D'oh! This can't be right...

[Cogs]

I have a wee whinge about the XT...

Love all the extras and the BRIGHT screen compared to the 595 but it's sh*t at directions, specifically on shortest route. We were down in Somerset at the weekend and plotted a route from our campsite near Frome to Brean Down on the Bristol Channel. Shortest route, over the Mendips.

Garmin says : 50 miles. Doesn't sound right so Google Map it too and that says : 38 miles. So we drove (because 1200 went through the floor of the trailer when we loaded up to go...) by Google with XT playing catch up.

XT did NOT want to go down any of the roads we used for a start but eventually agreed with GM after trying to pull us back onto A roads for several miles??

I've had Garmins since the last century (Colormap, 2610, Z660, Z595...) but never had this level of *not* shortest route. Any suggestions?

FYI this was our first outing with the XT having done all the updates via WiFi and then more via Garmin Express

CoGS

 

[JohnnyBoxer]

I have a wee whinge about the XT...

Love all the extras and the BRIGHT screen compared to the 595 but it's sh*t at directions, specifically on shortest route. We were down in Somerset at the weekend and plotted a route from our campsite near Frome to Brean Down on the Bristol Channel. Shortest route, over the Mendips.

Garmin says : 50 miles. Doesn't sound right so Google Map it too and that says : 38 miles. So we drove (because 1200 went through the floor of the trailer when we loaded up to go...) by Google with XT playing catch up.

XT did NOT want to go down any of the roads we used for a start but eventually agreed with GM after trying to pull us back onto A roads for several miles??

I've had Garmins since the last century (Colormap, 2610, Z660, Z595...) but never had this level of *not* shortest route. Any suggestions?

FYI this was our first outing with the XT having done all the updates via WiFi and then more via Garmin Express

CoGS

Modern technology (I have an XT too, dumbed down car nav technology)
Stick to the 2610 instead, proper motorcycle GPS and has never been beaten
I like my Garmin Montana - not bad on a bike

 

[Wapping]

Which, unfortunately, doesn’t in any way answer the OP’s routing anomaly question, JB.

Me, I’d maybe suspect simple algorithms, might well account for the 12 mile difference in the route offered up and / or maybe personal preference settings.

I have just asked Google for Frome to Brean Down and it comes up with two routes:

1. Clipping the bottom of the Mendips, being Green Ore > Red Quar > Draycott

2. The other misses out the Memdips entirely, going via Shepton Mallet and Wells to Draycott

Even the power of Google cannot decide on what is best.

Other route creation pieces of software, are offering up routes at around the 41 mile mark for the same basic A to B, Frome to Brean Down, journey. ViaMichelin offered up one choice (out of three) at 45 miles.

Of course the OP could have created his own ‘perfect’ route, directly in the XT (via its screen) or via say MyRoute but that’s another matter entirely.

PS Contrary to old JB’s words, the XT is a very good device. Luckily, he bought his cheap….. or we’d never hear the end if it

 

[DJ123]

Check your route/road avoidances and see if that changes it.

Alternatively it might ,perhaps, be the Xt saw traffic on the other route, which is why it tried to use another road compared to GM.

 

[John Armstrong]

I'll guess the "shortest" is using algorithms like the "fastest" which on every previous Garmin would mean the least amount of time, the XT seems to believe it means using as much as possible faster roads.

The XT is a wonderful machine, at everything apart from calculating routes.

 

[Wapping]

The XT is a wonderful machine, at everything apart from calculating routes.

Which is odd, when so many bods on this site use it for nothing more than taking them from A to B, using routes spat out by the device, with no other human intervention. Providing of course that it never uses a motorway, ‘cos they is well shite, mate.

The OP may indeed be a case in point.

 

[JohnnyBoxer]

Which, unfortunately, doesn’t in any way answer the OP’s routing anomaly question, JB.

PS Contrary to old JB’s words, the XT is a very good device.

Luckily, he bought his cheap….. or we’d never hear the end if it

Good job if it’s gonna this troublesome

 

[yoyo]

I find mine very good for A to B, its getting the route from My Route into the XT that I struggle with as came to light when I was in Scotland last week. It's all my own fault should have read the threads on here before going .

Sent from my ELE-L29 using Tapatalk

 

[Wapping]

You should have practiced before you left home

 

[Wapping]

If only to make a point, Google is now throwing up a route suggestion for the journey Frome to Brean, that is 46 miles long, crossing the upper part of the Mendips.

Google did not give this option, mid-afternoon yesterday, probably due to nothing more than traffic concerns within the algorithm.


As you (and hopefully Mr “The XT is crap” Boxter) can see, routing is far from an exact science, dependent upon a host of factors. These factors will include:

The algorithms of any one piece of software or application

The preference settings

Traffic considerations

Maybe, depending on the application, the time of day

Maybe, again depending on the application, any known road closures

Other things


The only way to ever be really sure, is to create the route yourself, which is easy enough. Or use a paper map. There again, you might route yourself by accident, along a stretch of road that is closed. That might leave you cursing the dumb device’s (or map’s) stupidity….

 

[Cogs]

Thanks for the input, all of it Johnny

Yes I agree re the 2610, it's all been downhill from there. I've since had the 660, the 595 and now the XT and though in each case they've done more, they've fallen down on something that was done better before.

Sadly the 2610 is no longer supported so no map updates available.

The 660 was a prize in a raffle and a joy, when it wasn't frozen, though the mapping looked like it had been drawn by a 5 year old with a fat crayon c/w the 2610, a downgrade in resolution, IMO, to make space for all the bloatware....

I bought the 595 because I needed something reliable (ie not freeze every 100 miles or so...) that would take the states in one chunk for a fly-drive trip. Big let down when I got back and fitted it to the GS as the screen was reminiscent of watching the Apollo 11 landing on a telly at primary school:- dim as f*ck. But I've got on / put up with it for >4 years until I saw a friend's XT at a HU meeting in The Peaks recently and I thought wow! that's bright, why not...?

I will admit I am a dynamic user rather than a plan-in-advance type and so a mere infant with regards Basecamp. Via and shaping points are new to me. But the unit doesn't do what it should and all its predecessors have done. That is, give it a destination and get shortest or quickest route options. Oh, or the all new (with the 595, XT) wiggly adventure option.

I have spent many an hour perusing the Zumo Users Forum and all I've found there is more confusion. For instance, did you know that Fastest route doesn't give you fastest A to B but A to B via the fastest roads? Which can add miles. Don't recall that ever being an issue with previous models?

However, I didn't find an answer to my question: Why does shortest give a route far in excess of that available via Google or good old paper Maps? Or, more relevant, by either the 595, 660 or the 2610?

The XT was straight out of the box (with all software and map updates done), no avoidances, no personal preferences. I guess it could have just been first night nerves but it's a bloody machine.

I will play with it some more but first impressions are mixed to say the least

 

[Keith Chapman]

Does it make a difference to the routing if you select a different mode of transport. eg , bike car or lorry?

 

[russ996duke]

... I bought the 595 because I needed something reliable Big let down when I got back and fitted it to the GS as the screen was reminiscent of watching the Apollo 11 landing on a telly at primary school:- dim as f*ck. But I've got on / put up with it for >4 years until I saw a friend's XT at a HU meeting in The Peaks recently and I thought wow! that's bright, why not...?

Interesting comment regarding screen brightness or otherwise on your 595
My old 590 has started to develop certain quirks, old age I suppose, on top of the usual garmin "personality"!
One of these is that if its in the bike mount when I switch ignition on, the 590 fires up normally, screen brightness very good. When i start the engine, it immediately goes into "dim" mode, very hard to read!
The gaffer tape fix for this is to take it out of the mount (engine remains running) and then re-clip it in, at this point it does the usual (pointless and extended garmin) start up routine, after which screen has returned to the very good brightness level!
Might be worth trying this power up and down with yours, if you havent binned it yet. I am very tempted by an XT, maybe later this summer

 

[JohnnyBoxer]

Thanks for the input, all of it Johnny

Yes I agree re the 2610, it's all been downhill from there. I've since had the 660, the 595 and now the XT and though in each case they've done more, they've fallen down on something that was done better before.

Sadly the 2610 is no longer supported so no map updates available.

The 660 was a prize in a raffle and a joy, when it wasn't frozen, though the mapping looked like it had been drawn by a 5 year old with a fat crayon c/w the 2610, a downgrade in resolution, IMO, to make space for all the bloatware....

I bought the 595 because I needed something reliable (ie not freeze every 100 miles or so...) that would take the states in one chunk for a fly-drive trip. Big let down when I got back and fitted it to the GS as the screen was reminiscent of watching the Apollo 11 landing on a telly at primary school:- dim as f*ck. But I've got on / put up with it for >4 years until I saw a friend's XT at a HU meeting in The Peaks recently and I thought wow! that's bright, why not...?

I will admit I am a dynamic user rather than a plan-in-advance type and so a mere infant with regards Basecamp. Via and shaping points are new to me. But the unit doesn't do what it should and all its predecessors have done. That is, give it a destination and get shortest or quickest route options. Oh, or the all new (with the 595, XT) wiggly adventure option.

I have spent many an hour perusing the Zumo Users Forum and all I've found there is more confusion. For instance, did you know that Fastest route doesn't give you fastest A to B but A to B via the fastest roads? Which can add miles. Don't recall that ever being an issue with previous models?

However, I didn't find an answer to my question: Why does shortest give a route far in excess of that available via Google or good old paper Maps? Or, more relevant, by either the 595, 660 or the 2610?

The XT was straight out of the box (with all software and map updates done), no avoidances, no personal preferences. I guess it could have just been first night nerves but it's a bloody machine.

I will play with it some more but first impressions are mixed to say the least

I said the 2610 was the still the best motorcycle sat nav, never beaten in the past at it calculated road routes
It doesn’t bother me that the mapping isn’t updated as the roads I still want to ride haven’t changed in the last 100 years
I bought a Zumo XT last year and have just started using it
It’s a toil so far
I also use a Montana 610 with either OS (ordnance survey for you Wapping) or CNavigator mapping on it, via SD card
I can toggle between profiles to select whichever maps I want and it’s great - but like an old 2610
Glad you agree with me

 

[John Armstrong]

I have a 590, 396 and XT. Of the three I'd say the 396 is the option I like the best as it has a fairly bright screen (though smaller than the other two) similar routing logics as the 590, and doesn't get into the repeated u-turns mayhem that the XT does when using an imported route with way / via points.

For certain I'm not putting any money Garmin's way for the XT2.

 

[Cogs]

Does it make a difference to the routing if you select a different mode of transport. eg , bike car or lorry?

I imagine it would, particularly between lorry and the others but I haven't tried that out with the XT yet. In this instance there were no access issues that could have caused such a disparity. We were travelling in our Ford Ranger BTW. I have yet to rewire the GS from 595 to XT as we came back from Somerset with my first dose of COVID which has laid me out and cancelled an operation on my foot

 

[Cogs]

Interesting comment regarding screen brightness or otherwise on your 595
My old 590 has started to develop certain quirks, old age I suppose, on top of the usual garmin "personality"!
One of these is that if its in the bike mount when I switch ignition on, the 590 fires up normally, screen brightness very good. When i start the engine, it immediately goes into "dim" mode, very hard to read!
The gaffer tape fix for this is to take it out of the mount (engine remains running) and then re-clip it in, at this point it does the usual (pointless and extended garmin) start up routine, after which screen has returned to the very good brightness level!
Might be worth trying this power up and down with yours, if you havent binned it yet. I am very tempted by an XT, maybe later this summer

Check your internal battery connections on the 590? The 595 certainly has an issue with that causing issues with using the unit away from bike, car or PC. there are vids showing how to revitalise connections with a scalpel or Stanley blade, though I'd recommend Servisol or similar first.