Is it true?

[TylerMack]

In simulation mode, I conducted a test to observe the behavior of the XT when selecting the 3rd waypoint as the next destination upon initiating a route. My objective was to establish whether the XT disregards all waypoints between the current location and the chosen entry point. Regrettably, I couldn't confirm this due to simulation mode commencing the route at the selected entry point. Kindly inform me whether the XT indeed bypasses all waypoints between the current location and the selected starting point. Furthermore, if it does, does the recalibration to the chosen entry point trigger a recalculation of the entire route?

[Peobody]

Kindly inform me whether the XT indeed bypasses all waypoints between the current location and the selected starting point.

Yes, it does.

Furthermore, if it does, does the recalibration to the chosen entry point trigger a recalculation of the entire route?

That is a good question. I believe it does but I am not certain. My sense is than any time the XT needs to do any calculation related to a pre-planned route that it includes the remainder of the route.

[FrankB]

Regrettably, I couldn't confirm this due to simulation mode commencing the route at the selected entry point.

When you put the XT in simulator mode, you can change 'its position'. See this post: viewtopic.php?p=15186&hilit=simulator#p15186

Furthermore, if it does, does the recalibration to the chosen entry point trigger a recalculation of the entire route?

As @Peobody I'm not 100 % sure. But I think the remainder of the route is not recalculated. In my tests it never did, but that's no proof.

[lkraus]

Yes, to the first question. By selecting an entry point other than the start, you are asking it take you directly to that point, so any route points prior to that point are ignored.

In my experience, the answer to the second question is effectively no. The portion of the route after the new entry point will be the same as if the route was entered at the start point.

[Peobody]

I have done some testing and now believe that @FrankB and @lkraus are correct in that the remainder of the route is not recalculated. I say that solely based on the calculation time after tapping Go.

Off topic though is my observation that using mostly non-alerting points in routes severely limits the options for selecting an entry point.
Laughable was one route that I attempted to use for testing. It had 18 shaping points along with Start and End, and those were the same. You can picture the three options for selecting an entry point; the first and third were the same (Start & End), the second was "Closest entry point". It was one of the first routes I ever created. My recent routes have a mix of shaping and via points. I was surprised by how many of them lacked a reasonable alternative entry point due to the limited number of via points. By "reasonable" I mean that I was looking at them with the intent of shortening the travel time by letting the XT find faster roads to a route point well down route. This has me once again questioning my use of shaping and via points.

[FrankB]

Off topic though is my observation that using mostly non-alerting points in routes severely limits the options for selecting an entry point.

Let me continue off-topic!
In itself that's true. But on the road it's seldom a problem for me:
- Choosing 'Closest Entry Point' is usually enough to get it done.
- Point on the map and say 'Go'. It helps if you always have the track corresponding with the route visible.

When preparing routes I usually keep them small. (250-300 Km's)
And of course you can create and send Waypoints (Not part of the route, but selectable in 'Where to/Saved') Once you have arrived at the Waypoint you can restart the route.

Guess it all comes down to what you like best. Or should I say: What you dislike least?

[lkraus]

Off topic though is my observation that using mostly non-alerting points in routes severely limits the options for selecting an entry point.

It is pretty easy to change a shaping point to a via point on the XT, which then becomes an option as an entry. The only tricky part is knowing which shaping point to change, since I usually do not take the time to assign sequential names to my route points.

[Peobody]

It is pretty easy to change a shaping point to a via point on the XT, ...

Indeed it is. It is SO easy that it can be done inadvertently. This is one place where I wouldn't mind a "Do you want to change this shaping point to a via point?" prompt. Unfortunately, doing so triggers a recalculation of the route and permanently changes the route in internal storage. This bit me on my last trip.

[lkraus]

I have not seen a route change after changing a shaping to a via point.

On the other hand, changing a via to a shaping point triggers a bug which moves the point to a different location, causing a recalculation. Then you better have a lot of shaping points so the XT has few alternative roads available.

Though I suppose if you accidentally change a shaping to a via, and then try to change it back...
Probably better to accept the mistake rather than correct it.

[jfheath]

When selecting the third Via point as the start, the zumos take you direct to that third point. It is basically asking where you want to start navigating your plotted route. Think of a number of friends all given the same route, but joining up part way through.
This point is illustrated here : app.php/ZXT-P32

The route may need to be calculated on transfer or loading. Selecting the 'next destination' does not recalculate the remainder.

The XT repositions the bike at the location of the chosen 'destination' when under simulation.

Changing shaping to via is instant and no recalculation takes place.

Change via to shaping often moves the point onto the faster route to the next route point.

Keep changing it back and forth, and the same happens, but curiously the new shaping point seems to keep getting nudged along the road.

The 595 and XT will change the name of route points - probably - ie more times than not. This renders them useless for identifying where you are by the name of the point. However, if you create points as Waypoints first, name them and save them and use these in your route, the Zumo will not alter their name.

I suspect that neither will it alter its location if you change it to a shaping point either. I haven't tested this, but waypoints are stored elsewhere and identified twice in the gpx file. Once as a waypoint and again when the point is used in the route as a via or shaping point.
But I don't think that I have ever tested this to confirm.

Selecting Closest Entry Point will change the nature of the route so that it behaves more like a Trip-Track than a route. This along with Skip may result in the RUT behaviour that I identified and named, and for which @FrankB identified a solution.