a while back, they began appearing as a link, and had to be opened separately. Never found out why. Can open attached images from elsewhere without difficulty.

 

The windscreen image is definitely .jpg, and not .jpeg and, so long as the indicated file size is below 100kb will post (though I still have to open it to see it - even in my own posts), but anything over 100kb just gets the standard "reject" notice after "Submit" is pressed after attaching the file to the post, saying in bold red, that image file sizes must be under 100kb. Odd.

 

I reckon Derek's sabotaged the forum to favour Macs! :-D

 

Deneb’s posting of 7 October 2019 1:37 PM in the following thread may be the “fairly recent” one he refers to above

 

https://forums.outandaboutlive.co.uk/forums/Motorhomes/Motorhome-Matters/Ducato-3-litre-access-to-and-servicing-an-EGR-valve/53293/

 

Interesting that you and Delimit is concerned) does not, although he’s using a PC and Windows.

[Deneb]

Derek Uzzell - 2019-11-12 1:35 PM

Deneb’s posting of 7 October 2019 1:37 PM in the following thread may be the “fairly recent” one he refers to above

 

https://forums.outandaboutlive.co.uk/forums/Motorhomes/Motorhome-Matters/Ducato-3-litre-access-to-and-servicing-an-EGR-valve/53293/

 

Interesting that you and Delimit is concerned) does not, although he’s using a PC and Windows.

 

That's the one Derek. It was a PDF file rather than a JPG image. I don't know if that makes a difference, but the forum software didn't complain that I couldn't post a PDF file, only that it was above the 100KB limit.

[Deneb]

Brian Kirby - 2019-11-12 1:13 PM

One instance is where the road forks, when the Drive sometimes thinks we have taken the "other" fork. If the road it then thinks it is on stays reasonably close to the road we are actually on, it happily bumbles along the parallel road (giving turn instructions a sit sees fit) until either the roads diverge, at which point it snaps over to the correct road, or the roads converge again, when it just re-joins the correct road. Fine in open country, when it can be left to sort itself out, but tricky in strange towns! This seems to arise if there is an obstruction (trees, buildings, bridge, etc.) in the vicinity of the junction that temporarily reduces its positioning accuracy, causing it to "think" it is off-track to the same side as the unwanted fork.

 

That is the type of misbehaviour I experienced quite regularly Brian, together with frequent occasions where I lost the signal altogether. I remember puling into a service area on the M74 where the vehicle icon had failed to follow the road for some time previously. On setting off again after a break, I had no signal at all for quite a while. The unit seemed unable to find or lock on to sufficient satellites to determine its location.

 

The original test that I carries out using the satellite reception screen was also in a service are where my Nuvi had lost the signal inside the van altogether, Norton Canes on the M6 Toll I recall. It may be that you need to be in a similar predicament to carry out a worthwhile comparison of the signal in and out of the van.

 

I still get the odd instance of the vehicle icon failing to follow the road, but very rarely and it normally corrects itself fairly quickly, but I've not had any total loss of signal since I moved the Nuvi to the centre of the dashboard.

 

There does seem to be something about the Ducato that affects the signal strength though. My Nuvi works flawlessly when in my or my wife's cars.

 

One other thought. Do you have the Fiat radio unit with satnav (uConnect 5.0)? I do, although I specified it for other reasons than the satnav element, as I already knew it was a pretty poor implementation, hence why I prefer to use the Garmin device.

 

The reason I mention it though is that it also has a satellite lock and signal strength display, which I also found useful in comparing it with the same display on my Nuvi when experimenting with its positioning. I believe the built in radio uses a separate GPS antenna to receive its signal though.

[Derek Uzzell]

Deneb - 2019-11-12 1:43 PM

 

Derek Uzzell - 2019-11-12 1:35 PM

Deneb’s posting of 7 October 2019 1:37 PM in the following thread may be the “fairly recent” one he refers to above

 

https://forums.outandaboutlive.co.uk/forums/Motorhomes/Motorhome-Matters/Ducato-3-litre-access-to-and-servicing-an-EGR-valve/53293/

 

Interesting that you and Delimit is concerned) does not, although he’s using a PC and Windows.

 

That's the one Derek. It was a PDF file rather than a JPG image. I don't know if that makes a difference, but the forum software didn't complain that I couldn't post a PDF file, only that it was above the 100KB limit.

 

For me .pdf files attach exactly as other files do. Up to 200KB size they will attach; over 200KB they won’t and an error message displays.

 

Compared to .jpg or .png file attachments, (as perhaps one might anticipate) the .pdf files do not appear as an image on the posting and - like .jpeg files - it’s necessary to click on the image-name link to view them.

[Deneb]

Derek Uzzell - 2019-11-12 2:42 PM

For me .pdf files attach exactly as other files do. Up to 200KB size they will attach; over 200KB they won’t and an error message displays.

 

Compared to .jpg or .png file attachments, (as perhaps one might anticipate) the .pdf files do not appear as an image on the posting and - like .jpeg files - it’s necessary to click on the image-name link to view them.

 

That is the behaviour I would expect, but if it works for you I think you must be special!

[Robinhood]

...I've never been able to attach any file above 100K in size.

 

Conversely, I've never had problems with uploaded/attached .jpg files displaying at the bottom of the post (no need to click the link).

 

AFAIK, the only way to get pictures to display "in-line" in text, is to externally host them and use bulletin board markup or HTML to embed the link at the point where you wish the image to display.

 

https://i.ibb.co/X3Np21d/DSC00714.jpg

 

Like the above, and I'm pretty sure that size limits don't apply in this case.

[Brian Kirby]

Deneb - 2019-11-12 2:02 PM...……………….One other thought. Do you have the Fiat radio unit with satnav (uConnect 5.0)? I do, although I specified it for other reasons than the satnav element, as I already knew it was a pretty poor implementation, hence why I prefer to use the Garmin device...……………..

No, third party DAB radio/CD. As supplied the radio housing was empty. However, I do wonder if the wiring and/or GPS antenna may be there in any case? If so, all we need is a sat nav with an external aerial input. Sorted? :-)

[Brian Kirby]

Robinhood - 2019-11-12 3:12 PM

 

...I've never been able to attach any file above 100K in size.

 

Conversely, I've never had problems with uploaded/attached .jpg files displaying at the bottom of the post (no need to click the link).

 

AFAIK, the only way to get pictures to display "in-line" in text, is to externally host them and use bulletin board markup or HTML to embed the link at the point where you wish the image to display.

 

https://i.ibb.co/X3Np21d/DSC00714.jpg

 

Like the above, and I'm pretty sure that size limits don't apply in this case.

Well that works for me, and I can see the image fine - but I've no idea what you're talking about!! :-D

[Robinhood]

...it is an image that is hosted elsewhere on a server on the web, Brian.

 

It could be one you find by browsing (and you can then copy the image address by right-clicking on it), or in this case, I've uploaded one of my images to a "hosting site", and am using an image address they've provided to me.

 

You can surround that image address with a bit of standard text, (code if you like) and insert it in your post.

 

The picture thus referenced is never uploaded to Warner's server, it is simply dragged into the display from its web location when you pull up the post with it in.

 

Accordingly, size is no longer an issue (and the picture displays in your post at the location where you've put the special text, rather than at the bottom as is the case with an uploaded picture - if that is working for you!).

 

A by-product of this methos is with the hosting site I've used, if you double click on the picture it will display a larger, low-res version, and also give the option to click that for a full resolution version. (which is quite a nice way of presenting a photograph)

[Brian Kirby]

Thank you Bob. Interesting, but I'm not that tech literate!

[Deneb]

Brian Kirby - 2019-11-12 3:30 PM

No, third party DAB radio/CD. As supplied the radio housing was empty. However, I do wonder if the wiring and/or GPS antenna may be there in any case? If so, all we need is a sat nav with an external aerial input. Sorted? :-)

 

According to the documents I have, vehicles supplied without a factory radio but with radio preparation are either supplied with an AM/FM antenna or an AM/FM/DAB antenna. Only vehicles fitted with the factory NAV unit have the additional GPS antenna, so on the face of it you are out of luck :-(

[Brian Kirby]

Hmmmmm. Thought you might say that! :-) Dommage!