Garmin RV 760LMT

I'm rather disappointed with the routing on my RV760. It ignores all the preferences I set (avoid dirt roads, avoid u-turns). The routing methods don't seem to make any difference. Fastest, shortest and there is no more "preferred" option.

Going from one major city to another, it seems to avoid major roads and finds the a narrowest streets with the most turns to take me down, again, ignoring the respective fastest/shortest routing method I had chosen. It seems to be stuck on shortest.

It's the complete opposite to the ten year old Garmin Nuvi I bought for $100.

The Nuvi I will trust to route me somewhere using a reasonable route... the RV760, NO WAY. Luckily I've not actually actually needed it yet.

That said, I do like the huge screen, and really like the voice commands and huge POI database. It doesn't take data like Google does, it doesn't require cellular coverage, and I don't have to fumble around to unlock my phone (ALWAYS keep your phone locked folks, always.) Also in RV mode, I like how it calls out changes in speed limits, a good warning for speed traps like when the limit drops suddenly from 55 to 25. It also warns if I turn down a road where clearance data is unknown.

Depends on how you have programmed it. Fastest, less traffic,truck,bicycle? Pick your programming functions.

donn0128 wrote:
Depends on how you have programmed it. Fastest, less traffic,truck,bicycle? Pick your programming functions.

Where is the less traffic option?

GordonThree wrote:

donn0128 wrote:
Depends on how you have programmed it. Fastest, less traffic,truck,bicycle? Pick your programming functions.

Where is the less traffic option?

My standard Garmin doesn't have that. It would also be great to have 'all highway' function and not cut me through a subdivision to save 30 seconds.

Garmin GPS units with Lifetime Maps and Traffic (LMT models) are good at picking up CURRENT traffic delays.

I know of no GPS which routes around historical traffic delays.

I've not had any difficulty routing around major city centers, or construction areas, with a Garmin Auto GPS or a Rand McNally RV GPS

The key is to sit down with the GPS and a map the night before you travel. Let the GPS create the route to your destination. Then add waypoints to force the route to avoid the area you want to avoid.

The save that route as a multi-stop trip.

The Rand does allow me to set temporary and permanent exclusion areas. The problem is that if I set a permanent exclusion for downtown Boston, as I did, then the GPS is useless for tourism trips into that area.

I have two multi-stop trips saved in my GPS to avoid Austin, TX. I will select the multi-stop trip that takes me either east or west of Austin, then add my destination as a via point at the end of the trip.

Take the GPS out some slow evening and practice changing the default routing to better suit your needs.

With the Rand I find it easy to find truck stops along the preferred bypass route and set up hem as a waypoint. Then the GPS will not take me into the undesired area. Highway intersections can also work easily.

In April 2015 I had to travel from Colts Neck, NJ to Thomaston, CT which the GPS of course wanted me to go thru NYC.

I added the Pilot at Mahwah, NJ and the Pilot at Newburg, NY as waypoints and didn't come anywhere near NYC.

There are eleventy-eleven threads on this forum about the best way to avoid D.C., look them over, pick the route you want and set it up and n the GPS.

NEVER EVER USE SHORTEST ROUTE on a GPS. That will send you down the tiniest roads to save a 10th of a mile.

Fastest route works best for most folks because it usually keeps you from n major highways.

Look to see what route preferences can be set. I can avoid/allow tollways, tunnels, u-turns, freeways, and several more.

A GPS is a valuable tool, take some time to learn how to make it work for you.

When I have a specific route in mind between 2 destinations, I find it easiest to simply pick a few waypoints along my preferred route and plot the route through those waypoints. I haven't had any issues with my older Nuvi 1490 failing to follow my preferences except in the rare occasion when there is no other reasonable option.

The preferences chosen are not an absolute. They are preferences, and if the receiver sees that a route following them goes excessively far out of the way, it will tend to select what it sees as a better path. The user has to stay in the game and pay attention. A GPS is a great tool, but it's not a substitute for human intelligence.

So, it's looks like the answer is no. It's not smarter that google maps or a car GPS unless I put in waypoints, like I do already with my old GPS.

sharker6 wrote:
So, it's looks like the answer is no. It's not smarter that google maps or a car GPS unless I put in waypoints, like I do already with my old GPS.

Smartness is relative.

If you're driving a big rig and want to avoid those crazy low bridges and other weird road restrictions they have out east, the 760 will help, Google will not.

If you're driving a car, and just want the fast point A to B, Google's WAZE is probably the smartest. it relies on real time feedback from nearby users, as well as traffic monitoring provided by the gov.

GordonThree wrote:
If you're driving a car, and just want the fast point A to B, Google's WAZE is probably the smartest. it relies on real time feedback from nearby users, as well as traffic monitoring provided by the gov.

The LMT model Garmins provide the same level of CURRENT traffic information/ route changes.

But neither provides historical traffic slowdown avoidance.

I've often wondered why no traffic routing software/ hardware will not route you off the Beltway around D.C. during rush hour.

You have to get within 5-15 miles of the delays/ backups before they start offering alternate routes.

Sometimes the best alternate routing requires a different road 50 or 100 miles before the backups.