This site uses cookies to offer you a better browsing experience. Find out more about how to manage cookies, or dismiss this message and continue to use cookies.

Why does the Nuvi keep trying to take me on back roads?

1356716

Comments

  • Good to know Tim. Just baffling (to me) that this isn't an easily understood and fixable issue. Perhaps if Garmin would participate in these forums we would know. Failing that we're left with going to the opposition strictly for unreliable routing issues-the essence of a PND.

    Mike
  • Not being argumentative...
    just have a different experience with my 765,
    it does just fine for my uses - yes, anything could be 'better'.....

    but it is just a tool, still up to us to use it or not....

    How many other products drive us crazy?

    a letter writing campaign to stop the destruction of our economy seems more important than this to me YRMV :)
  • I'm all for that but afraid that issue is totally off the rails.
  • So why are you even in this discussion? Most of us have spent in excess of $250 and we depend on this device to be relatively accurate. Sending us on 90 minute side trips is a pretty significant flaw as evidenced by the length of this thread and now Garmin's involvement. If you don't have an issue go somewhere you feel is worthy of your time.
  • Tim 1480 Points
    So why are you even in this discussion?
    It is worthy to set some sort of context around just how many people might be, or might not be impacted. Although there are dozens of people out there reporting this issue, there are millions of Nuvi owners out there. We tend to think that if a few people report an issue-- that the issue is widespread. That turns out not to always be the case.

    It is also good to get datapoints from people with different models, different map versions, and different application versions to try to track down just where the problem exists. If people who didn't have the problem didn't report in then we might incorrectly assume the issue impacts ALL devices. From the various people reporting no issue we know that isn't the case and additional reports can help narrow down the problem.
  • So why are you even in this discussion?

    It is worthy to set some sort of context around just how many people might be, or might not be impacted. Although there are dozens of people out there reporting this issue, there are millions of Nuvi owners out there. We tend to think that if a few people report an issue-- that the issue is widespread. That turns out not to always be the case.

    It is also good to get datapoints from people with different models, different map versions, and different application versions to try to track down just where the problem exists. If people who didn't have the problem didn't report in then we might incorrectly assume the issue impacts ALL devices. From the various people reporting no issue we know that isn't the case and additional reports can help narrow down the problem.

    Sorry, but I disagree slightly. I think most people who have GPS units probably use them infrequently... and only to places that they have no idea where they are. Even if they do notice that the unit has routed them poorly, most people probably wouldn't bother contacting Garmin or posting on a forum about the issue. It's up to the frequent heavy users, such as the posters on this thread to bring up issues that others don't see or simply live with. I sure hope that Garmin is taking this issue seriously, and not taking the stance that since only a few people are reporting problems it isn't a big issue. Word of mouth can be a very powerful tool, and report of major routing issues could eventually make an impact on Garmin.

    If Garmin is serious about resolving the issue, please have them let us know what they need from us to help. I would be more than happy to give them specific examples. (Actually, I have opened a support ticket with Garmin quite a while ago but have not heard anything back from them). I'm sure the others on this thread would help as well.
  • Tim 1480 Points
    Sorry, but I disagree slightly. I think most people who have GPS units probably use them infrequently... and only to places that they have no idea where they are. Even if they do notice that the unit has routed them poorly, most people probably wouldn't bother contacting Garmin or posting on a forum about the issue. It's up to the frequent heavy users, such as the posters on this thread to bring up issues that others don't see or simply live with.
    I'm not sure what you disagree with. I agree that most people wouldn't notice or report the issue. But it is an important datapoint to hear from people who do use them frequently, are GPS "experts", and don't see any issues. That is just as good data to have.
  • I totally agree. Again maybe I'm missing something but I can take a 255 with current firmware and maps and a 1350 with current firmware and maps (all preferences identical) and prove that one routes me to Chicago via HWY 41 and the other via I-94. Both using 'fastest time' opton.

    What more do they need?

    Mike
  • Sorry, but I disagree slightly. I think most people who have GPS units probably use them infrequently... and only to places that they have no idea where they are. Even if they do notice that the unit has routed them poorly, most people probably wouldn't bother contacting Garmin or posting on a forum about the issue. It's up to the frequent heavy users, such as the posters on this thread to bring up issues that others don't see or simply live with.

    I'm not sure what you disagree with. I agree that most people wouldn't notice or report the issue. But it is an important datapoint to hear from people who do use them frequently, are GPS "experts", and don't see any issues. That is just as good data to have.
    Tim I agree with you on the whole but disagree that this is a limited spectrum problem.
  • Tim 1480 Points
    Tim I agree with you on the whole but disagree that this is a limited spectrum problem.
    I didn't say it was-- just that we wouldn't be able to know if it was widespread or not if nobody was chiming in to say "works for me". Reading forums can sometimes be like evaluating the overall health of a region by visiting an emergency room... it doesn't give you the full picture due to statistical biases. I do think this is a relatively big issue which is why I mentioned this issue to the twitter crowd.
  • It is worthy to set some sort of context around just how many people might be, or might not be impacted. Although there are dozens of people out there reporting this issue, there are millions of Nuvi owners out there. We tend to think that if a few people report an issue-- that the issue is widespread. That turns out not to always be the case.
    Context? While there may be millions of Garmin owners very few will spend the time to register for this type of forum.

    Lets take the 7x5 freezing bug as an example. That was a known bug which affected almost all 7x5 units. And yet how many people reported the problem on this site? Less than a hundred. So are we to assume that the bug only affected a hundred users. Hardly.
  • Tim 1480 Points
    Context? While there may be millions of Garmin owners very few will spend the time to register for this type of forum.
    I agree- that is part of my point. We only hear from a certain type of person. Thus there is a statistical bias.
  • Man after reading this thread, I'm not so sure if I should purchase the 765t or not. I currently have a 350. Anyone want me to test a route on that model to see if it's any different?
  • cuc tu 91 Points
    It is worthy to set some sort of context around just how many people might be, or might not be impacted. Although there are dozens of people out there reporting this issue, there are millions of Nuvi owners out there. We tend to think that if a few people report an issue-- that the issue is widespread. That turns out not to always be the case.


    Context? While there may be millions of Garmin owners very few will spend the time to register for this type of forum.

    Lets take the 7x5 freezing bug as an example. That was a known bug which affected almost all 7x5 units. And yet how many people reported the problem on this site? Less than a hundred. So are we to assume that the bug only affected a hundred users. Hardly.


    This is a good point. It is all relative. I'm sure Garmin weighs the number of complaints. If a problem that affected every 765T owner was only reported by 100 consumers, i'm sure a problem that wsa reported by 10 or 20 would get adequate attention.



    BTW, Tim. I cannot see what I posting below the visible area of my text box. the dang scroll bar keeps jumping back up to the top...
  • It is worthy to set some sort of context around just how many people might be, or might not be impacted. Although there are dozens of people out there reporting this issue, there are millions of Nuvi owners out there. We tend to think that if a few people report an issue-- that the issue is widespread. That turns out not to always be the case.


    Context? While there may be millions of Garmin owners very few will spend the time to register for this type of forum.

    Lets take the 7x5 freezing bug as an example. That was a known bug which affected almost all 7x5 units. And yet how many people reported the problem on this site? Less than a hundred. So are we to assume that the bug only affected a hundred users. Hardly.




    This is a good point. It is all relative. I'm sure Garmin weighs the number of complaints. If a problem that affected every 765T owner was only reported by 100 consumers, i'm sure a problem that wsa reported by 10 or 20 would get adequate attention.



    BTW, Tim. I cannot see what I posting below the visible area of my text box. the dang scroll bar keeps jumping back up to the top...

    Garmin wouldn't be having all these problems if they would test their products thoroughly before putting therm on the market. I'm not about to spend my time testing and debugging their products for them unless they want to compensate handsomely me for my time.

    I went through this with computer software that I purchased for $20,000 + back in the mid 80's...I eventually sued the company and the dealer...the dealer filed for bankruptcy and I settled with the company for the services my company rendered to them to debug their programing , so it would function as promised.

    In this case Garmin will have to get it's act together or I will not be purchasing any more of their products in the future....Which will be their loss not mine.
  • dequardo 0 Points
    edited August 2009
    I agree Bulliever. I prefer the Garmin map display and overall UI over all competitors but right now I'm fleeing them and using those competitor products. I must say I find Tomtom's TeleAtlas mapping very impressive lately. Their UI still lags Garmin's but the first rule of GPS is it has to route you properly based on your preference. Garmin simply does not provide that across their entire line now. Quite frankly, since they themselves seem to not know what the problem is I'm afraid any currently properly working models (12xx, 13xx IMO) may well be rendered worsened by any future upgrade.

    They've got the routing algorithm messed up on the xx5 models-simple as that. If they would at least PUBLICLY acknowledge that they KNOW about the issue AND are actively working on it I'd feel quite a bit better.

    I'm taking a trip in two weeks. Whatever PND make and model I use for that will be the one I use for at least the next year+. Right now that will not be a Garmin. I've also cautioned several family members and friends similarly. Over a relatively short time this can be a real problem for Garmin in the marketplace. Bad news travels fast these days.

    I think they should spend less money on Christmas ads and move that to R&D and QC.
  • Is this now a dead issue or has someone heard back from Garmin on a fix?
  • NetPro 0 Points
    They've got the routing algorithm messed up on the xx5 models-simple as that.
    This issue is not across the entire xx5 line; I have an 885T with 2010.10 maps and I do not have this problem. I have tested it multiple times and the problem just isn't there.

    I recently purchased a lifetime map upgrade subscription (to upgrade to .20) but have not yet received it. when I do, I'll install it and test for this bug.
    Of course, I'll make backups of everything as it is now, just in case.
  • So why are you even in this discussion?

    It is worthy to set some sort of context around just how many people might be, or might not be impacted. Although there are dozens of people out there reporting this issue, there are millions of Nuvi owners out there. We tend to think that if a few people report an issue-- that the issue is widespread. That turns out not to always be the case.

    It is also good to get datapoints from people with different models, different map versions, and different application versions to try to track down just where the problem exists. If people who didn't have the problem didn't report in then we might incorrectly assume the issue impacts ALL devices. From the various people reporting no issue we know that isn't the case and additional reports can help narrow down the problem.
    How can we best collect the data needed by Garmin to troubleshoot this issue? Should we pick a specific route that is troublesome and have the readers of this forum submit their data? You had mentioned that Garmin is following this thread. Just wondering if you have heard if they have made any progress... or if there is any other information we can provide to help. I for one would be willing to help Garmin troubleshoot if they are serious about fixing the issue. Just let us know what they need.
  • If you agree with my 8/3 post it's elementary.
  • Tim 1480 Points
    I know they are aware of the thread-- beyond that they won't give any info. I'm not sure how well they've identified the issue or not. They won't really acknowledge that there is an issue.

    If people wanted to try to isolate the issue, I think people should agree on a route that is particularly bad then figure out exactly which combination of (a) device model, (b) firmware version, and (c) map version exhibit the behavior and which combinations of those three items create a reasonable route between the same two points. People would also need to agree on a set of routing preferences/avoidances to test from.

    There are clearly people who have combinations of those three items that are not exhibiting this problem. We would need to find a route which appears very unreasonable both for people with local knowledge and those without local knowledge.

    Perhaps the work would be mute and perhaps they know the specific issue already-- Garmin is mum on the issue. But a more systematic process to help pinpoint the circumstances that produce a terrible route would be handy.
  • I just purchased a 275T for my daughter, and after the first day of use I was already concerned, as we traveled a route that after the first exit on the highway the Nuvi should do what my Magellan would do - recalculate the route and continue on that highway. Instead, the Nuvi would tell us to make a u-turn at each exit, which would make the trip longer and longer. Having now found this forum, and reading the various posts, it is clear that this problem is not new, and that Garmin has no clue or doesn't care enough to fix the problem. The various suggestions by some posters are just too labor intensive. For those who are still within the return time frame, it seems the only obvious choice is to return the product and either go with a different model that may not be experiencing this issue, or go with another manufacturer. I have been fairly content with my Magellan, but after using some Nuvi's from relatives while on vacation I started enjoying their UI enough that I made the switch for my daughter. However, as she is one of my most precious "assets", I can't afford to use a product for her that appears to be totally unreliable.
  • Tennisnut, your issue could well be simply checking 'U-Turns' in the avoidances preferences.

    That said, your main sentiments are shared. I REALLY wanted to use a 255W but simply can not trust any of the routing having seen major algorithm problems in 3 major cities so far. I've returned it, bought a Tom Tom 340s which routes flawlessly, and have advised many friends and other folks here to avoid Garmin.

    That should be concerning enough I would think to Garmin. Again I have and can describe to them the exact issue and how to see routing errors between two of their devices. If they don't seem to care, goodness knows I don't.

    Mike
  • cuc tu 91 Points
    I know this aint gonna help, but...

    a coworker has a watch-type GPS (I think non-garmin) that would route him off the highway and then back on. It got him the first time, but he just started ignoring it after a while.
  • I don't have the unit in front of me to see what preferences are set, but I have used a GPS long enough to know some basics.

    I know, for instance, that no GPS is perfect, and it may make mistakes or tell me a route when I know another route is better. I also know that sometimes having the GPS tell me to make a u-turn is a good thing. If I just missed my exit or turn, a u-turn may be the next best move for some period of time. But I also know at some point the unit needs to realize that there are viable alternate routes, and then needs to recalculate and provide another route. So I don't know that I want to solve an issue by telling the GPS not to advise when u-turns might be the answer, and I certainly know I don't want the answer to be to train my daughter to just ignore the unit when it gives off certain information. Because where exactly do we then decide when to listen to the unit and when to ignore it? Do we only listen when we know that it is wrong? If that were the case, then we really wouldn't need these devices, now would we?
  • It boils down to trust. Do you trust the 275? I no longer trust the 255. As such I switched. And I would never let my daughter use a 255
  • dc9mm2 0 Points
    It sounds like we need to have other people here try routes that some of the people here are complaining about . We could just simulate the route and see which models have a problems. But the explantion of the trouble routes arent very good here.We need an "exact" starting point of a route that you have trouble with and an "exact" end point then others can simulate the route and report back. GPS cordinates would work best for start and end of route. So give us some start and end points so i and other can see how our gps routes us. Then just say what gps model and what maps. Seems like an easy way to see which GPS models or maps cause a problem. Just a crazy thought.
    So give me a start and end point and i will give the route a try in simulation mode. Iam kinda curous if my 855 has a problem or not. I havent used mine much so it would be nice to know if its good at routing or not.
  • mvl 191 Points
    Just a thought here:

    Garmin's are supposed to have a road-class learning engine. The more you drive the more it tunes to certain road classes. It's possible that, out-of-the-box, or with a new map, all road classes are at similar speeds, so it takes "shortest" routes.

    My Accord nav has a similar learning engine, and I thought it gave pretty good directions until I upgraded my map a few years ago. After the upgrade, the directions were terrible, but they improved a bit after a few months.

    Personally, I've felt that you can't trust navigation directions unless they have time-of-day historical info in their roads. Tomtom has IQroutes and Magellan has predictive traffic, hopefully Garmin gets on board soon.

    Another , more sinister, thought is that Garmin may have a Navteq Traffic Pattens or cell-probe traffic solution soon. And they could be deliberately dumbing down their latest maps so that users can see a bigger difference in the jump to the new technology.
  • That's black helicopter and urban legend stuff. I trust the IQroutes routes from TT. I no longer trust Garmin routing. A shame.
  • It sounds like we need to have other people here try routes that some of the people here are complaining about . We could just simulate the route and see which models have a problems. But the explantion of the trouble routes arent very good here.We need an "exact" starting point of a route that you have trouble with and an "exact" end point then others can simulate the route and report back. GPS cordinates would work best for start and end of route. So give us some start and end points so i and other can see how our gps routes us. Then just say what gps model and what maps. Seems like an easy way to see which GPS models or maps cause a problem. Just a crazy thought.
    So give me a start and end point and i will give the route a try in simulation mode. Iam kinda curous if my 855 has a problem or not. I havent used mine much so it would be nice to know if its good at routing or not.
    I'll start things off. Someone else in the thread mentioned issues when routing to Chicago. Try this route from the Pfister in Milwaukee to the Willis (Sears) tower in Chicago.

    424 E Wisconsin Ave, Milwaukee, WI 53202-4436
    331 S Franklin St, Chicago, IL 60606-7108

    The Garmin has you exit 1B left to US-41 S Waukegan, then to Skokie Hwy. This is not the fastest route by far. Bing, Yahoo and my older than hell TOMTOM all say to stay on the interstate until exit 51H. Bing, Yahoo and TOMTOM all give the exact same route... and I believe it is optimal.

    Here is my info:

    Model number: 765T
    Map version: 2009.11
    Software: 3.6
    Route Preference: Faster Time
    Avoidances: Disabled

    Here is the full route given on the Garmin if interested:



    Right on Jackson St
    Right to i-794 W to i-43/I-94
    Exit 1B left to i-94/US-41 to I-43 S/Chicago
    Keep Left onto I-94/US-41 to Chicago
    Exit 1B left to US-41 S to Waukegan (This is where it messes up)
    Keep left on Skokie Hwy
    Keep left on Skokie Hwy
    Keep right on i-90 E
    keep left onto i-90 e/i-94 e to Dan Ryan Expy
    Exit 51H-I right to I-290 W to West Suburbs
    Exit 51I left to Congress Pkwy to Chicago Loop
    Right to Wacker Dr
    Keep right onto Franklin St
    Arrive at 331 S Franklin St on right

    (BTW... anyone notice that at least 25% of the time the whole arrive on left/right thing is wrong?)
  • alanb 539 Points
    Thanks for posting this garddog32. It helps those of us who have not witnessed the routing problem see an example. I have a 755T with 2010.20 maps and 3.60 software. I get the same bad route on the newer maps that you do on the 2009.11 maps.
  • Tim 1480 Points
    The Garmin has you exit 1B left to US-41 S Waukegan, then to Skokie Hwy. This is not the fastest route by far. Bing, Yahoo and my older than hell TOMTOM all say to stay on the interstate until exit 51H. Bing, Yahoo and TOMTOM all give the exact same route... and I believe it is optimal.
    I fear opening a big can of worms here and I should probably keep my mouth shut. But my honest opinion, as a back seat driver who admittedly doesn't know the area, is that the route the Garmin picked isn't that bad. Is it perfect? Probably not. Is it the fastest? Probably not.

    When I pulled up the route in Google as Google thought was best, and compared it to what your Nuvi showed as best, there was little difference in estimated time. Google showed an estimate of 1:45 for their route, and Google showed 1:48 for the route the Nuvi picked. Three minutes difference over nearly two hours.

    In Yahoo, the route you liked was shown as 1:41 while the route your Nuvi liked was shown as 1:43. The difference here was even slimmer.

    I pulled it up on the TomTom too with the IQ routes data. It showed that the route you like is about seven minutes faster (1:47) over what it says for the route your Nuvi picked (1:54). This larger time split is still only about a 7% difference.

    So in my opinion you are probably right that the route picked by the Nuvi isn't truely the fastest-- but the difference is within what I would consider a tolerable amount.
  • The Garmin has you exit 1B left to US-41 S Waukegan, then to Skokie Hwy. This is not the fastest route by far. Bing, Yahoo and my older than hell TOMTOM all say to stay on the interstate until exit 51H. Bing, Yahoo and TOMTOM all give the exact same route... and I believe it is optimal.

    I fear opening a big can of worms here and I should probably keep my mouth shut. But my honest opinion, as a back seat driver who admittedly doesn't know the area, is that the route the Garmin picked isn't that bad. Is it perfect? Probably not. Is it the fastest? Probably not.

    When I pulled up the route in Google as Google thought was best, and compared it to what your Nuvi showed as best, there was little difference in estimated time. Google showed an estimate of 1:45 for their route, and Google showed 1:48 for the route the Nuvi picked. Three minutes difference over nearly two hours.

    In Yahoo, the route you liked was shown as 1:41 while the route your Nuvi liked was shown as 1:43. The difference here was even slimmer.

    I pulled it up on the TomTom too with the IQ routes data. It showed that the route you like is about seven minutes faster (1:47) over what it says for the route your Nuvi picked (1:54). This larger time split is still only about a 7% difference.

    So
    in my opinion you are probably right that the route picked by the Nuvi isn't truely the fastest-- but the difference is within what I would consider a tolerable amount.
    You really can't use the estimated time to determine what is the fastest route.... especially since the reason that this thread was started is because the Nuvi is not calculating local road travel time correctly. I can tell you that taking the Nuvi route is much slower that the optimal route. Even if it is only a 7% difference... it's still a more optimal route that the Nuvi should find.

    If someone has a better route to use... fine.. Otherwise let's stop screwing around and see if we can get this problem fixed!!!!! The route I gave is not optimal and that has been confirmed by a local user (me) and at least three other mapping systems.
  • FWIW I agree generally with Tim's comments but specifically with garddog32. No one wanting to get to the Sears Tower via 'fastest' would follow the Garmin routing and I don't know how the relative times are established but there's much greater time difference than what is shown via web.
  • Here is another example. This one shows how the Garmin way underestimates the time to travel on local roads. I drive this general route many times a week. I have tried the Garmin route 3 or 4 times, and found it to be at least 10 minutes longer than what it thinks it is.

    From: Blockbuster in Grafton, WI

    1967 Wisconsin Ave, Grafton, WI 53024-2605

    To: Blockbuster in Wauwatosa, WI

    6102 W North Ave, Wauwatosa, WI 53213-1530

    Garmin says it is 22.7 miles and 29 minutes. Taking the Garmin route actually takes more like 40 minutes: Here is the Garmin route:

    South on Wisconsin
    Left on Green Bay Rd
    Right on Green Bay Road
    Left on Lakefield
    Right on Port Washington
    Left On Pioneer Rd
    Right on I-43 S
    Exit 73B right to North Ave. (This is wrong. City stree with many stop/go lights)
    Arrive at 6102......


    My TOMTOM and Bing give this route... which they say is 32 minutes... and is actually correct at 32 minutes. This is longer than the 29 minutes the Garmin says it will take, but much shorter than the actual 40 minutes the Garmin route takes:

    1 Depart Wisconsin AveHide Start details 0.2 mi
    2 Turn left, and then immediately turn right onto Green Bay Rd 0.7 mi
    3 Turn left onto CR-T / Lakefield Rd 1.8 mi
    4 Turn right onto CR-W / N Port Washington Rd 1.0 mi
    5 Turn left onto CR-C / W Pioneer Rd 0.1 mi
    6 Take ramp right for I-43 South 17.1 mi
    7 At exit 72B, take ramp right for I-94 West toward Madison 2.3 mi
    8 At exit 308C, take ramp right and follow signs for US-41 North 2.0 mi
    9 Turn left to stay on US-41 / W Lisbon Ave 0.1 mi
    10 Bear left onto W North Ave 0.8 mi
    11 Arrive at 6102 W North AveHide End details The last intersection is N 61st St

    So as you can see, you cannot use the Garmin arrive time since that is part of what is broken to begin with.

    I hope all of this helps Garmin understand the issue and work towards a resolution.
  • Tim 1480 Points
    You really can't use the estimated time to determine what is the fastest route
    IQ Routes data is based on the actual driving time of over 8 million TomTom users across 6 billion miles of roads. If we are not going to use the estimates from multiple mapping providers across multiple GPS brands and multiple online mapping services, then you need to go drive the routes yourself multiple times over multiple times of day and days of week to produce statistical data that says otherwise.

    As I said above, I agree the route the Garmin picked probably isn't the best. And the estimates could be further off than what all of the systems describe. But we haven't seen anything but anecdotal data to dispute it.
  • Tim 1480 Points
    Even if it is only a 7% difference... it's still a more optimal route that the Nuvi should find.
    Then your expectations are different than mine. I'm not saying you are expecting too much-- just that our expectations are different. If over a route that takes about 1:45 the GPS picks a route that is 10 minutes slower than the best route, I'm fine with that. If I know there is a better way, I'll take it. If it is an unfamiliar area then I won't know it took me longer than it could have and I'll probably get to where I'm going on-time anyway.
  • You really can't use the estimated time to determine what is the fastest route

    IQ Routes data is based on the actual driving time of over 8 million TomTom users across 6 billion miles of roads. If we are not going to use the estimates from multiple mapping providers across multiple GPS brands and multiple online mapping services, then you need to go drive the routes yourself multiple times over multiple times of day and days of week to produce statistical data that says otherwise.

    As I said above, I agree the route the Garmin picked probably isn't the best. And the estimates could be further off than what all of the systems describe. But we haven't seen anything but anecdotal data to dispute it.
    I'm not disputing the TOMTOM drive time... I'm saying the Garmin is underestimating the local road drive time. That's why the Garmin route is much slower than the 7% difference you stated... and why even though the Garmin route says it's faster on the second route.. it isn't. I really don't know what you are looking for. You wanted examples of routes traveled that are wrong with local driver confirmations (I have driven these routes... hundereds of times... myself) as well as confirmation from multiple mapping systems. Seriously, what else could you possibly need?
  • Even if it is only a 7% difference... it's still a more optimal route that the Nuvi should find.

    Then your expectations are different than mine. I'm not saying you are expecting too much-- just that our expectations are different. If over a route that takes about 1:45 the GPS picks a route that is 10 minutes slower than the best route, I'm fine with that. If I know there is a better way, I'll take it. If it is an unfamiliar area then I won't know it took me longer than it could have and I'll probably get to where I'm going on-time anyway.
    You can't be serious.... how frustrating.
  • Tim 1480 Points
    You wanted examples of routes traveled that are wrong with local driver confirmations (I have driven these routes... hundereds of times... myself) as well as confirmation from multiple mapping systems. Seriously, what else could you possibly need?
    If we are not going to go by the estimates from multiple mapping companies, multiple GPS devices, and multiple online mapping services, then we need actual stopwatch times you have taken driving both routes at multiple times per day. "I've driven it, it is faster" isn't statistical data.

    Again, I'm not saying the Garmin route is fine. I'm just saying all of the data I've seen says it isn't terrible.

    There are lots of examples in the forums where where people have said "I thought the route was wrong, but when I timed it I realized I was wrong."

    I'm not saying that will happen to you-- but we would need to eliminate that possibility. To say "I've driven both, I know which way is faster" is fine-- now you just need to let us know exactly what the times were when you've driven those routes. (Not an estimate, not a guess, but times.)
  • You wanted examples of routes traveled that are wrong with local driver confirmations (I have driven these routes... hundereds of times... myself) as well as confirmation from multiple mapping systems. Seriously, what else could you possibly need?

    If we are not going to go by the estimates from multiple mapping companies, multiple GPS devices, and multiple online mapping services, then we need actual stopwatch times you have taken driving both routes at multiple times per day. "I've driven it, it is faster" isn't statistical data.

    Again, I'm not saying the Garmin route is fine. I'm just saying all of the
    data I've seen says it isn't terrible.

    There are lots of examples in the forums where where people have said "I thought the route was wrong, but when I timed it I realized I was wrong."

    I'm not saying that will happen to you-- but we would need to eliminate that possibility. To say "I've driven both, I know which way is faster" is fine-- now you just need to let us know exactly what the times were when you've driven those routes. (Not an estimate, not a guess, but times.)
    I've driven the Blockbuster route the Gamin gave me about 4 times. Each time was 40-43 minutes compared to the 29 it says it takes and the 32 the optimal route takes. Let me know what else you need.
  • If we are not going to go by the estimates from multiple mapping companies, multiple GPS devices, and multiple online mapping services, then we need actual stopwatch times you have taken driving both routes at multiple times per day. "I've driven it, it is faster" isn't statistical data.
    All I am saying is since the problem we are all reporting is in part due to the Garmin's problem with estimating drive time on local roads, we cannot just say that the route difference is only a few minutes and proclaim that it's OK. The Milwaukee/Chicago route is way slower than that on the Garmin. That's the whole point. I've checked TOMTOM, Bing, Yahoo, Google and Mapquest. They all come up with the same optimal route. The Garmin route is just wrong. You also have two local drives confirm that the Garmin route is much slower. For the life of me, I cannot understand why that isn't good enough.
  • jperry 0 Points
    Hi All,
    I have a 3-4 year old Nuvi 370 and a brand new Nuvi 275 because of the Euro Maps. Neither can find my house which is on an old dead end street. Recently we have been getting a rash of people pulling into our driveway to turn around and a neighbor said a police car came down and showed him his Nav which said our street went through. I checked on Mapquest and Navteq and sure enough, somehow it shows it going through to a development behind us, people actually pull into my neighbors gated driveway trying to keep going. We have dead end signs and no thru road signs but to no avail. I contacted Mapquest and Navteq twice now and have gotten no response. I will be contacting our local police and fire departments BEFORE an emergency in hopes they can get some action. After reading most of your forum posts is appears Navteq, not Garmin is the problem. I will not be upgrading or paying for anything from them for a good long time.
    P.S. Goggle Maps still has the correct route.
  • Tim 1480 Points
    we cannot just say that the route difference is only a few minutes and proclaim that it's OK.
    I agree. But if something is to be presented to Garmin as an example of something that is bad, we need to show them a really good example. If they say something is 20 minutes and it is really 35, then that is really bad. If we say "here is a route you say will take 1:45 and it actually takes 1:55" they probably won't care. While it probably doesn't seem like it-- I'm on your side here and trying to help present the best case possible to Garmin.
    For the life of me, I cannot understand why that isn't good enough.
    Just trying to get the best data we can. Using the best example with real data versus times when our own perceptions of drive time isn't right. There is another 200 mile route I drive every couple of weeks. Having timed it, I know which is the fastest way by about 10 minutes. But boy does that route feel slower than the others when it is proven to be faster. That's (part) of why I'm insisting on actual (I've timed this route several times) data versus "I've driven it many times, I know it is faster."

    I'm working on the second example you provided, but I'm having trouble following the Garmin route. Does Google Maps have the exits wrong? I'm looking at Exit 73c as the one going to W North Ave and I can't seem to pick out 73b.
  • we cannot just say that the route difference is only a few minutes and proclaim that it's OK.

    I agree. But if something is to be presented to Garmin as an example of something that is bad, we need to show them a really good example. If they say something is 20 minutes and it is really 35, then that is really bad. If we say "here is a route you say will take 1:45 and it actually takes 1:55" they probably won't care. While it probably doesn't seem like it-- I'm on your side here and trying to help present the best case possible to Garmin.

    For the life of me, I cannot understand why that isn't good enough.

    Just trying to get the best data we can. Using the best example with real data versus times when our own perceptions of drive time isn't right. There is another 200 mile route I drive every couple of weeks. Having timed it, I know which is the fastest way by about 10 minutes. But boy does that route feel slower than the others when it is proven to be faster. That's (part) of why I'm insisting on actual (I've timed this route several times) data versus "I've driven it many times, I know it is faster."

    I'm working on the second example you provided, but I'm having trouble following the Garmin route. Does Google Maps have the exits wrong? I'm looking at Exit 73
    c as the one going to W North Ave and I can't seem to pick out 73b.
    I'll time it the next time I'm there... but you can just look at a map and tell that it isn't optimal. It's really a local road with stop and go lights and the whole 9 yards.

    On the second route, the google route is probably better than Garmin, but isn't optimal. The exit it gives is different than the Garmin. I have not tried the Google route. Bing, Yahoo, Mapquest and TOMTOM give the optimal mostly interstate route.
  • Marc 301 Points
    So I put the Wisconsin Blockbuster route into both my wife's 265T and my Magellan 1340 and they both came up with the route you are unhappy with. Since they each have their own routing engine I would say this is more of a complaint against NAVTEQ's database than Garmin
  • Tim 1480 Points
    On the second route, the google route is probably better than Garmin, but isn't optimal. The exit it gives is different than the Garmin.
    But does Google Maps have the exit number marked incorrectly? I just want to be sure I'm following the correct (bad) route.
  • cuc tu 91 Points
    I think we are talking about several different issues.

    The ETA might not be perfect on Garmin, or any other device, but it seems to me if you plug in two different routes into the same PND (TOMTOM) and compare the ETAs, and do the same with BING, Google, MapQuest, et al, you will get a clear answer to how accurate Garmin's ETA algorithm really is. BUT, as I understand, Garmin has some sort of adjustment to the PND's ETA based on the owner's individual driving habits, which could be drastically different than those from a large pool of data (TOMTOM) or from a raw calculation.

    Route quality could be somewhat subjective. Having small differences in ETA would likely be meaningless, unless they were compared on the Garmin device in question. For example, if you compared Garmin's route with one you mannually enter, and the one you enter is shorter/faster than the one the Garmin device came up with, then you might have cause for argument. What in Garmin's algorithm could possibly cause the device to pick a longer/slower route when it knows (or should know) that a shorter/faster route exists. This is likely the needle in the haystack were hoping to find, but is likely a more trivial issue in the context of the other problems/fish-to-fry that Garmin is likely working on.

    Finally, what about plain old stupid routing that has you get off a highway, sit through a few lights, and then get right back the same highway! To me this is the biggest issue one could have with routing, other than taking you through non-existant roads, to the wrong place, or nowhere at all...

    So what problem do we realistically think we can solve?
  • Tim 1480 Points
    What in Garmin's algorithm could possibly cause the device to pick a longer/slower route when it knows (or should know) that a shorter/faster route exists.
    ahhhh... but that is just it. :) I'll have an article on this sometime. But the GPS does not test all combinations of route possibilities. (Any GPS.) It can't. There are too many possible combinations. That's why it doesn't take much longer for the GPS to calculate a route of a couple thousand miles than it does to calculate a route of a couple hundred miles. You can add a via point to certain routes and even by the GPS's own estimates create a route that is faster than what the GPS initially calculated as the fastest route. It doesn't happen often, but it does happen from time to time. People want fast routing and rerouting. To make it fast each device only tests certain combinations of routes that will probably be fastest.
    So what problem do we realistically think we can solve?
    I'm not sure... it depends what the underlying problem is. We could figure out by comparing the same map version across multiple devices if the issue is primarily one of poor map data (NAVTEQ) or one of a routing issue on the device. If it is a routing issue on the device we might be able to track down if it is an issue with certain models or certain firmware versions based on multiple people with the same map version but different devices/firmware. Or, we may never isolate the issue.
  • gatorguy 326 Points
    I understand Gardog's frustration and admit there may be a problem with route choices and ETA's on some nuvi models or specific devices. But Tim is right about details. Is your Blockbuster route being driven at rush hour? Have you driven that route mid-morning or mid afternoon and actually timed it? I had a similar issue today with a TA-mapped device and my 760. The TA device doesn't use IQR so I expect to get odd routes now and then. Today's was weird, insisting I "turn around when possible" numerous times while my nuvi continued to follow what I believe to be the fastest route. and one I've driven dozens of times. But can I prove the nuvi route was correct? It takes some planning to do so. I'd need to follow the TA route at a few different times and days, then same with the nuvi. Even then that only demonstrates what likely is the best for that particular route.

    Forget about on-line estimates of your travel time. You don't drive the same as me and you're not going to arrive at the same time I do. Estimates are just that, really an educated guess. Gardog, you're not alone is believing that something is amiss on certain nuvis. The problem is identifying where the problems are, then trying to identify where the source of of the problem is. Is everyone double-checking their route preferences and avoidances? Do 7x0's and 7x5's, or even older 200's have the same routing issue as you see? Is the problem across multiple map versions or application versions, or fairly restricted to a certain map or application update? Is it only local roads routing oddly, or across several or all road classifications? Are the estimates consistently incorrect by more than 5-10% compared to the actual driven times?

    Hints on where the issue lies, assuming there is one, can come from different types of investigations. I still plan on inputting a bonafide problem route on both my 760, latest maps and application, and my 255 that has last years maps and application (as soon as I can get it returned to me :roll: ) That may give us some clues. I noticed Marc posted that his Magellan and Garmin offered the same Blockbuster route. That's another clue. Google/TA and Mapquest/Navteq routing may offer still more indications. Once we can identify several obviously problematic routes, then try those on some different devices, preferably with actual drive times, then we have solid data for Garmin to take a look at. Of course I have no doubt that Garmin themselves are already looking at the complaints and likely doing their own testing. But if we see something here to submit as evidence, it may just be the clue that allows Garmin to sort out where, how or if the reported problems are widespread or correctable.
    You guys here can help out by checking your nav settings and avoidances before entering and/or driving "bad" routes. Make sure there's no user-error. Mention map and application versions along with model when you post this thread. I'm sure everyone contributing appreciates as much detail as you can provide, but patience is needed. Tim's not questioning that many of you feel there's a problem somewhere. He's only trying to help you understand what to look for and make note of, as well as realize the limitations of route calculation on any pnd, not just a Garmin nuvi. Realistic expectations need to be understood so that real issues can be separated from minor annoyances or one-time/rare incidents.
Sign In or Register to comment.
↑ Top