Strange routeing

Wrongstuff · Occasional Visitor Joined: Sep 15, 2005 Posts: 7

I have a garmin 1690 and wondered if anyone can explain or has the same problem with routeing.

If I plan to go from Milton Keynes to Kilmarnock when I first got the unit it would route M1 M6 M74 then strangely A75 A76 which is not the quickest route. If I put in the the intersection of M74/A70 as a via it knocks twenty minutes off the journey.

In the last six months it behaves even more oddly by routeing M1 either A50 across to the M6 or A66 across to the M6 neither of which are quickest. Coming back it does exactly the same thing.

It's not a real issue in terms of navigation, but it does screw up the traffic, which is why i have it turned on.

To get the routeing down or up the M6 I have to put in Southwaite, Stafford and Hilton Park services as vias to force it to route down the M6

I do this journey once a month and for instance coming back when it reckons that the fastest is via the A50 and I make the change it knocks up to forty mins off the journey time.

Thanks

M8TJT · Posted: Fri Aug 05, 2011 6:02 am Post subject:

Just a thought as I don't have a Garmin, Is there an option to set 'Quickest', 'Shortest' etc route? If so have you inadvertently set it to 'Shortest'?

Kremmen · Posted: Fri Aug 05, 2011 6:58 am Post subject:

From what I understand each road gets a series of 'parameters' attached to each map version. This is one of the reasons why new maps are often hopelessly out of date when they are released because they have to attach all manner of parameters to new roads and adjust existing parameters for roads that have been adjusted or now pseudo cul-de-sacs which also affects adjoining roads. Not a quick job I imagine.

When routeing is being calculated the software seems to take shortest and quickest into account and makes a decision for you that your requested shortest route is not a viable option and often gives you the quickest anyway.

My Honda/Alpine built in SatNav is just the same, it insists that Heathrow to Malvern has a shortest route of 129 miles whilst I can do it in 104. It decides that I must stay on the M40 instead of cutting across via Chipping Norton and Evesham which is far shorter and actually quicker at some times of day.

A few suitably places waypoints later and the journey is not only displayed as shorter but shows as quicker as well.

Funny thing is, MapPoint/AutoRoute does exactly what it's told and delivers the actual shortest or quickest route every time.
_________________
Satnav:
Garmin 2599 LMT-D (Indoor test rig)
DashCam:
Viofo A119 V3
Car Average MPG :

sussamb · Posted: Fri Aug 05, 2011 7:52 am Post subject:

tailz · Occasional Visitor Joined: Jul 03, 2008 Posts: 13

My 1690 is exactly the same, some of the routes it opts for leaves me stumped. on my way home from Mansfield to Kettering it tries to take me back roads all the way, if I ignore it and head down the M1/A14 it takes 15 minutes off the journey, even though it's about 20 miles further. I have quickest route set and no avoidances, so can only put it down to crap software.

Generally I only use mine if I am in a City as they can be difficult to navigate, so I have no idea if the routes selected then are any good or not. To be fair, it has got me out of some pretty bad spots, so it's not a total loss and always manages to get me home.

I have just accepted the fact that using it, will get me home eventually just not necessarily quickly.

Not any help to you but you are not alone, there are many threads covering strange routing from Garmin.

sussamb · Posted: Fri Aug 05, 2011 1:42 pm Post subject:

tailz · Occasional Visitor Joined: Jul 03, 2008 Posts: 13

sussamb · Posted: Fri Aug 05, 2011 3:38 pm Post subject:

Sorry, that comment not aimed at you Smile

I hear what you say about Autoroute, but then that's not in a PND that you can clip into your car, not sure you could get the computing power to do all of that plus all the other stuff your nuvi can do at the sort of price/size that makes sense. Would be good if you could though Wink

M8TJT · Posted: Fri Aug 05, 2011 4:50 pm Post subject:

Kremmen · Posted: Sat Aug 06, 2011 6:27 am Post subject:

I agree.

Yes a small PND would likely take considerably longer to calculate but I'm sure it would get there in the end.

I would be quite happy to let it chug away if it gave me the optimal route.
_________________
Satnav:
Garmin 2599 LMT-D (Indoor test rig)
DashCam:
Viofo A119 V3
Car Average MPG :

sussamb · Posted: Sat Aug 06, 2011 9:45 am Post subject:

mikealder · Posted: Sat Aug 06, 2011 9:57 am Post subject:

Most users of iGo will be using the software on a PDA or PDA based SmartPhone, iGo has also been released for iPhone but you don't need the Apple product to use iGo - Mike

M8TJT · Posted: Sat Aug 06, 2011 11:37 am Post subject:

sussamb · Posted: Sat Aug 06, 2011 12:07 pm Post subject:

Thanks for the clarification. I guess then that it's all being done using connected services, rather than storing/calculating everything in the device itself as 64MB wouldn't store the amount of mapping that most PNDs have? That's why it's able to do it, it's all being done on a server somewhere.

If I've got that wrong apologies, never really looked at smart phones!

mikealder · Posted: Sat Aug 06, 2011 12:37 pm Post subject:

The maps etc are stored on the device usually loaded to a memory card, if the hardware supports the SDHC format cards then anything up to and including 32GB is available for maps and application software.

This storage capacity is different to the 64MB/ 128MB or even 256MB of RAM fitted to the PDA/ SmartPhone. iGo doesn't need a data connection to work, everything is carried out locally on the device - Mike

	PocketGPS
	Web