Google Routes to Basecamp to Nav V

I hesitate to post about Garmin/Basecamp issues since I've only had my 590 a few months, but I had similar Earth problems. Earth was on my PC, but generated an error from Basecamp. Re-installing Earth did not help. The methods I found in this Garmin forum thread worked to allow viewing in Earth without the need for exporting the file and opening it separately. YMMV. I've not used that feature much since I find it cumbersome compared to Tyre or Google Maps, which let you modify your route in satellite mode, instead of just viewing the route.

Afternoon Larry__other readers

I used the info in that thread to allow BaseCamp to automatically open Google Earth. To get it to register correctly I had to run as administrator but more importantly I had to change the directory (CD) to the root directory of the drive that Googel Earth is loaded on before running RegServer to get it to work.

I think I see why the new Googel Earth dropped the auto linking as I get a BaseCamp lock-up every time I use BaseCamp to open Google Earth then go back into BaseCamp to do other functions.

I t-h-i-n-k I have a work-around for the BaseCamp/Google Earth lock-up (at least it is working so far (win 10 creator) is to ALWAYS delete the BaseCamp route from Google Earth's temp folder BEFORE exiting Google earth or reverting back to BaseCamp. (at least something to try if you get BaseCamp lock-ups)

Thanks all who have posted- so far.

I was and still am frustrated by Basecamp and route design thereon... but my original comment was more directed toward Garmin than the work-arounds... which are much appreciated... but should not be needed.

Mapsource worked for years and then Garmin merged it with the hiking/tracking software. I do not know about the Hikers, but I know the motorcycle guys and those who like to make routes for their autos/travels came up on the dirty-end of the deal.

IMHO they took a productive tool and turned it into an obscure and difficult solution to a problem that did not exist. Garmin's article on Mapsource goes on about it and it sounds like whining. It also irritates me that it is not compatible with Mac OS.

Thanks to all for your input.

Please carry on.

 

I'm not sure if I understand this comment, but there is a Mac version of Basecamp, in fact, it pre-dates the Windows version. I've used it since 2010, and find it easy and relatively intuitive.

Thanks all who have posted- so far.

 

I was and still am frustrated by Basecamp and route design thereon... but my original comment was more directed toward Garmin than the work-arounds... which are much appreciated... but should not be needed.

 

Mapsource worked for years and then Garmin merged it with the hiking/tracking software. I do not know about the Hikers, but I know the motorcycle guys and those who like to make routes for their autos/travels came up on the dirty-end of the deal.

 

IMHO they took a productive tool and turned it into an obscure and difficult solution to a problem that did not exist. Garmin's article on Mapsource goes on about it and it sounds like whining. It also irritates me that it is not compatible with Mac OS.

 

Thanks to all for your input.

 

Please carry on.

Have you watched any of the tutorial videos on using Basecamp? I used Mapsource for about 10 yrs and then switched to Basecamp and find it as easier if not easier to create routes from simple to complicated ones. And the data management is much better than Mapsource.

Hi, Ken... and others.

Yes, the Basecamp I have plays on all my Mac machines.... I was responding to a previous post where it implied otherwise... but I digress...

The main thing that I find strange about Basecamp is the way it changes routes after they are made. Without all the gory details I made a custom route from Colorado to our family's home in Texas. No matter what I did... BC insisted in altering my chosen path of travel.

I called Garmin support and the first two "helpers" could not break the code- and yes- they witnessed it happening.... then they sent me to a higher level support who repeated the issue numerous times until they decided they did not know what was causing it nor what to do about it. Disappointing.

I found a kludgy work around but I still get odd paths and turns, but this works only because I knew where I really wanted to go anyway. If I were traveling on unfamiliar roads I would risk being taken to unintended paths...

The odd thing is that I was an early adopter of the original Zumo. I was also the first, or second, moderator at the Zumo Forums site...

 

The main thing that I find strange about Basecamp is the way it changes routes after they are made. Without all the gory details I made a custom route from Colorado to our family's home in Texas. No matter what I did... BC insisted in altering my chosen path of travel.

Morning Hopz

Did you start & make that route fresh or did you use parts of an older route to build that route from?

I have found many routing issue in BaseCamp if I try to use an old route (or even part of an old route) to start with (especially if the old route was originally made in MapSource or on a real old NT map set).

 

I'm not sure if I understand this comment, but there is a Mac version of Basecamp, in fact, it pre-dates the Windows version. I've used it since 2010, and find it easy and relatively intuitive.

Do you know if B C is compatible with iPad and, if it is, can Zumos connect to ipads for data transfers?

 

Do you know if B C is compatible with iPad and, if it is, can Zumos connect to ipads for data transfers?

Morning Rex

Look in the App store for your device, just be sure it is the Garmin BaseCamp & not some other app marketed as BaseCamp.

If it will load it will probably work.

I haven't ever been able to get Garmin BaseCamp to work on an android system.

 

I'm not sure if I understand this comment, but there is a Mac version of Basecamp, in fact, it pre-dates the Windows version. I've used it since 2010, and find it easy and relatively intuitive.

 

Do you know if B C is compatible with iPad and, if it is, can Zumos connect to ipads for data transfers?

Not to my knowledge. The Mac version is strictly that - for Macs only, not iOS mobile devices.

When I connect my gps (zumo) to my PC and view the routes contained therein in BC, the routes are "dotted" with blue flags. It's very distracting trying to work with the map when it is covered with these shaping points.

OTOH, the routes stored in BC/on my PC do not display the shaping points, or they are displayed as small dots that aren't nearly as annoying.

Ironically, most of the routes on my zumo were originally created in BC.

Using the OPTIONS menu under EDIT, I globally set the display of symbols to a smaller size which reduces the problem with these flags. Unfortunately, it also shrinks the display of the waypoints that I actually want to display. So it is not an ideal solution.

Anyone know how I can adjust my settings to alter the display of these shaping points/waypoints?

When I connect my gps (zumo) to my PC and view the routes contained therein in BC, the routes are "dotted" with blue flags. It's very distracting trying to work with the map when it is covered with these shaping points.

 

OTOH, the routes stored in BC/on my PC do not display the shaping points, or they are displayed as small dots that aren't nearly as annoying.

 

Ironically, most of the routes on my zumo were originally created in BC.

 

Using the OPTIONS menu under EDIT, I globally set the display of symbols to a smaller size which reduces the problem with these flags. Unfortunately, it also shrinks the display of the waypoints that I actually want to display. So it is not an ideal solution.

 

Anyone know how I can adjust my settings to alter the display of these shaping points/waypoints?

 

Afternoon Rex R

BaseCamp has an option to turn off those flag announcements BUT it doesn't seem to work on the older Zumo's

Build a new route but put the shaping points "that you don't want announced" EXACTLY on road intersections (real road intersections not driveways or very small roads). With the Zumo that usually prevents all those flags from showing along the route.

Thanks Dirt R.

I don't have time to try it right now, but I'll play later. Do the shaping points have to be IN the intersection for your technique to work? Normally I place them right after the intersection where I want to force a turn, usually between a dozen and a couple hundred feet. When I placed the points in the intersections (or before), I often did not get the route I intended.

Thanks Dirt R.

 

I don't have time to try it right now, but I'll play later. Do the shaping points have to be IN the intersection for your technique to work? Normally I place them right after the intersection where I want to force a turn, usually between a dozen and a couple hundred feet. When I placed the points in the intersections (or before), I often did not get the route I intended.

Afternoon Rex

Place them RIGHT AT the center of the road intersection. Placing them after the intersection will have them show & announce.

At least try it, the shaping points on the intersections used to work great for not showing/announcing on the Zumo's but I don't ride much with a Zumo any longer so haven't tried it with the new Garmin NT mapping.

Basecamp really s_cks! It's got a few good features, but everytime I try to get zen with it, it finds a new way to s_ck.

Anyone know a way to get it to be a little less Hymie the Robot with avoidances? I have it set to avoid unpaved roads. But just because I don't want to ride 3 miles on dust and gravel doesn't mean I t want it send me on a 5 mile detour to avoid a quick 1/4 mile length of unpaved road.

Like I said: just a little less Hymie the Robot. (if you're too young to remember Get Smart, that means a little less literal, and just a little more flexible.)

 

Anyone know a way to get it to be a little less Hymie the Robot with avoidances? I have it set to avoid unpaved roads. But just because I don't want to ride 3 miles on dust and gravel doesn't mean I t want it send me on a 5 mile detour to avoid a quick 1/4 mile length of unpaved road.

 

Evening Rex

That's as easy one (at least for me)-- I just turn off ALL avoidances, then when I get to 1/4 mile of gravel I just ride across it & when I get to 3 miles of gravel I hit detour & ride around it.

If you tell BaseCamp to avoid something it will do what it's told & avoid it.

Tell BaseCamp that you want to avoid toll roads & it can send you 3 states out of the way to avoid a toll bridge.

NOW will you finally admit that Basecamp S_CKS!?

I learned the hard way that Zumo does the same thing. When it was new, I tried using it to get home from a ride. I finally gave up waiting for it to calculate the 10-15 mile ride home. Eventually I figured out why it was taking so long. it was taking me 6+ hours out of my way to avoid a $1.25 toll!

Your way would work for me, if it gave me notice that the route included 3 miles of dirt. Then I could take a detour. But I'd rather not need to carefully review the entire route for any unpaved sections.

In 2017, computers should be able to handle a couple of judgement calls.

In 2017, computers should be able to handle a couple of judgement calls.

Rex,

Tell me you're not serious.

Like DR suggests, turn off the avoidances. You make the judgement calls.

My tongue just MAY have been in my cheek when I typed that. I would have to view the playback to verify. And I'm pretty sure DR understands my facetious sarcasm. OTOH, I stand by the evaluation of BC. When I create a route in Google Maps, it notifies me if there are tolls along the route. I can then search for a detour if I choose to go 6 hours out of my way to avoid a $1.25 toll. I would think offering such a warning for unpaved roads is a simple programming step.

BC, unfortunately, does not offer such a warning for unpaved roads (ie "Heads up! 42 out of 51 miles on the route you just mapped out are unpaved. You REALLY want to do that the day after you washed your bike?") Nor does it have a simple AI algorithm to suggest sucking it up and crossing an unpaved road to avoid going 5 miles out of your way if you opted to avoid unpaved roads. ("Hey doofus! I'm doing what you asked, but you're making me add 20 minutes to a 10 minute trip because you don't want to cross a couple hundred feet of hard-packed clay. Why don't you put on your big boy pants today and try something new.")

If I always had the time and inclination to zoom in tight enough on the map to see unpaved roads, and carefully scrutinize the route from beginning to end, then turning off all avoidances would be a viable solution. However, I use computers to facilitate my work and play, not complicate it. Hell, I actually still remember how to read, use AND fold paper maps! I could use them, but for most purposes computerized maps and gps are more efficient. My contention is BC could and should be even more efficient if it used GM as a paradigm and instituted a few tweaks.

(btw DR, thanks again for the tips)

 

My tongue just MAY have been in my cheek when I typed that. I would have to view the playback to verify. And I'm pretty sure DR understands my facetious sarcasm. OTOH, I stand by the evaluation of BC. When I create a route in Google Maps, it notifies me if there are tolls along the route. I can then search for a detour if I choose to go 6 hours out of my way to avoid a $1.25 toll. I would think offering such a warning for unpaved roads is a simple programming step.

 

BC, unfortunately, does not offer such a warning for unpaved roads (ie "Heads up! 42 out of 51 miles on the route you just mapped out are unpaved. You REALLY want to do that the day after you washed your bike?") Nor does it have a simple AI algorithm to suggest sucking it up and crossing an unpaved road to avoid going 5 miles out of your way if you opted to avoid unpaved roads. ("Hey doofus! I'm doing what you asked, but you're making me add 20 minutes to a 10 minute trip because you don't want to cross a couple hundred feet of hard-packed clay. Why don't you put on your big boy pants today and try something new.")

 

If I always had the time and inclination to zoom in tight enough on the map to see unpaved roads, and carefully scrutinize the route from beginning to end, then turning off all avoidances would be a viable solution. However, I use computers to facilitate my work and play, not complicate it. Hell, I actually still remember how to read, use AND fold paper maps! I could use them, but for most purposes computerized maps and gps are more efficient. My contention is BC could and should be even more efficient if it used GM as a paradigm and instituted a few tweaks.

 

 

(btw DR, thanks again for the tips)

Morning Rex

Well, short of trying to write your own program to find hidden gravel roads, then determine the length, then figure out if it should route across or around them I just don't know of any mapping program that will do that at this time.

Personally & just make my routes using enough detail to see the gravel sections then determine if it's across or around.

There is one work-around that I use-- I ride using Open Street maps. Those maps are customizeable (sp) but definitely not easily unless time is taken to learn & understand the somewhat complicated program.

In any case, in Open Street Maps, I make my gravel roads look wider, darker, & more pronounced so I can spot them way in advance while riding. Big difference is I am looking for dirt & gravel not trying to avoid it.

Added: How are you making or forming your route? Are you just putting in the start & finish with maybe a few points to guide it or are you using the routing tool to draw the route as you move along the mapped roads?

"You're on the list, buddy."

I see your point on the warnings and that would be a nice feature. But, do remember that BC isn't a GPS and you're sitting behind your computer while on it, not on the road. I think a really good route analyzer would be very useful. Something you run after your route is built that could give you all the stats. Road classes, speeds, gravel/dirt roads, u-turns, tolls, etc. That would be a helpful starting point instead of having to zoom in tight and scan every inch of the thing.

FILES AND STORAGE: with MapSource (I still fall back to that sometimes) I can create routes, save waypoints and tracks in separate files just like I would name a file in Word, Excel, or any other application. This makes it easy to store and retrieve data and to work undistracted by irrelevant data when creating or editing a trip/route etc. I just can't get a handle on how Basecamp organizes data in the window on the left side of the screen (under Library).

I will disagree about this comment you made earlier regarding files and storage. I've got a nice database of routes I've built (but mostly acquired) in BC over the last couple of years and its nicely organized and makes good sense to me. And my database in BC is a joke compared to a a few I know on this site.

I've got a nice database of routes I've built (but mostly acquired) in BC over the last couple of years and its nicely organized and makes good sense to me. And my database in BC is a joke compared to a a few I know on this site.

Morning Mike

If you value that those lists make sure to back them up to another place or folder. As a rule Windows backup doesn't include the BaseCamp lists in there normal folder back-up's & if windows crashes you will lose your BaseCamp lists.

Just happened to a friend of mine a while back-- Luckily my friend rides mostly the same routing as I do so I had most of the routes he lost backed up on my cloud.

Morning Mike

 

If you value that those lists make sure to back them up to another place or folder.

yup, often.

"You're on the list, buddy."

I'm guessing that's a direct response to my "Lighten up" comment. don't recognize the reference, tho. (Assuming it's a quote)

I will disagree about this comment you made earlier regarding files and storage. I've got a nice database of routes I've built (but mostly acquired) in BC over the last couple of years and its nicely organized and makes good sense to me. And my database in BC is a joke compared to a a few I know on this site.

I don't dispute that BC is capable of storage and organization. I merely criticize it for its lack of intuitiveness, a complaint that many others share, including members on this message board. I'm certain that just a little over-the-shoulder help, would go a long way towards gaining mastery over their system. However, I don't have a BC expert in my home or office.

If you value that those lists make sure to back them up to another place or folder. As a rule Windows backup doesn't include the BaseCamp lists in there normal folder back-up's

I changed the storage location of the database to my OneDrive folder so I have access to it from my laptop or desktop. I also automatically backup my OneDrive folder

Basecamp is probably the most irritating program of any sort I have ever encountered. You can shape a route then load it and viola"... it changes it. etc. Won't go into more details here except to say it remains a P.I.T.A.

The OP seems to have achieved catharsis; he hasn't posted in this thread for a while. But I keep find new ways BC s_cks!

Maybe someone can help with this latest irritant. I "joined" 3 separate routes in BC (because BC won't let us just "extend" a route like its predecessor MapSource does) to create a round-trip route from/to home for a nice 4 hr ride. Thought everything was good. The route looked good on my computer screen. Got on the road and realized something was wrong. Because the scrolling and zooming features on gps are pretty slow, it took me a while to figure out the problem.

BC used the wrong waypoint as my start/end point. End result was I was able to follow the route I wanted, but the "time to destination" was wrong, and I had to stop at the "end point" and re-select the joined route to continue my ride.

Anyone know a way to ensure that a joined route begins and ends where you intended?

Basecamp is probably the most irritating program of any sort I have ever encountered. You can shape a route then load it and viola"... it changes it. etc. Won't go into more details here except to say it remains a P.I.T.A.

 

The OP seems to have achieved catharsis; he hasn't posted in this thread for a while. But I keep find new ways BC s_cks!

 

Maybe someone can help with this latest irritant. I "joined" 3 separate routes in BC (because BC won't let us just "extend" a route like its predecessor MapSource does) to create a round-trip route from/to home for a nice 4 hr ride. Thought everything was good. The route looked good on my computer screen. Got on the road and realized something was wrong. Because the scrolling and zooming features on gps are pretty slow, it took me a while to figure out the problem.

 

BC used the wrong waypoint as my start/end point. End result was I was able to follow the route I wanted, but the "time to destination" was wrong, and I had to stop at the "end point" and re-select the joined route to continue my ride.

 

Anyone know a way to ensure that a joined route begins and ends where you intended?

Afternoon Rex

Did you recalculate the route after all the joining? Did you (manually) verify the correct start & end points after recalculation? (double left click route in the L/H box, then look at PROPERTIES, should show DEPART as the start & the last ARIVE should be the end)

Hiya Dirt,

I did check that when I returned home and, during the ride, on the gps. That's how I concluded BC joined them incorrectly.

I did not recalculate, but I did observe that the joined route and the individual routes matched exactly. Well, almost exactly. Except for the wrong start/end points.

Hiya Dirt,

 

I did check that when I returned home and, during the ride, on the gps. That's how I concluded BC joined them incorrectly.

 

I did not recalculate, but I did observe that the joined route and the individual routes matched exactly. Well, almost exactly. Except for the wrong start/end points.

Evening Rex

I usually don't join more then 2 routes at a time. I have seen some irregularities when trying to join 3 or 4 routes at one time.

Maybe try joining the fist two route sections, then join the 3rd route to that route, then join the 4th (etc) to that if you have more sections.

Thanks, bro. I'll try that next time.

Rex...

thanks for the observation and comment on this thread.

Catharsis ?... No, not yet. I just began this thread out of frustration, no... irritation... that Garmin would do what they did... still cannot figure out why,,, but I digress.

I find is curiously refreshing to know that so far, there are basically 78 posts to this thread so I am apparently not the only one having BC issues.

Thanks everyone- please continue... (FWIW... In general I no longer use Basecamp... I just use the "Where To" option and tell the Nav V where I want to go... then follow the pretty colored line.... I know- it is a surrender but so far I almost always end up someplace.

(P.S. > If anyone believes that- you are mostly mistaken.)

Hiya Dirt,

 

I did check that when I returned home and, during the ride, on the gps. That's how I concluded BC joined them incorrectly.

 

I did not recalculate, but I did observe that the joined route and the individual routes matched exactly. Well, almost exactly. Except for the wrong start/end points.

 

Evening Rex

 

I usually don't join more then 2 routes at a time. I have seen some irregularities when trying to join 3 or 4 routes at one time.

 

Maybe try joining the fist two route sections, then join the 3rd route to that route, then join the 4th (etc) to that if you have more sections.

When joining routes make sure you get them in the right order. Otherwise BC will mess it all up!

"HOW do you make sure you get them in the right order?" is the $64,000 question

"HOW do you make sure you get them in the right order?" is the $64,000 question

Morning Rex

You don't get that choice so only join 2 sections at a time. Join section two to section one, then join section three to the route created when joining 1 & 2. Even then you can sometimes end up with minor routing problems if one route section routes back over or across an earlier section or uses a common waypoint.

Personally if I'm working with more than one route section I re-name the section with numbers after them so I can easily tell them part (like Home_1,,Home_2,, Home_3. So if I join Home _1 & Home _2 I then re-name the created route to Home_J1. Then when all done & I am happy with the route & after I delete all the left-overs I then go back & re-name the single created route to it's final name.

By numbering the created route sections it makes it easy to keep track, but just as important, by having numbers after the routes it makes it more difficult to delete the main stored route in another list (if you delete Home_1 & delete Home_2 in the current working list that will not delete the route named "Home" in another list by mistake). Or put another way, by adding a number or letter after the route names that you are working with that makes the routes unique to the list that you are working in.

Plus NEVER start a route then end that route at the very same point. If something goes wrong with the route then your GPS can jump to the return section without routing you along the entire route path.

The safe way is to have a separate route gong TO then make a separate route returning BACK. If you make a long continuous loop route then always return it to a point just short of the starting point.

My personal way is to change the color of routes going "to" from purple to green & change the color of routes "returning" from purple to red. That way it is very easy to distinguish TO routes from RETURN routes (unfortunately few GPS devices can use or show the colors but Base Camp shows it)

"HOW do you make sure you get them in the right order?" is the $64,000 question

When you click "Join Routes" a pop up box appears. In that box you can rearrange the order of the routes segments. Do it in the wrong order and BC will have you traveling back and forth.

DING DING DING DING!!!

We have a winner! Guess I missed (or clicked right thru) that box the few times I joined routes.

Thanks JK!

Rex...

 

thanks for the observation and comment on this thread.

 

Catharsis ?... No, not yet. I just began this thread out of frustration, no... irritation... that Garmin would do what they did... still cannot figure out why,,, but I digress.

 

I find is curiously refreshing to know that so far, there are basically 78 posts to this thread so I am apparently not the only one having BC issues.

 

Thanks everyone- please continue... (FWIW... In general I no longer use Basecamp... I just use the "Where To" option and tell the Nav V where I want to go... then follow the pretty colored line.... I know- it is a surrender but so far I almost always end up someplace.

 

(P.S. > If anyone believes that- you are mostly mistaken.)

 

Here's a new way for BC to s_ck:

I'm scheduling several errands today, travelling N, S, E & W from home. Thought I knew an efficient route to cover all the spots with minimal backtracking. Decided to give BC a chance to find a more efficient route. Put the waypoints in, created MY route. Driving time was calculated by BC at 1:02.

Then I gave BC a shot at it, clicked the OPTIMIZE button. BC offered me the option to retain the last waypoint as the route's ending point. I clicked NO to give BC the widest possible lattitude to find the quickest route. BC re-ordered the waypoints and calculated the driving time for this "optimized" route at 1:14.

 

Here's a new way for BC to s_ck:

 

I'm scheduling several errands today, travelling N, S, E & W from home. Thought I knew an efficient route to cover all the spots with minimal backtracking. Decided to give BC a chance to find a more efficient route. Put the waypoints in, created MY route. Driving time was calculated by BC at 1:02.

 

Then I gave BC a shot at it, clicked the OPTIMIZE button. BC offered me the option to retain the last waypoint as the route's ending point. I clicked NO to give BC the widest possible lattitude to find the quickest route. BC re-ordered the waypoints and calculated the driving time for this "optimized" route at 1:14.

 

Rex,

Did it retain the same ending point? If it did not, that throws in a lot of variables. Also, if it recalculated on shortest distance, that could result in a shorter route than your original, but with a longer travel time. What are the original and optimized route distances?

 

I'm scheduling several errands today, travelling N, S, E & W from home. Thought I knew an efficient route to cover all the spots with minimal backtracking. Decided to give BC a chance to find a more efficient route. Put the waypoints in, created MY route. Driving time was calculated by BC at 1:02.

 

Then I gave BC a shot at it, clicked the OPTIMIZE button. BC offered me the option to retain the last waypoint as the route's ending point. I clicked NO to give BC the widest possible lattitude to find the quickest route. BC re-ordered the waypoints and calculated the driving time for this "optimized" route at 1:14.

Afternoon Rex

What are your BaseCamp routing profiles for that route? If set to shortest distance or curvy roads it can route you across roads with more stops or lower speed limits.

If set for the fastest time then it might be a slightly longer route but over much faster roads.

Afternoon Rex

 

What are your BaseCamp routing profiles for that route? If set to shortest distance or curvy roads it can route you across roads with more stops or lower speed limits.

 

If set for the fastest time then it might be a slightly longer route but over much faster roads.

Hi brother

THAT much I did check. I have the default profiles (car and motorcycle) set for FASTER TIME. And I double-checked this specific route, and it is using the default (faster time) routing option. Therefore, BC should not give me a route that, by its own calculation, takes 12 minutes longer and adds 6.1 miles to the trip.

Just for sh_ts and giggles, I re-ordered the points back to my orginal order and recalculated. BC calculated the time for just 1:01 this time. I can accept and ignore a one-minute discrepancy as a rounding error. But how does BC "optimize" 6 waypoints so badly?!

Afternoon Rex

 

What are your BaseCamp routing profiles for that route? If set to shortest distance or curvy roads it can route you across roads with more stops or lower speed limits.

 

If set for the fastest time then it might be a slightly longer route but over much faster roads.

Hi brother

 

THAT much I did check. I have the default profiles (car and motorcycle) set for FASTER TIME. And I double-checked this specific route, and it is using the default (faster time) routing option. Therefore, BC should not give me a route that, by its own calculation, takes 12 minutes longer and adds 6.1 miles to the trip.

 

Just for sh_ts and giggles, I re-ordered the points back to my orginal order and recalculated. BC calculated the time for just 1:01 this time. I can accept and ignore a one-minute discrepancy as a rounding error. But how does BC "optimize" 6 waypoints so badly?!

Evening Rex

What do you have your road speeds set at in the "fastest time" road types vs travel speed? (I usually use + 15mph on freeways, & +10mph on major hiways, & +5 on smaller roads). I think the B/C default is 67, 58, 35.

Look in (routing) -- (speed) -- (customize), then set you travel speeds by road type.

I just go with the default speeds in the program.

Because BC doesn't allow for traffic, I never depend on its estimates of travel time. In this particular case, I am looking only at the relative times because of the program's internal inconsistency. i.e. its "optimized" route is longer (in both time and miles) than the route I created.

I just go with the default speeds in the program.

 

Because BC doesn't allow for traffic, I never depend on its estimates of travel time. In this particular case, I am looking only at the relative times because of the program's internal inconsistency. i.e. its "optimized" route is longer (in both time and miles) than the route I created.

Morning Rex

Do you have ALL the avoidances turned off in BaseCamp?

Morning Rex

 

Do you have ALL the avoidances turned off in BaseCamp?

No, but none of those apply to any part of my route. It "avoids" unpaved roads, ferries, car pool lanes, cable cars, narrow trails, climbing paths, and date & time closures.

Morning Rex

 

Do you have ALL the avoidances turned off in BaseCamp?

No, but none of those apply to any part of my route. It "avoids" unpaved roads, ferries, car pool lanes, cable cars, narrow trails, climbing paths, and date & time closures.

Afternoon Rex

Turn ALL your avoidances off then see what route it gives you.

The unpaved roads can really bite you as there are parts of some roads that are paved but the NT map tells BaseCamp that a short section is unpaved. In a lot of cases you can't visually see that on the map.

(I see that about every route as there is a 3 mile section of paved road leading out one direction from my house (been paved since 1963), BaseCamp sees a mile section being unpaved)--Just about impossible to route that direction if I have avoid unpaved roads turned on. When using OpenStreet maps I have no routing issue as that section has been changed on the OpenStreet mapping.

Same with car pool lanes as those are not always accurate on the NT map.

Just had an unbelievably frustrating ride home yesterday. I made route in base camp and transferred to Nav 5. The first hundred miles were great but then it kept routing me onto dirt roads (I was on my RT so not a fan of dirt). I spent an hour or more trying to get around it but every time I turned around it would route me down another dirt road. I finally abandoned my planned route and just hit go home on Nav and damned if it didn't do it again. Like an idiot I didn't have a real map with me. Won't make that mistake again. I definitely had the avoidances set correctly. I wonder if the maps they bought were not correct and the Nav didn't know that they were dirt roads.

On an interesting side note. I went to an open house at a BMW dealership because there was going to be a base camp seminar. The guy talked about how bad base camp was and the entire time was spent using a program called Rever. It is much easier to plan routes. The only problem is that if you want to convert the routes to gpx format you have to pay. I think it was $5.00 a month. He planned a route on Rever, converted it and then transferred to GPS.

Just had an unbelievably frustrating ride home yesterday. I made route in base camp and transferred to Nav 5. The first hundred miles were great but then it kept routing me onto dirt roads (I was on my RT so not a fan of dirt). I spent an hour or more trying to get around it but every time I turned around it would route me down another dirt road. I finally abandoned my planned route and just hit go home on Nav and damned if it didn't do it again. Like an idiot I didn't have a real map with me. Won't make that mistake again. I definitely had the avoidances set correctly. I wonder if the maps they bought were not correct and the Nav didn't know that they were dirt roads.

 

On an interesting side note. I went to an open house at a BMW dealership because there was going to be a base camp seminar. The guy talked about how bad base camp was and the entire time was spent using a program called Rever. It is much easier to plan routes. The only problem is that if you want to convert the routes to gpx format you have to pay. I think it was $5.00 a month. He planned a route on Rever, converted it and then transferred to GPS.

Morning bgf50

When you turn around & ride a route backwards the Nav 5 can do an unnoticed recalculation & change the route.

When you get on a road that you don't like & turn around (ie ride route backwards) always stop the route then re-initiate the route when you get heading the correct direction again.

On an interesting side note. I went to an open house at a BMW dealership because there was going to be a base camp seminar. The guy talked about how bad base camp was and the entire time was spent using a program called Rever. It is much easier to plan routes. The only problem is that if you want to convert the routes to gpx format you have to pay. I think it was $5.00 a month. He planned a route on Rever, converted it and then transferred to GPS.

At a seminar during the BMWMOA rally the Garmin rep sort of recognized the general suckiness of Basecamp and indicated that it may be going away within the next year. He seemed to be unwilling to comment on a replacement program. The impression I had was that he knew of many problems with Basecamp and the Nav VI, but was not supposed to be talking about them, or making promises about possible fixes. He was reassuring to the many unhappy Nav VI owners about the media player issues, but indicated that those bug fixes are delayed because they require approval from BMW engineers. He did not seem happy about BMW engineers reviewing the work of Garmin engineers. After all, if BMW knows so much about GPS software, why are they contracting with Garmin?

I am happy to report that I made it to Utah and back without major incident. The four days' worth of Basecamp-planned routes to SLC were mostly OK. (After about twelve hours of work they should have been perfect.)

One error occurred a mile from home, when my zumo 590 wanted me to ride around a local shopping center before continuing down the road. At two other points, I received instructions to get off at an interstate ramp and then get right back on. The explanation for this seems to be that a shaping point was too close to the ramp entrance and the GPS chose to follow the ramp instead of the road. I've learned that I can touch the questionable instruction at the top of the screen to view the upcoming directions - if I see "U-Turn" or directions to get back on my current road, I'll ignore the erroneous instruction and continue straight.

Also, there were at least four places where I'd be (correctly) instructed to turn or take a ramp, and the map showed the turn, but as soon as I actually started the turn I'd be told I was off-route. I ignored the warnings and all was well, until the next time.

After the rally I spent a few days in Utah and Colorado, before returning to Ohio. The four routes for these days were all planned in Furkot. Each route took maybe five minutes to plan and transfer to the GPS. Typically, I'd set start,finish, and intermediate stops, then drag the route on my netbook to the exact roads I wanted. When the ride exceeds the preset fuel range, Furkot adds a gas stop (which I can modify). When Furkot exports the route, it automatically adds many shaping points to keep the route on track, and includes both the track and the route in the .gpx file for transfer to the GPS. The Furkot-planned routes were perfect, with no U-turns, no around-the-block diversions.

For the entire trip, the GPS was set to the Automotive(Fast) profile to keep it from adding more "Motorcycle" or "Curvy Road" diversions. I'd already included plenty of curves in the original planning.

I think all my future route planning will be in Furkot. It is much simpler to use than Basecamp and the on-the-bike results are exactly the route I planned. It does not hurt that it is free. Even better, in another seminar I learned that an off-line version is in the works using downloadable maps from OpenStreetMap.

I've come to the conclusion that dirt/gravel roads are unavoidable, especially in the western states. Even a paved road requires repair, which often involves tar with an inch of loose gravel on top. I've learned to just slow down and accept the squirrely steering. The RT wants to stay upright and will do fine as long as I do not tighten up on the handlebars.

Morning Larry

What mapping were you using in your nav vi?

Maybe it isn't the BaseCamp vs Furkot difference but the mapping difference used when planning/riding routes.

I have had MUCH better routing when using OpenStreet mapping so if Furkot uses the OpenStreet mapping that might be the difference in route planning vs route quality.

One problem that will eventually pop up if using NT mapping in your GPS but using a different map for route planning (I'm not sure what Furkot uses) is there will be times when you plan a route on one map set but the one in your GPS doesn't match (like having the same exits, or the road is changed, or changes from one way to 2 way, or from 2 way to one way, or ???)

It sounds like you traveled fairly major roads so most times those roads tend to match pretty well in any map set. The mapping mismatch usually shows up on very small back roads or in areas with old narrow bridges that are closed or newly opened.