Support Thread for the TND 500, TND 700 or future Rand McNally products. (part two)

There is a rest area just north of Congress on US 93, I have it in my address book and set it as a via when having to travel that route then the gps will route you properly from Vegas to Phoenix

 

Ok I have a 520 it's been over a year since a map update and it keeps telling me every time I turn it on. the dock says its up to date it's been a year and no map update love the GPS but needs a new map keep running across major changes two I can think of are orlando fl toll road has been done for 2+ years now but not on my GPS and Indiana used the tell rand feature but not sure if that does any good

 

I stand corrected. Rand McNally does designate US 93 from Kingman to Wickenburg as a non STAA route, therefore all of its GPS programs direct you down US 95 and I-10 at least 75 miles added to a 250 mile trip. I am sure legally RM is on strong footing.
The problem: 2 of their competitors, deLorme, who provides maps for the state of AZ website, and Garmin both route 53' 102" wide via 93, and the AZ DOT website designates it as part of the National Highway Network. In addition in the 3 hours I was on thst highway yesterday I lost count of the dozens of carriers, largest in the nation routing both doubles and 53' s that way. AZ even routes oversize loads on that route. They feel they are on equally strong legal ground. Someone is right here, and someone is wrong.
My point: I don't need strict legal defintions for routing. I need practical definitions. If any RM representative got out of the cubicle and was actually on that highway, and visited in person with a rep of the AZ DOT, their routing would be changed. Google streetview has photographed most of the country in the years RM introduced the 500. Multiply this routing "opinion" by thousands of others RM has programmed into their machines and routing becomes sketchy at best. You have at least 2 screens I have to click through releasing you of liability.
I know it costs money to have qualified people in the field. I am willing to pay for that expertise. And I know you can't do it at consumer pricing, retailing a unit for $200. Figure out what it would cost and present me with a premium option. Others in the marketplace already do.

 

As a commercially licensed product they have to abide by the laws. Just because a truck drives down a road doesn't mean it's ok.

 

[quote name="Studebaker Hawk" post=4212279]I stand corrected. Rand McNally does designate US 93 from Kingman to Wickenburg as a non STAA route, therefore all of its GPS programs direct you down US 95 and I-10 at least 75 miles added to a 250 mile trip. I am sure legally RM is on strong footing.<br />
The problem: 2 of their competitors, deLorme, who provides maps for the state of AZ website, and Garmin both route 53' 102" wide via 93, and the AZ DOT website designates it as part of the National Highway Network. In addition in the 3 hours I was on thst highway yesterday I lost count of the dozens of carriers, largest in the nation routing both doubles and 53' s that way. AZ even routes oversize loads on that route. They feel they are on equally strong legal ground. Someone is right here, and someone is wrong.<br />
My point: I don't need strict legal defintions for routing. I need practical definitions. If any RM representative got out of the cubicle and was actually on that highway, and visited in person with a rep of the AZ DOT, their routing would be changed. Google streetview has photographed most of the country in the years RM introduced the 500. Multiply this routing "opinion" by thousands of others RM has programmed into their machines and routing becomes sketchy at best. You have at least 2 screens I have to click through releasing you of liability.<br />
I know it costs money to have qualified people in the field. I am willing to pay for that expertise. And I know you can't do it at consumer pricing, retailing a unit for $200. Figure out what it would cost and present me with a premium option. Others in the marketplace already do.[/QUOTE]<br />
<br />
As a commercially licensed product they have to abide by the laws. Just because a truck drives down a road doesn't mean it's ok.<br/>

Just to stop the problem the new maps that are in my TND 730 route up 93 without a problem so when new maps are released for update you will be fixed

 

Yeah it's ok that's what we go by in chicago lol

 

This is not a black or white issue. The law never is. The legal departments for Walmart, UPS, Swift and countless others have a different interpretation of "the law", as interpreted by RM. Even the AZ DOT puts a disclaimer on their website "we make no guarantees that info yada yada yada".
As long as we are in this legal limbo, trucks are going to get routed into places they don't belong and vice versa. I am just suggesting that someone get out in the field and document needed changes. If there is a discrepancy, flag it as such as let the driver make the final decision. Garmin does that now by putting a little truck and a question mark on the screen.
If I followed the law to the letter everyday I wouldn't make it very far before breaking it.

 

Rand does have people in the field. Mark has a team of beta testers that report said issues to him and he passes that along. That coupled with this website and the tell rand feature make issue reporting very nice.

 

That's all well and good but I have reported issues 4yrs ago that still haven't changed so how long do we need to wait until things get corrected.