Should I buy an XT2?

[jfheath]

So, unlike other devices, for the XT2 to display up-ahead fuel stations/restrooms/restaurants it has to be connected to the Tread app (although not synced)?! Aren't these embedded in the map running on the device?

I can understand the need for a connection to display live info like traffic, weather and road closures but cannot think why Garmin would need to make the XT2 dependent on a mobile data connection for up-ahead fuel stations. Or am I missing something?

I'm not sure about restrooms/restaurants needing the live data from the Tread App.

Fuel - in the UK it gets the information regarding petrol prices, which by law have to be made available to try to get a bit of competition into the fuel market I believe. I tend to group them all together as up ahead places, because that is how you get them to appear.

I always leave auto-recalc as prompted rather than enabled. When I deviate I just drive towards the magenta line. With this method I would assume that the RUT behaviour is non-existent... or not?

RUT behaviour is what happens if two things happen in sequence:

• The route is recalculated by the Zumo XT1 or XT2. So far I have only been able to make the same thing happen if I opt to Skip a route point. THe whole route is then recalculated, and from then on it behaves very differently.
• You deviate from the plotted route in such a way that the Zumo wants you to go back. It doesn't matter whether it requests a U turn or not. What matters is that it has tried to get you to go back to the point where you left the route. If U turns are enabled this is easy to spot. If they are not - well it needs to find a place where it can turn you back. Each time you ignore its instructions, it calculates a new way. It is no longer trying to get you to go back to the place where you deviated. It is trying to get you to the place where you last ignored its instructions. Then to the place before that. Etc until it gets you to the place where you deviated.
• I'm of the opinion that Garmin reckon that they have fixed this. Because a new feature was that the Zumo now asks for a U turn twice only. It then assumes that U turns are not allowed, so it looks ahead much futher for other ways to turn you back. In looking further ahead, it is more likely to spot the magenta line - and if it does, it will head for that.

If you are asked to recalculate and you say" no" and make tour own way to the magenta line - then you will not observe RUT behaviour. It cannot ask you to go back. The satanv will go into a sulk, and it will not start talking to you until you rejoin the magenta line. When you do rejoin, because the route has been recalculated (when you pressed skip), the nature of route points has changed. If you ignore an instruction to turn off to visit the route point, it simply removes the route point from the map. In fact - it behaves exactly like a track that has been converted to a trip, as if the route points do not matter.

Some have commented that a route will display RUT behaviour even if Skip hasn't been pressed at some point. I am not convinced by that. I have tried to provoke RUT behaviour in other ways, but so far skipping a route point has been the only way I have been able to make it happen.

I'm happy to be corrected about that - but its important to note that repeated U turns is not the definition of RUT behaviour. That is just a possible symptom. The term RUT comes from being 'stuck in a rut', and not being able to escape from it. You can get the same symptoms perfectly legitimately - eg by failing to visit a Via Point - particularly if you are in a group and the start point is at the start. Not all of you can pass through the start point - so the route is forever wanting you to visit the start. Put the start point half a mile up the road to avoid this.

I cannot be absolutely sure that I have observed RUT behaviour without running the same route twice - once with U turns turned off and once with it turned on. I then needs to get a few screen shots with the time and lat/long coordinates displayed, and compare that with the recorded track log. RUT behaviour displays some particular characteristics. And so far it has never happened unless I have skipped a route point. When testing my routes always have an additional route point about a mile after the start. I set off, make sure the route is running and I have passed through the start, and then skip the extra route points. Nothing ever goes wrong unless I subsequently deviate from the route in such a way that the obvious thing to do is to turn round.

Reading the posts on this forum I have come to the conclusion that many XT2 users are frustrated (with good reason) that even though they plotted a route on BC using the exact map version installed on the device, this is sometimes recalculated in a different way when imported on the device. However, I have found this to be true even on the 395. In fact, on import, I always double checked that route did not deviate from what I plotted on BC and found that there was a good chance that it did. My solution was to put shaping points on the stretch where the device is deviating. To what extent does the XT2 exhibit this same behaviour? Do Shaping points force it to draw the exact route plotted on BC or these need to be Viapoints (which is not ideal since then you will get spoken alerts every few miles that you have arrived at the destination)?

The thing about the Tread app is that I do not believe that it sends the 'ghost points' to the XT2. It only sends the route points. The ghost points are the hundreds and thousands of additional coordinates that ensure that the Zumo plots the route that was planned on the program. As soon as the route is recalculated, all of those ghost points are lost, and the Zumo relies on the position of the route points. The via and the shaping points.

What it does send however is how the route should be calculated between via points. Faster, Shorter, Adventurous level 1 to 4. Are sent with the route. The Zumo itself can be programmed to also take into acoount Michelin Scenic Roads, Popular (Moto) routes, Book Marked Great Rides.

However, the XT2 now seems to regard shaping points as movable. Think of it like this. You have programmed a route to use Fastest time. You have then put shaping points on a route to lead you away from a nearby motorway. That is a bit of a conflict. Traditionally, the route has taken priority, but with the XT2 - which only seems to operate on a minimum of info. If you have chose 'Faster' then that take priority - and it seems it takes priority over shaping points. So shaping points get moved to the Faster road.

Anything that goes the the Trip planner and into the Zumo will adopt this new system. But routes that are planned on the Zumo itself, do not - unless you edit it.

And more to the point - if the Zumo THINKS that the route has been created on the Zumo itself, it doesn't apply that logic.

So tricks like taking a copy of the route once it is in the XT2 and using that works a treat.
Using Trip Manager to create the Zumo's trip file without the Zumo ever seeing the original route also works like a dream.

The problem is that there are now many circumstances when the route will get recalculated. Passing it back and forth between the Tread database via your phone (synching), is one method. Editing route points is another. Skipping, turning U turns on/off, changing route preference while the route is loaded are others. Road closures ahead will recalc without warning and without option.

With your 396, the recalculated route was also possible. If maps on the Zumo were regraded as being different - it would recalculate on load. If skip was pressed, if you miss a route point, or you wander off route, or a route point was placed slightly off the road. The favourite cause of many issues was placing the start point at the start of the ride. 'Cos if the Zumo thinks it is facing away from a start point just 2 metres away and you don't head in that direction .... you will be following the magenta line - but it is actually trying to get you to go back to the start first. The only clue that you can get is by displaying the distance to the next via point - which will be increasing, rather than decreasing.

The 396 / 595 etc never displayed the sort of issues that the XT2 has. But yes- if you were not careful, the route could be recaclulated. Thats why BAsecamp has always been my program of choice. It uses identical maps to those in the Zumo. You can always tell when you start a route. If the route is being recalculated it will say so - and it will take about 30 seconds. If it says 'Calculating' but completes in say 10 seconds - it sin't recalculating the route. It is organising its data and plotting a way to get to the start.

I think that Garmin aren't going to fix this, because they don't think it is broken. They have developed something which uses less data to pass a route from the Tread Route Planning App to the XT2. ie the Via points and the segment between which is controlled by routing preferences.

The fact that I do not want to be controlled by someone elses idea of Adventure level, or by roads which are popular with other motorcyclists. I want to be able to plot a route with a series of points that I want to pass through, and for me those points should be fixed.

And on the XT2 I can get that if I use Trip Manager or make a copy of the route, and do not allow Tread synch anywhere near my XT2.

I have four Zumos from which I can choose. The 590, 595, XT1 and XT2. The 590 was by far the best satnav in terms of being predictable. It didn't alter route point names, it recalculated to the next route point if I deviated - it was forgiving if I missed out a shaping point or two.

But in spite of the issues - it is the XT2 and Basecamp that I use exclusively.

[Wenzudeg]

Thanks for the lengthy explanation. I have no problem continue using BC. In fact I prefer to use BC rather than a mobile-only app. From my experience working with BC I know that it is VERY capable and powerful in terms of planning, storing routes etc. I am thinking that my way should be this: plot routes on BC, transfer them through TM on XT2, never sync with Tread app and disabling auto-recalc on device just like I do on my present 395.

The only disadvantage with this way is that it will be hard to change/plot routes when on a trip (unless I take a Windows-based laptop with me) and harder still if I want to change/plot route on the road when in the middle of a daytrip. Maybe, just maybe, Garmin will update softwares on Tread and XT2.

[Oop North John]

Thanks for the lengthy explanation. I have no problem continue using BC. In fact I prefer to use BC rather than a mobile-only app. From my experience working with BC I know that it is VERY capable and powerful in terms of planning, storing routes etc. I am thinking that my way should be this: plot routes on BC, transfer them through TM on XT2, never sync with Tread app and disabling auto-recalc on device just like I do on my present 395.

The only disadvantage with this way is that it will be hard to change/plot routes when on a trip (unless I take a Windows-based laptop with me) and harder still if I want to change/plot route on the road when in the middle of a daytrip. Maybe, just maybe, Garmin will update softwares on Tread and XT2.

I've come to accept the Tread vs XT2 negative behaviors as I can change routes easily on my tablet/ phone when away from home. I dislike route planning on the XT2, and if Tread has the waypoints I'd use at home on BC then it's a fairly painless way for me to do it.The tablet is smaller and weighs less than my laptop.

But, because of the shaping points problem I mainly use waypoints in my BC exported route, 99.9% of them are of interest to me, for example, fuel stations, view points, mountain passes etc. On transfer to Tread and opening the routes up lets me see virtually what the XT2 will be doing, this then lets me add shaping or waypoint to drag the route back to where I'd like it to be. This works for me, others do not like using waypoints this way.

YMMV.

[jfheath]

That is a good point to make @Oop North John .

If you have a lot of pre-prepared waypoints and you add these to the route as Via point - shown on the XT2 as orange flags, then the route points remain almost where you planted them, and there is very little that the XT2 will do to alter the route - apart from finding different roads between via points.

I use this technique as a last resort - have a load of saved waypoints prepared in case I want to put together a different route for days when we are staying at the same base. The XT2 route planner is quite quick easy to use when just selecting point from an ‘unused waypoint’ collection.

It does have some issues - but these are things to be aware of, rather than game changers

• Up ahead places - eg fuel, traffic, road closures seem to report only for the current segment. I have never seen the XT2 report incidents beyond an orange flag via point.
• The waypoint that is used to create the via point has its own smaller icon, which you can select when it is created or edited. When the route is processed during the transfer/import/synch process, via points are subject to being modified slightly using known locations that are close to the original - so it is possible (I have seen it happen) that the route passes through the new via point location, but it does not pass through the waypoint - which remains in the original location. Both symbols - waypoint small icon, and orange flag via points - can be seen clearly on the XT2 screen.
• The trip data is able to show distance/time to the next via points. With lots of via points, showing how long before the next stopping place for coffee cannot be shown - something that my pillion uses quite a lot - as in “I’ll need to stop before then”

Having waypoints stored is a boon. Anecdote:

I was testing for what was happening when I discovered what I later called RUT behaviour. I knew what I thought caused it and I plotted a route with two opportunities for it to misbehave. I was doubling up ‘cos each test took 2.5 hours. It became obvious that my first test was stuck in a Rut and it was never going to recover from it no matter how far I traveled, which would ruin the second point where I expected RUT to develop. I couldn’t modify the route or skip another point as that would affect the result, so I stopped and rebuilt the route on the XT2 screen with waypoints that I had saved, sitting on the bike at the roadside. I Started the route and then skipped the points that I had already passed. So it was exactly as it should be for a good test of the next place wher I had observed the odd behaviour before. Continued with the ride, and got to the point where I knew that RUT behaviour would start again. It didn’t. It immediately calculated the way that I was heading no u turns required, it just did it ‘properly’

That turned out to be because it was planned on the XT2 screen- A SAVED route, rather than imported. And that quickly led to the means by which RUT behaviour could be fixed. I later proved that it wasn’t because I had built the route with saved waypoints. The same RUT free route was created if I used ad hoc points set as Via points using the XT2 route planner on screen. No saved waypoints involved at all.

[Oop North John]

My use of shaping points for the other 0.1% points in a route is often where Basecamp follows the road I'd like to, but the XT2 using its faster roads logic takes me off on a detour. IF, and it's a big if as others have found out, the shaping point is far enough away from a "faster" road, then the XT2 and Tread will use it, and not move it (as far as I can see). As an example, in southern Spain between Ecja and Utera without a shaping point the XT2 / Tread takes about 1H 12mins as it goers via Osuna, inserting a shaping point on the A364 reduces the time to 1H 3mins. This mirrors my experience with the XT, also in Spain, where it wanted to take longer, and almost as soon as I was on the route I chose, it correctly worked out it was a quicker option, it just needed a push to take its blinkers off!

100% of my inserting shaping points is done in Tread as I find it easier to insert / delete / view the effect of them there.

[jfheath]

I think that there is a distance involved, but haven't established what it is yet. Something like half a mile. If the shaping point is less than 'half a mile' away from a faster road, it may jump to the faster road. Anything more, it doesn't.

I haven't estabished this either: Routing along faster roads (XT1 and XT2). A notion that I have: - heading for the next route point - If there is a faster road that will take you to the next route point it will use the faster road IF it can reach the faster road quicker than it can reach the route point.

And If AI gets hold of either of those two statements it will quote them as fact. They are hypotheses, yet to be tested to determine whether or not they are true.

[nehpetsthegrey]

I have followed with interest and maybe understand , but dont see a reference to the kill a waypoint button. If I miss a waypoint the nav tries to take me back to it. Fine. But if I dont want to do that I hit the kill button that I keep a a permanent screen option and it forgets about going back. It just aims for the next point. Do others not use this. It the funny at shaped button that can be found buried in the various options and can be put up as one of the permanent screen shortcuts.
As for what to buy I am still in doubt, my new XT sat nav has failed and is back with garmin. Life seems to hate me sometimes.

[smfollen]

@nehpetsthegrey I think you mean that you want to "skip", not "kill" either a "via point" or a "shaping point", not a "waypoint". This is Garmin's terminology.

Waypoints are saved locations - aka favorites.

Routes are made up of via and shaping points. When following a route, an icon on the right side of the screen allows you to skip the next via or shaping point.
Note that shaping points are normally skipped automatically if you return to the original route after the point. Via points are considered to be places you really want to visit, so they must be skipped explicitly, otherwise, the zumo will keep trying to take you back to the via point.