Route Planning Question

[the_e-man]

Hi All,

I'd like to find a better way to plan my driving routes. The maps feature on smart phones like iPhone are optimized for the fastest route. That often isn't a good route when you are in an RV. In too many cases, it will lead you down narrow or winding roads that just aren't safe or comfortable.

I tried the Good Sam Trip Planner. It has an option to avoid highways. What I'd like to see is an option to show the easiest route - even if it takes a little longer. In many cases, that might mean using highways or interstate rather than smaller roads.

What do you recommend for finding the best RV driving route?

Thanks.

[profdant139]

valhallah, thanks for the tip about right clicking the google earth route to get the profile -- I did not know that!

[valhalla360]

ferndaleflyer wrote:
I use an old fashioned road map! First time we went to Pigeon Forge TN my DW insisted on using GPS and ended up on a narrow crooked road with tree limbs rubbing the sides of the DP. I later looked at a map and 1 mile up the road and it was a straight shot in. GPS is sometimes helpful but for an old guy like me the map never fails. I was driving coast to coast before there were any interstates or 4 lane roads let alone GPS or IPhones.

20-30yrs ago at the dawn of automotive GPS routing, this was a real concern.

Back in the modern world, no need to get out a paper map. Your phone will show you alternative routes and if you pan around a little, you will see that straight shot route.

Always makes sense to check the route prior to driving it.

[prichardson]

Back up any routing system with paper maps. Many times there is a better route than the one chosen by the electronic system.

[ferndaleflyer]

I use an old fashioned road map! First time we went to Pigeon Forge TN my DW insisted on using GPS and ended up on a narrow crooked road with tree limbs rubbing the sides of the DP. I later looked at a map and 1 mile up the road and it was a straight shot in. GPS is sometimes helpful but for an old guy like me the map never fails. I was driving coast to coast before there were any interstates or 4 lane roads let alone GPS or IPhones.

[the_e-man]

valhalla360 wrote:
Not sure about apple (but I'm betting it's similar) but Google Maps usually tries to get you from your start point using small local roads (if needed) working quickly to a high level road (arterial/freeway/etc). Then when you get close to your destination, it will reverse the process taking you to smaller more local roads as needed.

The only time we ever had issue with it is once, we should have driven past the first exit and backtracked a couple miles to get better roads. But that was on us as we didn't check the route before setting out.

It also typically gives you multiple options and there are some settings to adjust (avoid tolls, shortest distance, etc...) depending on your preferences. It's a good idea to explore those. I generally avoid tolls but if it's going to add 2hr to the drive, I'll happily pay them (usually obvious if you look at the route). Also, some times there is negligible time/distance between alternatives, so you can pick the one that appears to be higher level roads.

I wouldn't trust any system blindly. Particularly if you get off Interstate and US routes, best to zoom in and look at the proposed route ahead of time.

If you are in the mountains, I suggest downloading Google Earth (different from Google Maps). It's free. The advantage is you can plug in your route and if you right click, it gives you the option to show the profile. Now you can see where the steep sections are, what % grades to expect and if they are in a twisty-turny section. Also, you can zoom into smaller roads and enter "street view" to see if they are gravel or if they are very narrow.

Another item to understand is the road numbering convention.
- "I" routes are interstates freeways. Pretty much never going to be an issue (other than possibly congestion).
- "US" routes are the next level down but still major arterials. Depending on location and traffic demand they may vary from freeway to 2 lane-2 way but almost always suitable for trucks.
- State Routes, usually designated by the first initial of the state (ie: in Michigan "M" routes). Still typically arterials suitable for trucks. Typically, surface roads (not freeways but there are exceptions) but otherwise major arterials.
- County Routes, designation is a little less clear but typically a numbered route. These are often considered "collector" roads. They probably are suitable for trucks but it's less clear cut.
- Local Roads: Typically not numbered. They may or may not be suitable for trucks and you really should look closely before taking them

Thanks. Appreciate the good overview of road numbering conventions.

[the_e-man]

Tvov wrote:

the e-man wrote:
....
I tried the Good Sam Trip Planner. It has an option to avoid highways. What I'd like to see is an option to show the easiest route - even if it takes a little longer. In many cases, that might mean using highways or interstate rather than smaller roads....

That sounds a lot like a truck gps is what you are looking for.

A truck GPS is likely what I need. The Garmin RV GPS looks great. I'd like use roads that are easy. With interstates, I know that there won't be things like steep grades. Was thinking that maybe one of the RV trip routing apps like RV Life or TOGO might be sufficient rather than buying a dedicated GPS. Has anyone tried either?

[fwgjag]

I use RV Life trip wizard. It works good. You plan the trip on your laptop or computer then the route shows up on the app on your phone or iPad. You enter the information about your RV so it will know how to route you safely with your rig.

[Tvov]

the e-man wrote:
....
I tried the Good Sam Trip Planner. It has an option to avoid highways. What I'd like to see is an option to show the easiest route - even if it takes a little longer. In many cases, that might mean using highways or interstate rather than smaller roads....

That sounds a lot like a truck gps is what you are looking for.

[valhalla360]

Not sure about apple (but I'm betting it's similar) but Google Maps usually tries to get you from your start point using small local roads (if needed) working quickly to a high level road (arterial/freeway/etc). Then when you get close to your destination, it will reverse the process taking you to smaller more local roads as needed.

The only time we ever had issue with it is once, we should have driven past the first exit and backtracked a couple miles to get better roads. But that was on us as we didn't check the route before setting out.

It also typically gives you multiple options and there are some settings to adjust (avoid tolls, shortest distance, etc...) depending on your preferences. It's a good idea to explore those. I generally avoid tolls but if it's going to add 2hr to the drive, I'll happily pay them (usually obvious if you look at the route). Also, some times there is negligible time/distance between alternatives, so you can pick the one that appears to be higher level roads.

I wouldn't trust any system blindly. Particularly if you get off Interstate and US routes, best to zoom in and look at the proposed route ahead of time.

If you are in the mountains, I suggest downloading Google Earth (different from Google Maps). It's free. The advantage is you can plug in your route and if you right click, it gives you the option to show the profile. Now you can see where the steep sections are, what % grades to expect and if they are in a twisty-turny section. Also, you can zoom into smaller roads and enter "street view" to see if they are gravel or if they are very narrow.

Another item to understand is the road numbering convention.
- "I" routes are interstates freeways. Pretty much never going to be an issue (other than possibly congestion).
- "US" routes are the next level down but still major arterials. Depending on location and traffic demand they may vary from freeway to 2 lane-2 way but almost always suitable for trucks.
- State Routes, usually designated by the first initial of the state (ie: in Michigan "M" routes). Still typically arterials suitable for trucks. Typically, surface roads (not freeways but there are exceptions) but otherwise major arterials.
- County Routes, designation is a little less clear but typically a numbered route. These are often considered "collector" roads. They probably are suitable for trucks but it's less clear cut.
- Local Roads: Typically not numbered. They may or may not be suitable for trucks and you really should look closely before taking them

[paulj]

While the `shortest` can easily end up being a minor slow road, I would expect the 'fastest' to be biased toward the freeways. But that may vary with the region and length of route.

Usually 'fastest' is based on distance and some sort of estimate of the speed. That speed estimate might a crude one based on road type/name, but might also take into account road surface, grades and curviness. At least with Google Maps in the western states, the differences in speeds between routes seem to be realistic. I can imagine cases in the eastern mountains were short windy route through some pass would end up being both shortest and fastest - at least for a car.

With Google Maps with full internet access it is easy to examine the suggested route for details - terrain mode shows the hills, a zoom in shows the curves, and Streetview shows even more detail. It is also change the route and see how that changes distance and time estimates.

Getting this kind of detail is harder on a phone, or when route finding without internet connection. That's where a degree of preplanning comes in.

[BB_TX]

Fastest can get you in trouble also. I have had two GPS that tried but I already knew better. There are GPS units that are supposed to be optimized for RV and truck routing. I haven’t used one but I am sure someone who has will quickly come along with their experiences.

[rk911]

in my experience the shortest route is the one that will take you down dirt roads, city streets. if you have only two options...shortest or fastest, take the fastest.