This site is now in read-only archive mode. Please move all discussion, and create a new account at the new Victron Community site.
I bought a VE.Can to NMEA2000 cable. thinking it would show me lots of data, now I'm not so sure, and as Cerbo GX is limited to 2 Can connections only, I'm tempted to dispense with it.
I currently have a Multiplus and a REC BMS, connected, what data would these provide over NMEA2000 that I can not see already?
this cable primarily use case is to connect your Victron GX device to any NMEA 2000 network to share its data and make it useable for example by an MFD.
The Cerbo GX share almost every available info of its connected devices, like SmartShunt, MPPT, Inverter/Charger and so on. So basically you make this data available for your RV or Boat network and work with it.
Hope this helps.
Hi @Stefanie (Victron Energy Staff)
on the same topic, I have a 3rd party BMS connected to the CerboGX via VE.CAN, and now I would also like to connect the CerboGX to my SeaTalkNG network. as the CerboGX only has 1 VE.CAN, do you know if I could connect the CerboGX to a network switch, and from the switch to my BMS and a 2nd connection to SeaTalkNG?
Thank you in advance for your help
regards
Andres
Hi @andres Hs1,
VE.Can is physically the same as NMEA 2000 or SeaTalkNG. The Cerbo GX's VE.Can interface has two ports, allowing you to daisy chain the BMS and STNG at the same time. Just make sure the network is properly terminated at both ends.
Thanks @Stefanie (Victron Energy Staff)
quick follow up question
the CerboGX has 2 ve.can ports, one connected to the 3rd paty BMS and the other one directly to my Raymarine Axiom Raynet port
the CerboGX is also connected to the Multiplus, could I connect the Multiplus to the SeatalkNG network? I am asking as the port names are not the same
thanks
regards
Hi Andres,
VE.Can/NMEA 2000 is not Raynet (similar to Ethernet), so you cannot connect the Axiom via its Raynet port to the Cerbo GX's VE.Can port.
There are two ways to connect the GX to a Axiom:
1. Via VE.Can / NMEA 2000 using a VE.Can to NMEA2000 Micro C cable or
2. Via Ethernet and Raynet using a Raynet to Ethernet adapter cable (can be purchased from Raymarine)
I recommend having a read about all this here:
The same applies to the MultiPlus; The Multi has neither a VE.Can port nor an Ethernet port. It connects to the Cerbo GX via VE.Bus. Please be careful not to confuse the VE.Bus, VE.Can and Ethernet ports on the GX. They all use the same RJ45 connector, but are not electrically the same.
Hi Stefanie. I have just purchased a Cerbo GX and about to install it connecting my Axiom MFD. I have purchased the VE.Can to NMEA2000 Micro C cable and VE. Direct adaptor & Ethernet cable. The first option seems less straight forward than the ethernet cable, albeit this will require chasing the cable through 15m of cavities. My question? Is one option better in terms of data transfer than the other. Is there any (dis) advantage to connect both?
This is an old post but I suspect readers will have the same questions as I when it comes to ve.can and ethernet connections to Raymarine seatalk or raynet networks.
If anyone at Victron could correct incorrect or incomplete information in my response, I'd appreciate it.
There are two methods to connect a Raymarine Axiom system to the Cerbo:
1. Ethernet (Cerbo) <> RayNet (Raymarine)
2. VE.CAN (Cerbo) <> NMEA2k <> SeatalkNG (Raymarine)
The data sent via each is different:
Method 1 (ethernet) provides basic Victron power and battery status data to the Raymarine Victron app, but nothing else. It is a very limited connection, with no NMEA data received or sent. You do not have access to data on the N2K or SeaTalkNG network using this method.
Method 2 (VE.CAN): NMEA2K data is sent and received between the Raymarine and Victron Cerbo. This allows SignalK functionality such as reading N2K data (wind instruments, GPS, etc), and writing data to the Raymarine network that can be displayed on the Axiom display.
Based on this, it seems the VE.CAN <> NMEA/Seatalk integration is more powerful and flexible than the ethernet method.
