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.

user compliant GPS routing

we have an ancient Nuvi - works ok. it's great for navigating strange local areas, absolute bad at long distance planning.

when we take a trip/vacation I would like to be able to sit at the computer with a big screen and a big keyboard and a mouse - and enter destinations plus routes.

example - we were staying in San Fran - Fisherman's Wharf area. I wanted to drive north over the Golden Gate bridge thence to the Napa area. well, no flipping way would the olde Nuvi do that. finally at my last turn onto the expressway leading over the bridge it 'recalculated' the route.

I want to look at a map and click thru this point, click thru that point, etc. I don't want to have to - as I do now - go to the web and look up some business on Main Street so I can enter a street number and street and town and state to get a way point.

route 'optimization' is almost a moot point - I already know the route _I_ want to take - it's getting the GPS to accept my way of going places.

there are many other examples of things I'd like to do - but that's a start. hiking / mountain biking / finding tall cliffs to jump off are not on my wish list, if that helps.

the BaseCamp software "says" it does all that. so I downloaded it to give it a spin. surprise - first you have to have a compatible Garmin to use the maps in the GPS - the downloaded software is completely non-functional. and various forum comments are not especially encouraging about BaseCamp.

the classic Catch-22

who uses BaseCamp + (what) GPS model and does it do a decent job?


  • sussamb 829 Points
    edited November 2014
    Basecamp works with both my 1490 and 2508 ... used it for route planning for years :-)

    Unfortunately I suspect your nuvi model doesn't do 'routes'.
  • t923347 532 Points
    It may well be that your "ancient Nuvi" would work fine with Basecamp BUT you would need to have your Nuvi attached to your computer via the USB cable. If you attach the Nuvi to your computer and then start up Basecamp it will use the maps on your GPS and be perfectly "functional". Also if you were to update the maps on your Nuvi and save the update to both the GPS and your computer, Basecamp would use the maps on either your attached GPS or the ones stored on the PC.

    Since you don't say what model your "ancient Nuvi" is we can't be sure if using Basecamp would actually provide you with workable routes as some older Nuvi models did not support multi-point routing. Almost any of the newer models do, now known as Trip Planner, but we'd need to know your current model in order to confirm if using Basecamp would be of any value to you or not.
  • thanks for the info - not particularly concerned with 'salvaging' the old model - had to dig it out - Nuvi 350 NA. it accommodates one, count'em one, way point. it is not a newer terms of decades....

    I could easily be convinced to upgrade the technology - there's a neat idea of smart phones Bluetoothing(? - or is that Blueteething....) coordinates directly to the GPS - that would be kool enroute - "Heh! lets go see that!"

    Trip Planner - gosh, how can one (?) company create so much confusion.... seen references to it.
    is Trip Planner a Garmin product?
    is it similar/same as BaseCamp?
    is one more "car oriented" than the other?

    I frankly don't care what they call it, as long as it does what I want....
  • t923347 532 Points
    Trip Planner is not a software program but is how the newer Nuvi models deal with multi point routing. Basically Trip Planner will route you from one waypoint to the next, ending at your final destination. The prior Routes system basically routed you from your start to the your destination through your various waypoints. All new Nuvi's will use the Trip Planner function as will the computer software Basecamp. So you can create your "Trip" either using Basecamp and transfer it the Nuvi or directly on your GPS.
  • sussamb 829 Points
    Also be careful of reviews about 'trip planner' and don't confuse it with the 'trip planner function' in Basecamp.

    There are 2 versions of trip planner on the nuvi, that on pre 2013 models and the one on 2013 models onwards. There were numerous issues with the early trip planner, which Garmin took on board and resolved with the later version. I've used it for a couple of years now with my 2508 and find it better then the 'route planner' on my 1490.

    The trip planner function in Basecamp I don't use, having tried it but find it doesn't suit my needs. I simply create routes in Basecamp and then send them to my 2508, where they are loaded into trip planner.
  • Dilbert 1 Point
    edited November 2014
    thanks for the clarifications - one Q, must the GPS unit itself have 'trip planner' in order to use BaseCamp?

    being a semi-sane (I suppose) individual, setting out on a trip I can figure out which ways points I want and in what order. and I'm seriously not interested in have software rearrange my drive to the west coast based on some funky idea of 'optimized'

    I'm going to check out the various models / numbers etc - I'll be back here to confirm stuff about the pre/post "oops" software stuff.

    appreciate the help!
  • sussamb 829 Points
    No, you can use Basecamp with any Garmin device, but if you want to have routes/trips on your nuvi it needs to have either route planner or trip planner.
  • the Garmin site offers a filter for "2014 Models" - after some digging and thinking, looks like the Nuvi 2589LMT should do the trick for me.

    hopefully this model is post-not-so-hot (internal) software?

    couple questions - we do have a bucket list European trip; went to check out prices for the Europe maps and regrets the shopping page does not yet list 2014 models....(HuH?) so couldn't find out the stand-alone one-time cost of that - anyone know?

    Smartphone Link - any experiences as to how well that works?
    and - a biggie -
    the car already has 'built in' Bluetooth for hands free phone calls, for iPhones can one link both to the car and GPS via Smartphone Link simultaneously? more of a phone question than GPS question I suppose, but I suspect someone here as already "de-pained" that issue.

    voice activation - my forseen usage is minimal - two things I commonly do while using a GPS:
    - mute on / mute off. with a hundred miles to drive on Interstate X I really don't need to hear "Keep left . . "
    - toggle to the screen that shows miles to go, vehicle speed (used for setting cruise control)
    fooling with buttons while driving is not high on my list of preferred activities...
    any confirms on how well voice control works?
  • Boyd 1999 Points
    Maps for both continents can be a little complicated. See my posts in this recent thread:

    To avoid the "not so hot software", generally speaking avoid model numbers that end in 0 or 5. They have the old-style trip planner. But like everything else with Garmin, there are bound to be exceptions to this rule. ;)
  • t923347 532 Points
    edited November 2014
    Garmin maps of Europe are listed on thier website at

    Looks like $70 to $100 US depending on the area of Europe you want to have maps for.
  • Boyd 1999 Points
    Just be sure that you understand the limitations/advantages to the different formats in which Garmin offers these maps, as discussed at the link I posted. :)
  • Boyd - good info on the various options. at this point a SDCard is the most attractive - it's a once&done deal.
  • Boyd 1999 Points
    It is nice because it will work any any GPS, but there are some drawbacks…

    1. You cannot add any other maps to the card, so it monopolizes the card slot while in use. If future US map updates become to large for internal memory and you need to use an SD card, then you would have to physically swap cards to switch between US and EU maps.

    2. You can't update this kind of map, so it must be replaced with a new card at full price when you want new maps.

    3. If you lose or damage the card you're out of luck. With the download option, you can re-download at any time for the next 12 months.
  • Dilbert 1 Point
    edited November 2014
    ayup. when I bought the new 98/99 Groesse Shell Atlas I threw out my 83 version.

    for us in our current situation, it's a one time one shot deal.

    if I understand the functionality correctly (is that a huge assumption or what . . .) when booting up the GPS makes you select the map set to use. yank the SD card, no more question about that, no effect on the prior internal workings.

    "too large for internal memory" - don't go there. this is a sore point with several hundred trillion users who have attempted to 'update' their maps. their GPS units don't support half of what the map file contains / enables, but the file with all its unusable information is too big to fit on their old standby still working not-a-problem GPS thingies.
  • Boyd 1999 Points
    Dilbert said:

    ayup. when I bought the new 98/99 Groesse Shell Atlas I threw out my 83 version.

    But that probably cost about $10 and the EU maps cost about $100.
  • well, got 2589 'on order' - the saga shall continue.

    frankly I've got to check how much driving we'll be doing on the Europe bucket trip. I don't like to do cars for big city visits - more a PITA than public transport.
  • so I now have the 2589 and BaseCamp set up, talking to each other etc.

    my original reason to think about draining the swamp was to have the ability to go 'click to here, click to there' and establish a driving route. I've spent the last two days establishing waypoints at pretty much every blinking intersection trying to get the Garmin to go where I want it to.

    apparently for some of the route, shortest works according to plan, for other parts of the route, fastest works best - and for some of the routing parts it quite literally sends me in circles. not kidding - drive the interstate north take exit, turn left turn left drive the country road back to the previous (same interstate exit) - quite unbelievable. it extends the trip to waypoints I've deleted from the route. have to delete the waypoint from the data base and restart software. you can't make this up, folks.

    did someone mention / did I not see in passing other software that would produce a file/routing useable by the Garmin?

    is that software any better than BaseCamp?
    I can 'convert' a file, I can load it on an SD card vs direct to the GPS unit.

    before I extract the remaining parts of my hair, I need to look for some better software. even MicroSoft Windows 2.0 Paint worked better than BaseCamp.
  • Boyd 1999 Points
    You can look at Tyre. It was originally developed as freeware for TomTom devices but was sold to a company that added Garmin capability. It is based on Google Maps so the road data will be different from City Navigator and that might create some problems. I don't use it myself.
  • alanb 556 Points
    edited December 2014
    You can create a multipoint route in Mapquest and transfer it to the nuvi for import. I have had pretty good luck with Mapquest routes, although my routes tend to be pretty strait forward using the "fastest" setting.

    As far as the "going in circles" problem, that can sometimes be caused by putting a via point on the wrong side of a divided highway. It is easy to do if you don't zoom the map in far enough when placing points on the map.
  • I'll check out the Tyre - I'm really disimpressed with BaseCamp.

    actually I did 'discover' that 'misplacing' the exact dot can cause idiot behavior - the problem I'm seeing tho is (a) set up a route (b) go there (c) 'invert' the route - oops - circles and loops and all kinds of garbage.

    and in the Interstate case, three way points - one at Exit 9 one at Exit 10 - software exited at 9, takes you on a big loop through the country side, then back onto the same interstate at exit 10 and continues you in the direction you were going. so I put a waypoint in the road, midway between the two exits - same routing behavior, never does go thru the waypoint....

    this was advertised as a 2014 model, but I'm wondering if it's got the old loco embedded software in it.
  • alanb 556 Points
    Yes, reversing a route can cause backtracking because some via points may need to be moved to the other lane to make the direction of travel correct.
  • Boyd 1999 Points
    edited December 2014
    Frankly, the problems you describe don't sound specific to the newer devices. Creating custom routes has always been a tricky proposition because maps don't always match reality.

    I gave up on creating routes back around 2006. There were just so many problems when waypoints weren't precisely located - it was more trouble than it was worth. I got the best results when I used waypoints that I recorded myself out on the road though. That way I knew it would be a point that I actually had to drive through.
  • I've reached an unsatisfactory "solution" - a work-around for a major failure to think on the Garmin end.

    placing a waypoint upstream on a two lane not divided road will take you 'through' an intersection _if_ the shortest/fastest auto-calc wants to go that way.

    however for an intersection of two divided highways, forget it - it is not possible to establish a single way point so that going and (inverted) returning does not take one through circles, loops and u-turns - sometimes 50-60 miles 'out of the way' as you have to go to the next exit and do the loops and hoops.

    placing a waypoint on (either lane or the dead center middle at the highest resolution) a divided highway will also not work for forward and invert route - it sends you in loops and hoops.

    curiously, placing a waypoint in the dead center of an intersection of a divided/4 lane highway and a crossing 2 lane highway does work forward and invert.

    so, what's the big deal? we live in the greater Baltimore/Washington area. there are specific 'back ways' to go during traffic times. one does not wish to follow the 'std' GPS routing around the Washington loop at 4-5pm - it can easily add 2-3 hours to a trip.

    and DW will go into loops if the GPS tells her to 'exit here' because she's not as familiar with the back ways.

    what Garmin needs to develop is an "intersection waypoint" - a big circle around the cloverleaf (for example) that will route you through that intersection regardless of which direction you are coming from or going to.

    I have not found a way to "create" one of those - if I'm missing something please clue me in!

    the 'work around' is to copy/rename the route, invert and tweak the waypoints to avoid the loops and hoops.
  • sussamb 829 Points
    It's not really a work around, what you're doing is what you're meant to do. Just because you want it to work that way doesn't mean everyone does. Imagine a delivery driver needing to visit a location on a particular side of a divided highway. He'd be pretty miffed if his nuvi just let him sail by on the assumption that even though he set his waypoint correctly his nuvi decided that was an error.

    If you set a waypoint you should expect your nuvi to take you to it. If you set it wrong it'll still take you there.
  • privet01 228 Points
    I've never been happy with 'customizing' routes on anything. Once you decide you don't want to go with the route or routes automatically picked for you between the Start and Destination, trouble usually begins. And mostly for the reasons already stated in this thread.

    The particular one that gets me the most is not zooming in sufficiently to get the viapoint or whatever route modifier the program uses placed in the lane of traffic specifically going in the correct driving direction.

    The other issue I have is sometimes I like to just drive a specific section of road and my nuvi and any mapping programs always want to get me off that road at the next exit, when I desire to stay on it till the end. Filters and other such are no help here. As an example, Try to go from Clinton, MS to Natchez MS and stay on the Natchez Trace Parkway for the entire length of the Trace between those two cities. You can't AFAIK with Google Maps, Basecamp, Mapsource, Mapquest or any other program or website I've been on UNLESS you use a lot of viapoints, shaping points or whatever. Highway 61 is a better option all around, except for those that find it more relaxing to drive the Trace, but you can't program that!

    In the early days of map software on the web, it did seem like I didn't have the issue of routes doubling back on themselves and such, BUT.... it was much harder to make multiple course modifications without things quickly going awry and not being able to correct them. At least now they can be corrected. Albeit with a lot of work that frequently means I just let my nuvi sit there and "recalculate" while I go where I want to go!
  • sussamb - by that logic one needs what - 6, 8 'waypoints' per intersection?
    if it works for you, fine - but that kind of "thinking" doesn't work for me. a way point is not a destination . . . . and any delivery driver relying on Garmin for a good route is in for a very bad day.

    a curious follow up to privet's comment.... last night we went to a gathering about an hour away - DW's old stomping ground. we knew how to get to the area but not the street address.

    so I set up the Garmin 2589 on the dash, and compared that to the OEM Garmin installed in the car. coming home, being within 20 miles from my front door, I knew exactly how to get there. no way points set - just "Go Home" - both units wanted to send me through loops and hoops - different loops and hoops mind you - but not the shortest or fastest route. the 2589 wanted me to drive two legs of a triangle vs. the direct route - on a State numbered highway, not a cowpath - but correctly calculated at 18 miles and 25 minutes "further" than the car Garmin.

    and this is why this dummy wants to set waypoints - I'm tired of the GPS taking me from Baltimore to New York City via Chicago.
  • privet01 228 Points
    Dilbert said:

    and this is why this dummy wants to set waypoints - I'm tired of the GPS taking me from Baltimore to New York City via Chicago.

    I hope that's an exaggeration. While I often see routings that may not be the "best" way to go, usually the deviations are very local and very minor. A person that is not familiar would seldom notice. For those of us that are not "navigationally challenged" it does seem odd and sometimes ridiculous, but when I start to attempt to figure out why, I do see how programmatically it may have picked that route.
  • DaveM 160 Points
    I also hope that is an exaggeration. No GPS or mapping software will ever chose the best route 100% of the time. If I'm in my car and it sends me a mile out of my way who cares, it's better then driving around for miles lost and trying to read signs. If I know how to get to the area but not the street address I will drive the way I know. The GPS will recalculate as I go and I use it after I get close.

    On the other hand if I'm on a longer trip and need the GPS but would like to avoid a large city or go a different way etc. I will put points in with BaseCamp and force it to go the way I would like. Also if I'm on my bike I will plan the route in BaseCamp it's time well spent to get the route I would like.

  • sussamb 829 Points
    Dilbert said:

    sussamb - by that logic one needs what - 6, 8 'waypoints' per intersection?

    Personally I never put a waypoint at an intersection. Why you feel you'd need 6 or 8 I have no idea. Like the others here I haven't seen the major problems you have. Maybe you just have a bad unit, or it's not set up correctly.

  • of course Balt to NYC via Chicago is an exaggeration - but frankly not really much of one. my last "blind GPS trip" it took me over an hour - and many miles - out of the way. when it started telling me turn here, exit there I _knew_ it flipped its chips - but I did not have maps with me. I now carry an atlas because I'm not pleased at the idea of making a 5 hour trip into a 6.25 hour trip again.

    and forget about for the moment the sign posted as you turn onto the two lane road "NOT A RECOMMENDED GPS ROUTE" - I went anyway - it was a corkscrew road with more ups and downs than the Alps. I had fun driving it, but not a hour's worth.

    sending me so far out of the way - and the eventual path not shortest and not fastest - by that kind of margin is unacceptable "logic"

    example last night on the way home - a 7 mile A to C route on state roads versus an 18 mile A-B-C route is not insignificant on a 9 mile (or 9+18 mile) trip.

    I understand a GPS may have a different opinion on 'the best way' than mine - especially as multiple specific routes I deal with are based on 'traffic times' - the gps does not understand doing the Washington or Baltimore loop at peak traffic times is a 2-3-4 hour 'delay factor' vs ducking through Mount Airy the back way. I want the gps to give my wife the real exact turn by turn directions - and not send her on loops and hoops.

    waypoints, as implemented, do not cope with forward and reverse. in a multi-lane situation one cannot establish a (reusable) way point of "go thru the intersection of I- 95 and I-495"

    in my area, I cannot establish a single waypoint that tells the gps to use the Commodore Barry Bridge instead of plowing through downtown Phila traffic to the I-95 bridge. I need two way points - one for each lane(s) of traffic on the bridge - depending on which way I'm going over the bridge. to say nothing of the gps taking me east into center city before sending me south on I-95 to the bridge. so now I need waypoints to force the routing "more sensible" to the bridge - BUT there's a bunch of divided highways enroute, so now I need a waypoint for each direction on those....and it just does not end.

    not putting a waypoint at an intersection is a wonderful workaround - but only if the software will select the further route you want, and no send you sailing through that intersection to some other wiffle route.

    if one does this once a decade, no problem. if you do it regular, you've a got problem of sorting out dozens of way points based on your direction of travel. one shortly needs a Dewey decimal system for waypoints.

    the people who make these things should be forced to use them in real life. it's like the phone dialing sequence in my car - you have to enter one letter at a time until you reach a unique "entry" so you can "select" it - Windows solved that issue with Version 1.0 Beta - "here's a list of all C's - scroll down and select"

    but Windows doesn't get a full pass either - when you select your state by first letter, all the states starting with that letter do not appear - the first state that starts with that letter appears as the bottom/last entry on the list. then you have to scroll further down to see all the states starting with that letter. Question: why not show the first state starting with the letter at the top? then it's click to highlight, and off you go.

    same issue - a wonderful but less than actually useable design.
    people who write the software never actually use the software so they are completely unaware of what a real life user needs.
  • DaveM 160 Points
    If it's routeing you that far out of the way I would have a good look at how the avoidances are set. If it's set to avoid certain road types it could be routeing you a longer on a different type of road.

    I agree with sussamb I would never put a point at an intersection. It's too easy to have it a little off and then the GPS will route you past the intersection or turn right when you should tern left etc. to get to the point. It will then need to route you from there to your next point. Depending on avoidances one ways etc. it could add a fair distance. I would always put a point ether before or after the intersection.
  • no avoidances. not the issue. specifically looked at all that. every single option available on screen - as in uncheck all of them.

    the issue has been identified - a "waypoint" is a two square foot area through which you must past - even if you have to be re-routed through Chicago to make that happen.
    see: loops and hoops.

    I've put waypoints in a median cross over of four lane divided highways. you are rerouted to the next intersection to make a u-turn and go back through the waypoint.

    I've put waypoints "in the air" between elevated&separated bridge lanes.

    I've tried the "optimize" option -

    it is the very definition of insanity - doing the same thing again and again thinking it might have a different outcome.

    establishing a route does not work with waypoints as implemented in the Garmin software. the waypoint does not mean "drive via this intersection" - it means "drive over these two square feet" - even if you have to go through Chicago to make sufficient u-turns to get there. and the waypoint is only good for that exact route from the exact same origin and to the exact same destination.

    one cannot even use the
    "GO to . . ." followed by the next waypoint in a
    "GO to . . ." followed by the next waypoint in a
    "GO to . . ." followed by the next waypoint in a
    "GO to . . ." followed by the next waypoint in a 'fake'
    mode because if the waypoint is on the oops side of a cloverleaf it takes you to Chicago so you can u-turn and drive back over the waypoint.

    the bottom line is really quite simple: it does not do what common sense would like to do. the user has to spend trillions of hours establishing a 'work around' to the simple fact that the software does not do what a sane navigator would do and 'forcing' it to a specific route is exceedingly complicated and tedious.

    it's a severe disappointment. one needs to plan out one's long distance driving on a real map - google maps is your friend - the Garmin is only valuable for the last three blocks.

  • t923347 532 Points
    In addition have you got the Avoid Tolls avoidance ticked?

    If yes, that could be your Barry Bridge problem. The Nuvi will do every thing it can to AVOID a toll road or bridge if the Toll avoidance is on.

    If your driving the I95 area this could be the cause of many of your problems.
  • DaveM 160 Points
    Dilbert said:

    I've put waypoints in a median cross over of four lane divided highways. you are rerouted to the next intersection to make a u-turn and go back through the waypoint.

    I've put waypoints "in the air" between elevated&separated bridge lanes.

    That's at least part of the problem. The point is not at the exact spot you think it is. So you go past the intersection to get to the point then need to turn around or loop around. Don't put a point in mid air or in an intersection put it on the road somewhere before or after the intersection. That way you will get to it without a U turn or looping around.

    I would put the start and end points in BaseCamp. Then if I was not happy with the route I would add a via point on the road and not in an intersection. If I didn't like the new route I would add a new via point.

    Also make sure the avoidances are not checked in BaseCamp or on your GPS. If they are set different you could be getting different routeing. Also make sure to use the same map in BaseCamp and on your GPS a different map could give different routing.

    BaseCamp works well and is easy to use after use it a little.
  • BaseCamp without an attached device works on an 15th century map

    see the above, avoidances / settings / are not the issue.

    and such as is forthwith should not be an issue with "waypoints" - waypoints means - by definition - go from here to there (or my stupidly contrary definition "via there")

    when one has to set a waypoint at one end of a road and then the other end of the road to avoid the software indicating a route off-center, off to the side, 10 miles + out of the way..... there is a problem. yes, I've seen that. one road goes straight away from point A to point B, waypoint at each end, then I have to set a waypoint in the mid-point to "force" the route not to turn left, go five hundred miles through the country side, then turn right, then arrival an intersection 100 feet from the end waypoint. no, it does not make any sense.

    I asked the question earlier - if I'm missing something, tell me.
    so far all I've seen is comments from people who quite apparently have not attempted to establish a route - or if they did, return from that destination.

    I'm perfectly willing to be wrong - but kindly stop telling me I'm doing something wrong you have never attempted to do - because I have made the attempt and it does not work.
  • DaveM 160 Points
    Dilbert said:

    BaseCamp without an attached device works on an 15th century map

    Yes the basemap is useless. I wouldn't wast my time trying to make a route with it.

    Ether plug your GPS in, or you can copy the map from it to a USB drive or sd card in a directory called Garmin and BaseCamp will read it from there. Your map will be in the Garmin dictionary of your GPS and will most likely have the default name of gmapsupp.img.

    I make routes all the time and learned not to put the point in intersections the hard way. I would try keeping the points on two way streets. If you have a point on a road before where you would like to get on an expressway and one after you get off it should route on the expressway and be able to route back.

    If you can't get the routeing you would like without putting points on expressways, one way streets etc you will need to make a different route to return.

    If you need to do this the easiest way I know of is in BaseCamp. In the list on the left side of the screen right click on the name of the route and select "Duplicate" This will make a new file that will be the same and have one or more "1"s added to the name. You can rename it if you would like. Right click on this new file and select "Invert Route". Now using the move point tool drag any via points that are on the wrong side of an expressway, one way street etc. to the correct location. This will give you a return route.
  • privet01 228 Points
    edited December 2014
    I just put it up to the software can't satisfy everybody. I'm one of those it can't. My GPS frequently is recalculating while I drive my way. If we fixed some of the things touched on in this thread that seem to be the cause of our issues, we would likely cause issues for those that are getting decent routing. One day maybe some GPS software development team will figure out a way to satisfy every user, but it's a daunting task.
  • sussamb 829 Points
    edited January 2015
    If you're using points that you mustn't hit exactly set them as 'shaping or do not alert' points. That way there's no need to go through the two feet square.
  • sussamb 829 Points
    Dilbert said:

    ... so far all I've seen is comments from people who quite apparently have not attempted to establish a route - or if they did, return from that destination.

    I do this all the time and don't hit the problems you're having. I suspect you need to use more 'shaping points' in your route as posted above. This 'shapes' the route but doesn't insist that you hit every spot. To do so in Basecamp prior to sending the route to your nuvi right click the waypoint in route properties and set to 'Do not alert'. On your GPS to do so go to Apps, Trip Planner and select the route. Tap the icon to the left of the waypoint that you wish to change and then Yes where it asks if you want to change to shaping point.

    Shaping points aren't announced as you travel and your nuvi won't continually try to reroute you if you miss one.

  • re "shaping" point - on the investigating . . . it sounds like what I'm looking for.....
  • sigh. my experimentation with shaping points shaped up to be very disappointing.

    a shaping point creates loops&hoops. as far as I can see, all it does is suppress the voice prompts of 'turn left here and drive over the cliff.'

    the situation is very simple: you're coming up on the intersection of two divided multi-laned highways.
    traffic is thick.
    you're not familiar with the area/road/route (why else does one need a GPS?)

    being told - verbally or on-screen 'indications' to exit now - sending you into a loop of insane un-need - does not work for me.

    methinks I've harped on this enough already. the Garmin does not have the capability of establishing forward/inverted loops without forty tons of exquisitely placed way points and in situations cannot even then cope. so one has to establish different routes for coming and going - but when one selects a destination with multiple routes *ie coming and going* the GPS unit displays in very very small scale the start to finish and expects one to pick a route based on a level of detail not visible.

    as someone proposed, you just can' make everyone happy. I'm not happy with the Garmin capabilities. so, it's back to maps and typed out directionless stored in the glove box.....

    thanks to all who contributed - I do appreciate the help and pointers!
  • sussamb 829 Points
    Well I still feel something is wrong. ... either with the way you're doing it or the way your nuvi is set up. Are you able to post some examples or better some screenshots?
  • privet01 228 Points
    edited January 2015
    I agree with sussamb, something is amiss. Though I seldom go to the trouble of making routes for my GPS to go the way I want, When I do, I still do not have the loops and hoops you seem to be talking about. Pic's can make up for a few thousand words. Along with some specific details of point a to point b that you use as an example.
  • DaveM 160 Points
    I agree with sussamb and privet01. With some screenshots we could try creating routes with the same start and stop points as you are using and maybe find why you are getting the results you are.
  • I appreciate your concern. as I have previous stated:

    all avoidances have been unchecked
    I have checked the routes with set to faster and set to shortest

    (one of) the issues is with the hoops&loops running the route "forward" and running the routine "inverted" - I can pretty much fiddle&diddle with the standard Mark I Mod 0 waypoint to make one direction work.

    but a separate route structure is required for the return trip - but selecting the route is essentially NOT possible given the small scale presentation on screen.

    note that one CANNOT just go to a menu a select a is forced to select a destination then select a route. the route which you cannot "see" in the detail required to avoid doing loops and hoops.

    tried the "shaping point" - on screen and on-the-road. complete failure. all that does is suppress verbal cues to turn x/y/z. if you follow the on screen cues, it takes you through the same loops&hoops. what's the point? I could just mute the sound for the same effect.....

    (one of) the issues is utter nonsense 'directions' / 'routing' whatever. real example: between waypoint A and waypoint B is a straight as an arrow two lane paved road where not even the speed limit changes. no ferries, no tolls, no bridges, not so much as a deer crossing sign - absolute dead absolutely nothing but a straight road from point A to point B. yet the GPS demands one turn left, then turn right, then go through the village, then turn right, then turn left again onto the same blinkity blankity road you were just on. why? there's nothing but absolutely straight unencumbered road between point A and point B. the road has been there, unchanged and unmodified for 2-3 hundred years....?

    and this "effect" is not new - on my old three digit Garmin - approaching a near home intersection when sanity says "turn left, then turn right" the old Garmin sent me through the intersection, right, right, right, (around the block) then go straight thru the sanity intersection and turn right....

    the new four digit Garmin sends me through the intersection but then tells me to turn left, left again, then right. basically 'around the block' to the left instead of 'around the block' to the right. and the intersection has not changed in the last 40 years - it's called a screwy logic flaw. not only that, but the sanity intersection has a left turn arrow. the route around the block to the left involves multiple "unprotected" cross traffic turns.

    "Search by intersection" - cute idea, utter failure. for Maryland, search for the intersection of Interstate 270 and Father Hurley Blvd. I'm looking at it on screen on the Garmin map, with all the roads labeled. tried 270&; tried I-270&; tried I270 and, etc and el barfo. it is possible that the locals have some local "name" for the Interstate 270 highway - you know something like "Veterans' Memorial Highway" to which of course I have to pose the question: how does the tourist from 300 miles away know what the local name is?

    bottom line Search Result: "Not found"

    this is the kind of stuff that makes Garmin and how many other GPS offerings utterly useless for long range trip planning.

    multiple people have mentioned putting a waypoint in midair between lanes of a 4x4 divided highway is my problem. it is not my problem - after exhausting multiple other options I intentionally put the waypoint there EXPLICITLY to see if the internal routing software would cope - it does not - the internal software does loops&hoops to send you through that point which, mathematically is 1 or 2 millimeters to one side of the divided highway or the other.

    another ultra stupid example: US 29 in Virgina. four lane, divided by a gassy median, with cross over 'segments' from mile to mile. so I said - I'll put the waypoint in the cross over - any sensible person will ignore the directions to turn left, then make a u-turn, then turn left.... right? well - it does not work. the waypoint is 1 or 2 millimeters closer to one side of the road or the other and depending whether you are going north-south or south-north you get directions to turn left, then make a u-turn, then turn left back onto your original route or you get directions to go past the waypoint and make a bunch of loops and hoops to mystically pass through the waypoint. and no, converting the waypoint to a shaping point by suppressing the voice prompts really does not do anything inside the bounds of driving sanity.

    I see two possibilities - implement a "route intersection point" - meaning that the exactly turn by exit by ramp directions would automatically adjust to the direction of travel - ie north to south, inverted south to north
    a menu where one could select a route based on the route "name" as specified by the user. yes, yes, yes. if you're parked in Miami and you select a route you have established from St Louis to Toronto, you're gonna' get some flaky results. but I don't have an issue with "some intelligence required"

    however, a waypoint/shaping point that insists you go back through a 2 sq inch patch of southbound lane when you're heading the invert northbound route is ahhhh, not so sensible.
  • sussamb 829 Points
    edited January 2015
    You've still not given us any real examples that can be checked to see if your experience can be duplicated. In most cases there shouldn't be any need to put waypoints where you seem to be doing so, but without some concrete examples or screenshots it's impossible to see what you are doing wrong.

    My workflow is simply to put in the start and end points, see what route I get then maybe put in one or two shaping points if necessary. Job done and none of the 'hoops and loops' you seem to be experiencing.
  • privet01 228 Points
    edited January 2015
    It would still help us if you could give enough specifics in the scenarios to duplicate what you describe here. I'm not able to get anything completely useless like you've described. Maybe your map has issues. either minor data corruption or maybe there are some be map errors that no one else has ever complained about to get them fixed.

    I can't make the statemet
    "this is the kind of stuff that makes Garmin and how many other GPS offerings utterly useless for long range trip planning."
    because a majority of others apparently aren't having those issues every time.
  • alanb 556 Points
    edited January 2015
    It sounds to me like your primary objection is having to carefully place waypoints in the correct lane on a divided highway based on the direction of travel and having to adjust these points when you reverse the route. I suspect Garmin (Navteq/Here) digitizes divided highways the same way they do one-way streets, so it is not surprising that the routing works this way. That said, it would be nice if there was some way to place a generic waypoint between the lanes on a divided highway and have the routing algorithm adjust it automatically based on the direction of travel. But there is no such feature, so we have to live with it the way it is.

    Garmin does have a site where users can offer suggestions for improvements in their products. Since you feel so strongly about this, you could submit the suggestion there.
  • "But there is no such feature, so we have to live with it the way it is.

    yup. you can't make everyone happy.
    but imho, it's a major failure to think how GPS units/functions are used.

    and I don't object to having to place waypoints 'tweaked' to work IF one could select a route. bottom line, waypoints are not bi-directional, and the work around of multiple routes technically exists but is not usable.

    that's a lose-lose situation.
    sussamb said:

    You've still not given us any real examples that can be checked to see if your experience can be duplicated. In most cases there shouldn't be any need to put waypoints where you seem to be doing so, but without some concrete examples or screenshots it's impossible to see what you are doing wrong.

    My workflow is simply to put in the start and end points, see what route I get then maybe put in one or two shaping points if necessary. Job done and none of the 'hoops and loops' you seem to be experiencing.

    but, are you listening to what I am saying?
    I can twitch & glitch waypoints to work just fine. until the route is inverted. then it all falls apart.

    as far as I can see, one can't post screen shots here. I find no option to attach anything other than text typed in the box. I would go through some effort, but everyone is focused on faulty assumptions of 'how it is set up' - which is not the problem.

  • Boyd 1999 Points
    Dilbert said:

    as far as I can see, one can't post screen shots here.

    Sure you can post screenshots here. You just cannot host screenshots here. Upload your screenshots to your own webspace, such as a photo sharing site. Then copy the URL of the image and click the button in the editor that looks like a little picture. Paste the URL into the box and the image will appear in your post.
Sign In or Register to comment.
↑ Top