Ditch the sat nav and find your inner self!

[Ash]

hi all

As a bit of a Luddite, I have long been suspicious of satellite navigation systems in cars and now on bikes too. I was marvelling at Ken's recently on the Tour d'Unagi.

Don't get me wrong, these things are undeniably useful especially when you are up some back road on a mountain in Whoop Whoop Prefecture with the night and a typhoon closing in!

BUT, they do not have the charm of being able to read a MAP. Maps are a part of a cyclist's life, and they are a great deal of fun to read and plan your trips with. They contain heaps of interesting by-the-way information that is interesting to learn even if you never use it. For the city cyclist as well they are are splendid way to orientate yourself, especially in the tangled streets of Tokyo.

I am sorry but just can't learn anything from a sat nav display, even though the damn thing is (supposedly) taking me on the shortest route. There is no planning involved, just punch in the place you want to go.

Kinda takes the charm out of the journey in lots of ways I think.

Anyway, here is an article on the same subject from the Times (UK) newspaper, for those of you who are interested!

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-2519679,00.html

Ash

 

[KWill]

hi all

As a bit of a Luddite, I have long been suspicious of satellite navigation systems in cars and now on bikes too. I was marvelling at Ken's recently on the Tour d'Unagi.

Don't get me wrong, these things are undeniably useful especially when you are up some back road on a mountain in Whoop Whoop Prefecture with the night and a typhoon closing in!

BUT, they do not have the charm of being able to read a MAP. Maps are a part of a cyclist's life, and they are a great deal of fun to read and plan your trips with. They contain heaps of interesting by-the-way information that is interesting to learn even if you never use it. For the city cyclist as well they are are splendid way to orientate yourself, especially in the tangled streets of Tokyo.

I am sorry but just can't learn anything from a sat nav display, even though the damn thing is (supposedly) taking me on the shortest route. There is no planning involved, just punch in the place you want to go.

Kinda takes the charm out of the journey in lots of ways I think.

Anyway, here is an article on the same subject from the Times (UK) newspaper, for those of you who are interested!

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-2519679,00.html

Ash

I use both but my NAV screen is much easier/safer to read at 42kph...waterproof too. I'm also data freak...so I like to know altitude, distance travel, nearest town, food, toilet, etc.

In March 2003 I trusted my Garmin GPS/Nav from Kuwait City to Baghdad it didn't let me down as long as I fed it fresh AA batteries.

 

[Phil Harris]

Map VS SAT NAV

I side with ashwarren on this issue, though for those who prefer SAT NAV, it probably has some advantages.

I thoroughly plan my route to include places to stay and where mountains will make the route challenging. Comparing the Mapple page with Google Earth is very useful as well in route planning, though some areas have less resolution than others.

 

[Sora]

I am using SAT NAV "Garmin GPS" also. But mainly I use it as not for NAV but for track recorder. When I come back from touring, I just connect it to PC, then easily make my track of the tour on a map (like GoogleMaps: you see it in the tour reports of official tour). It is real track, so I can exactly know when and where I was. It is very enjoyable. The track data is one of my treasures like photos and bills of hotel of the tour...

As for NAV, I want more detailed and whole map data of Japan...