[cellsafemode]

Originally Posted by Thor142

I've said this a bunch of times before and I'll say it again. Car manufacturers are the only ones that get away with charging crazy premiums for old tech. At the rate technology advances now charging $500 or whatever it is for integrated nav that's not up to par with google maps is ridiculous. I could go on and on but I think I made my point. What's nav and PDR $1500? Come on...

In the size of ...literally my phone... I have the same functionality that takes up literally 20+ times the space, much more power use, far less upgradeable and expandable, less features, and less performance.


They could have put a 500 dollar android tablet in place of the mylink display and improved available features, reduced footprint, reduced energy usage, improved security, and reduced cost.

[camaromatt.s]

Originally Posted by cellsafemode

did you throw your cell phone out or just dont believe in using one built since the advent of android?

Google maps may not be perfect, but why you would use a different navigation platform is just odd. I say odd to be nice.

Yeah, Google maps works great when you have cell service. Good luck using it when you don't...

[camaromatt.s]

Originally Posted by Number 3

You were counting on you GPS to do something different than you programmed it to do? I've never seen a GPS that would allow for a "fun route with corners you can tear through". I've seen quickest route, no toll routes but no corners to tear through route.

My point was more that the GPS has knowledge of some 16 mile long single lane dirt road but frequently fails on populated and developed ones. GPS was just on the default settings. Obviously I am aware that I looked at the offered route and decided to go with it, I just don't understand where Chevrolet sourced their map data where it is lacking so many roads, but then includes obscure ones like that.

[cellsafemode]

Originally Posted by camaromatt.s

Yeah, Google maps works great when you have cell service. Good luck using it when you don't...

You can download maps you intend on driving in if you feel that cell service is questionable.

https://support.google.com/maps/answ...-1478019893374

Google maps will also cache for places you've been often (to some file size constraint).

In such situations, realtime traffic is lost but navigation is not.

Given the max locally cached map data you can have is about 2.5GB. I think you'll be fine with a tiny bit of planning.

[Emoto]

The truth is that nobody has map data that is very good. I am a heavy GPS user (for backroads routes on motorcycles) and it is a real cr@p shoot on whether the map data is accurate on whether a road is dirt or not. Mostly, that info is not even present. Map data can also include "paper roads" that were approved by a town but never actually built. Also, forest roads like the one with the puddle above will be listed as regular roads. This is not going to change any time soon.

Use your GPSes accordingly.

[MrChrisLS3]

Originally Posted by Thor142

I've said this a bunch of times before and I'll say it again. Car manufacturers are the only ones that get away with charging crazy premiums for old tech. At the rate technology advances now charging $500 or whatever it is for integrated nav that's not up to par with google maps is ridiculous. I could go on and on but I think I made my point. What's nav and PDR $1500? Come on...

That's probably true. But the way technology seems to go these days, it's inevitable. The car was in the design phase for at least a couple of years. Then the vendors get selected, the contracts get signed, and by the time the car hits the dealer's lot, that tech is three generations old. Kind of like the benefit of being at the end of the line for the new I-phone, by the time you get to the front, you're the first in line for the next one.

GPS is a tool, a general guide. It is not meant to take the place of a good sense of direction, watching where you're going, and good ol' fashioned common sense.

[Thor142]

Originally Posted by MrChrisLS3

That's probably true. But the way technology seems to go these days, it's inevitable. The car was in the design phase for at least a couple of years. Then the vendors get selected, the contracts get signed, and by the time the car hits the dealer's lot, that tech is three generations old. Kind of like the benefit of being at the end of the line for the new I-phone, by the time you get to the front, you're the first in line for the next one.

GPS is a tool, a general guide. It is not meant to take the place of a good sense of direction, watching where you're going, and good ol' fashioned common sense.

I've had the same android cell phone since 2013. I can even download a track app and use it like a PDR. It cost $250. I bet it still has more capability that the tech in the Gen 6 Camaro. Just sayin....

[DGthe3]

Originally Posted by Thor142

I've had the same android cell phone since 2013. I can even download a track app and use it like a PDR. It cost $250. I bet it still has more capability that the tech in the Gen 6 Camaro. Just sayin....

And I bet it also isn't nearly as robust, in either the hardware or the software. The a car is a fairly harsh environment for electronics, with temperature extremes, moderate g-loads, and constant vibrations. The coding is expected to be perfect on day 1, never failing or needing an update (something gaming studios aught to consider emulating ... ). The reason Google & Apple are only now entering the dashboard of cars isn't because they're suddenly interested ... its because until now, their code has been too sloppy to meet automotive standards.

Then there is longevity. Your 3 year old cell phone is a little older than average. In comparison, a 3 year old car is practically brand new -as the average age for a car is about 11 years now. It should be reasonable to expect that after 15 or 20 years, all the electronics in a car should still work like they did when it was new. Do you have the same expectations with your cell phone?


But yes ... your cell phone can probably do more nifty things. I wouldn't call that more capable though.

[warriordave927]

On the bright side thats some beautiful scenery,id trade in some highway miles for a detour like that,aside from the flooded crossing of course

[BrianL]

I live in rural area & find the factory NAV pretty good so far for us. We passed on a car because it didn't have the NAV option when we were shopping. Old school I guess (maybe just old), I don't want to be tethered to my phone.