Garmin 1090 Route Issue

aftergolf wrote:
Planning a trip north going through Baltimore in a Class A. Garmin route takes me through the McHenry Tunnel, which I am too wide for. Max width in the tunnel is 8' and my MH is 8.5'.
Called and talked to Garmin support and they said to submit a map error.
Discussed this is a fundamental map problem, not a map 'error'. The rep did not want to hear about it or discuss it. Was told you must do your planning properly.
This is nuts! What is the value of the GPS if it routes through a tunnel that will not allow the vehicle?
All of the input parameters are correct in the 1090, for height, width, weight etc and all maps are up to date.
Any one else have these problems?

You can never depend 100% on any GPS device. As you were told, you need to do your planning and ensure the route is right for you.

So what’s the big deal? Submit it as a “map error”.
You’re arguing semantics to the guy who can define “map error” any way he wants. Your goal is to get it fixed; regardless of what it’s called. If you submit it and then they don’t fix it, then complain.
As an aside, does Garmin even say that route planning uses the parameters you input; or how exactly do they use your inputted data; if it’s used at all? The only thing I know of is it “alerts” you, not that it calculates a route based on the inputs you entered.

On tunnels and overhead clearance. Navteq (which supplies virtually all the data for all gps mfg) gets there data from published state data. Therein lies the problem. There is inconsistent data. In Oregon the published clearance height is the clearance at the minimum edge of the tunnel. But clearance in the normal roadway path is usually much more. Washiungton is similar.

As a result it will tell me I don't have clearance on several tunnels on federal highways that truckers use. But I do and it will try to either alter the route or warn me. Same with several other gps programs I have.

I've had similar issues with traffic lane widths. So the problem isn't garmin, it's the raw data that is published they have access to.

Now in the OP case it could very well be that published data they use hsow a traffic lane more than 8.5ft wide. hence it routes through the tunnel.

BTW if that tunnel is indeed only 8ft, I couldn't drive my truck through it without pulling in the mirrors and folding them against the truck.

Does the tunnel really only have a 8ft traffic lane? That would really be unusual. And a dually couldn't go through it either.

From the MD DOT page
Any oversize or overweight vehicle and any vehicle and load together exceeding 96 inches (8 feet) in width or 13 feet 6 inches in height is prohibited from entering the Baltimore Harbor Tunnels and its approaches

What is the value of this device if I have to research every DOT site for where I am traveling?
To set up the unit the user has to enter vehicle info including height, width, weight etc and is supposed to keep you off of roads with lanes too narrow, bridges to low or underweight.
That is the entire premise of the device!

aftergolf wrote:
What is the value of this device if I have to research every DOT site for where I am traveling?
To set up the unit the user has to enter vehicle info including height, width, weight etc and is supposed to keep you off of roads with lanes too narrow, bridges to low or underweight.
That is the entire premise of the device!

Your assumption is that ALL the roadway data that if filed or on file with DOT or whomever is (a) correct (b) up to date (c) truely reflects the roadway and (d) captures any other restrictions.

THAT is a BAD BAD BAD assumption. Often Much of that data is old, obsolete, incorrect, only partial data or NOT filed.

As I mentioned, the data the gps uses is what is filed by whomever is responsible for the road. If that data it is not correct or not filed, it's not the gps fault. It's the agencies fault for not having correct information on file that Navteq has access to.

As I mentioned earlier, that same garmin will say I can't go on SR14 in Washington or down 101 in oregon without routing around tunnels. That's because the ONLY data filed show edge clearance outside the traffic lane of around 9ft, NOT the clearance on the traffic lane of 14+ft. If I go to ODOT website it will show the clearance as 9ft. on many tunnels. Even though traffic lane clearance is listed before the tunnel as 14+ft and an edge clearance much less.

that's likely the issue you are seeing. BAD data from whomever is responsible. It may all that was on file was traffic lane width, not the other restrictions.

So does that tunnel prohibit duallys unloaded? they are over 8ft, so is my 3/4 ton unless I fold the mirrors against the body.

I took a look at a picture of the tunnel and the picture showed at least one vehicle in the tunnel over 8ft wide mirror to mirror, and the traffic lanes look to be the typical 12ft lane.

And here is a quote from the DOT on tunnel restrictions. 8.5 ft is perfectly legal according to this.

Any oversize vehicle and load together exceeding 14 feet 6 inches in height or 11 feet in width is prohibited from entering the I-95 Fort McHenry Tunnel and its approaches unless, in the case of vehicles and loads exceeding 11 feet in width, special written permission is obtained from the Administrator of the Tunnel.

aftergolf wrote:
From the MD DOT page
Any oversize or overweight vehicle and any vehicle and load together exceeding 96 inches (8 feet) in width or 13 feet 6 inches in height is prohibited from entering the Baltimore Harbor Tunnels and its approaches

from what I found the ft mchenry tunnel and baltimore harbor tunnel are different tunnels.

Ft. Mchenry allows up to 11ft width, Baltimore harbor 8ft. So the Garmin is correct, you CAN go through the Ft. McHenry tunnel.

One is on I-95 th eother on the bypass I-895