Hi! We see you’re using an ad-blocker. We’re fine with that and won’t stop you visiting the site.
But as we’re losing ad-revenue from this then why not make a donation towards website running costs?. Or you could disable your ad-blocker for this site. We think you’ll find our adverts are not overbearing!
Joined: Mar 18, 2011 Posts: 4456 Location: West Sussex
Posted: Thu Sep 21, 2017 10:18 am Post subject:
M8TJT wrote:
Quote:
But even that depends on what a user believes is 'unavoidable'?
Unavoidable is not a user choice. It's when it is the only road available.
Well surely that would be daft? An A or B road might be available but could be tens of miles extra travelling, would you really then want to avoid a road simply because it's unclassified? _________________ Where there's a will ... there's a way.
Presumably, because it saved you .4 of a mile you are planning for shortest route ?
My experience with all SatNavs is never to use shortest* but always fastest.
The shortest v fastest is evident when they frequently take you off motorways and down and up slip roads where motorways bend because it is often shorter.
*I only use shortest when I have pre-planned the majority of the route and I only really need the Nav for the last few miles.
My unit was already set to fastest but even so, the route it sent me on was, according to google maps 2 minutes longer but .4 of a mile shorter to navigate. Knowing the road(s) concerned, that's about right.
I just planned the same route on basecamp and it sends me on the commonsense route, avoiding the narrow road in question. Why can't the unit do the same?
Any suggestions?
Last edited by topref on Thu Sep 21, 2017 11:26 am; edited 1 time in total
The problem here is that any satnav works by looking at a series of nodes that are connected by data that includes distance and speed limit. Many rural roads in the UK are classed as 60mph roads, though they can hardly be driven at that speed!
Stop defending the indefensible suss. They know about speed limits, tight bends, schools, wildlife crossings, etc. etc. So surely they must know about single track roads. If you select 'Fastest route', they should never ever try to take you down one unless it's unavoidable. Even Google street view didn't go down my 'pet' single track road at the co-ordinates given below.
Quote:
Your device also isn't a mind reader. You may not want to ever go on narrow roads but others will be quite happy to do so.
In that case the user should put in 'Shortest route'.
Quote:
All modern Garmin devices will offer up to 3 routes so choose the one that best suits your driving style. Any other issues can generally be sorted by looking at the map as you drive rather than blindly following the directions.
But you can't necessarily see that it's trying to take you down a single track road from looking at the routes offered. What about iGO's 'Scenic route' that minimises turns and junctions? Sometimes a good option. As they undoubtedly have the required data, what the devices need is an 'Avoid single track and unclassified roads' option.
Quote:
It does work both ways though. Often I've been in heavy slow moving traffic on major routes and by looking at the map have been able to pick a route around it by taking minor roads.
I 100% agree on that one.
I have just tried routing in my iGO, and all routes take me down my 'pet' single track road at 51.11882, 0.40243 on 2015 maps. Will try my Honda satnav and my iGO Truck later and report back.
What is strange though, is that Google maps gets it right and avoids the single track lane. So it can be done using google maps AND the correct (sensible) routing algorithms.
Exactly. To be fair, TT very very rarely sent me on very narrow roads.
But even that depends on what a user believes is 'unavoidable'?
Unavoidable is not a user choice. It's when it is the only road available.
Well surely that would be daft? An A or B road might be available but could be tens of miles extra travelling, would you really then want to avoid a road simply because it's unclassified?
But give me the choice, that's all I ask. The tracks I am regularly sent on are so narrow that the foliage on each side of the road touch my car.
I am going to travel the same route later with the setting set to shortest to see how it routes me.
Joined: Mar 18, 2011 Posts: 4456 Location: West Sussex
Posted: Thu Sep 21, 2017 11:59 am Post subject:
topref wrote:
I just planned the same route on basecamp and it sends me on the commonsense route, avoiding the narrow road in question. Why can't the unit do the same?
Any suggestions?
BaseCamp has many more routing and avoidance options, plus you can adjust the speeds on various road types. That's why BC routes can vary from your satnav. _________________ Where there's a will ... there's a way.
Joined: Mar 18, 2011 Posts: 4456 Location: West Sussex
Posted: Thu Sep 21, 2017 12:03 pm Post subject:
topref wrote:
But give me the choice, that's all I ask. The tracks I am regularly sent on are so narrow that the foliage on each side of the road touch my car.
Then make that suggestion via the link I posted. If enough do the same you might get your wish. You do appear though to live in a fairly rural area so surely must expect to use rural roads? _________________ Where there's a will ... there's a way.
But give me the choice, that's all I ask. The tracks I am regularly sent on are so narrow that the foliage on each side of the road touch my car.
You do appear though to live in a fairly rural area so surely must expect to use rural roads?
But in my original post I said that it regularly routes me off an A or B road on to a single track only to come back on to the same A or B road farther down the line!
Joined: Mar 03, 2006 Posts: 7040 Location: Reading
Posted: Thu Sep 21, 2017 1:09 pm Post subject:
sussamb wrote:
Strangely enough I've just hit the opposite problem. I'm due to visit some friends in Tonbridge. I live in Worthing and both BaseCamp and my Drive want to take me up the A23/M23, along the M25 and then down to Tonbridge. Distance of 65 miles and time of 64 minutes. I want to go via Lewes, putting in a via point I get the distance only being 47 miles (a saving of 17 miles) at a cost of 5 minutes.
Now I'm sure there are some who would prefer to go the extra 17 miles and save 5 minutes, but not me
That sort of routing is what my built in SatNav tries to do. Makes a 104 mile trip from Heathrow to Malvern into a 130 mile jaunt round the motorways.
I ask it to calculate 3 routes and one of them is the 104 mile trip.
Humble pie time ....... MapPoint does the same. I had to put in a waypoint near Crowborough _________________ Satnav:
Garmin 2599 LMT-D (Indoor test rig)
DashCam:
Viofo A119 V3
Car Average MPG :
If it is via Tunbridge Wells and Lewes, then the M23, M25 route will be quicker! Trust me. The A26 from Lewes in not that quick and I avoid going through Southborough to Tonbridge for good reason.
The problem here is that any satnav works by looking at a series of nodes that are connected by data that includes distance and speed limit. Many rural roads in the UK are classed as 60mph roads, though they can hardly be driven at that speed!
Stop defending the indefensible suss. They know about speed limits, tight bends, schools, wildlife crossings, etc. etc. So surely they must know about single track roads. If you select 'Fastest route', they should never ever try to take you down one unless it's unavoidable. Even Google street view didn't go down my 'pet' single track road at the co-ordinates given below.
Quote:
Your device also isn't a mind reader. You may not want to ever go on narrow roads but others will be quite happy to do so.
In that case the user should put in 'Shortest route'.
Quote:
All modern Garmin devices will offer up to 3 routes so choose the one that best suits your driving style. Any other issues can generally be sorted by looking at the map as you drive rather than blindly following the directions.
But you can't necessarily see that it's trying to take you down a single track road from looking at the routes offered. What about iGO's 'Scenic route' that minimises turns and junctions? Sometimes a good option. As they undoubtedly have the required data, what the devices need is an 'Avoid single track and unclassified roads' option.
Quote:
It does work both ways though. Often I've been in heavy slow moving traffic on major routes and by looking at the map have been able to pick a route around it by taking minor roads.
I 100% agree on that one.
I have just tried routing in my iGO, and all routes take me down my 'pet' single track road at 51.11882, 0.40243 on 2015 maps. Will try my Honda satnav and my iGO Truck later and report back.
What is strange though, is that Google maps gets it right and avoids the single track lane. So it can be done using google maps AND the correct (sensible) routing algorithms.
I whole-heartedly agree with your comments M8TJT and since the pre-planning a route for a Garmin device is also next to useless (unless of course you want to add lots of intermediate waypoints to stop it completely messing up your route if you happen to deviate just a few feet off it), I am going to return to using my TomTom as my main sat nav. I tested it today and was impressed that when I went slightly off-route, it gave an audio alert to say that it was planning a route back to my track, plus I have discovered that I can export routes to the TomTom from MyRoute-app over the Internet without even having to connect the sat nav to a computer or wi-fi network.
They know about speed limits, tight bends, schools, wildlife crossings, etc. etc. So surely they must know about single track roads. If you select 'Fastest route', they should never ever try to take you down one unless it's unavoidable.
But even that depends on what a user believes is 'unavoidable'?
And it's too simplistic to say that if you're happy to go down single track roads then you should select shortest route. Otherwise you might be taken cross country all the time.
Fact is no matter what options you include you won't please everyone.
Garmin, TT etc sell because they do what most users want most of the time. There will always be examples that don't suit some users but others are happy with. Garmin, and perhaps TT, provide a web site for user feedback, and if they get enough folks asking for the same capability then they introduce it. Best way forward is to make any suggestions there.
Hmm, my experience is that the likes of TomTom and Garmin largely ignore problems raised by their users or keep asking them to provide more information/examples or else come back with some meaningless waffle or vague promises that the highlighted problems are being looked into. In reality, these problems, such as the narrow country lanes problem, just go on and on for years. And no, I don't believe that "Garmin, TT etc sell because they do what most users want most of the time." I think they sell because they don't have any real competition. If there were many other well-known brands of consumer products making satellite navigation systems and providing the features that the customers of Garmin and TomTom have been asking for for years, then there would be a mass exodus. Until that happens, I don't believe they will take any notice of what we have to say.
Presumably, because it saved you .4 of a mile you are planning for shortest route ?
My experience with all SatNavs is never to use shortest* but always fastest.
The shortest v fastest is evident when they frequently take you off motorways and down and up slip roads where motorways bend because it is often shorter.
*I only use shortest when I have pre-planned the majority of the route and I only really need the Nav for the last few miles.
My unit was already set to fastest but even so, the route it sent me on was, according to google maps 2 minutes longer but .4 of a mile shorter to navigate. Knowing the road(s) concerned, that's about right.
I just planned the same route on basecamp and it sends me on the commonsense route, avoiding the narrow road in question. Why can't the unit do the same?
Any suggestions?
Good question - that's what I was wondering. Also, the Garmin sat nav will overwrite your chosen route if you dare to move even a few feet off it while driving - how stupid is that?
But give me the choice, that's all I ask. The tracks I am regularly sent on are so narrow that the foliage on each side of the road touch my car.
You do appear though to live in a fairly rural area so surely must expect to use rural roads?
But in my original post I said that it regularly routes me off an A or B road on to a single track only to come back on to the same A or B road farther down the line!
I was travelling north through Great Malvern again yesterday and my "wonderful" sat nav once again tried to get me to divert right off the main road, down a steep hill, to a T junction, back up another steep hill and then the worst part, back onto the main road I would have just left, via a right-hand turn on a steep slope. Weird or what?
Posted: Today Post subject: Pocket GPS Advertising
We see you’re using an ad-blocker. We’re fine with that and won’t stop you visiting the site.
Have you considered making a donation towards website running costs?. Or you could disable your ad-blocker for this site. We think you’ll find our adverts are not overbearing!
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Or you could disable your ad-blocker for this site. We think you’ll find our adverts are not overbearing!
Hi! We see you’re using an ad-blocker. We’re fine with that and won’t stop you visiting the site.
But as we’re losing ad-revenue from this then why not make a donation towards website running costs?. Or you could disable your ad-blocker for this site. We think you’ll find our adverts are not overbearing!
Forum FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Profile
Log in for private messages
Log in
