Interesting (Waze traffic)

I have noticed that Waze is very accurate in reporting road closures at night for construction where Garmin traffic is never aware of road closures in Toronto area.

Traffic wise always accurate, gas price not much unless someone make correction. and if you do you get 8 point.

Very happy with it

Yes, privacy and battery drain are my main reasons I haven't used Waze. I had it downloaded and started it up and then it started asking for access to everything on my phone...
However, all my friends swear by it, and I have been impressed with its ability to navigate rush hour downtown traffic whenever riding with a friend who uses it.

You don't have to grant those permissions to use it.

I saw google maps change the time of arrival by 5 min. this was because the bridge had lane closures that occurred en route. Very fascinating to be in real time. In this case, my decision for the bridge was made 10 min. prior to arriving, so google maps could not save me from an instantaneous lane closure or planned. In this case, I bet AM radio prevails!

WAZE dependant on cell towers?

How well does it do when you are out of cell range?

Maybe some mountain areas or out in the weeds somewhere?

Much quicker to adjust for traffic issues than Garmin. I sometimes keep both on for long drives to see if they differ. Travel time also much more accurate on Waze

never tried it but google asks if you want to download the route in case you encounter a situation where there is no coverage. At least when in a major metro area, it has to save tens of minutes over Garmin. The latest where it was tested by me is a turnpike bridge closure forcing all traffic to take alternate routes. This likely translated into a 40 min. savings on a 100 minute trip.

Yes, it is cell data dependent. That said, the maps should keep displaying when cell service drops, the maps are really small and cached.

You lose traffic data, and other pop up data, but the map should continue for a while, pending recovery of cell service.

There is intermittent cell service, (drops to 1x or out completely), between Brookneal, VA eastward through Charlotte County on US 40. road and traffic data drops out, and Waze complains about the cell service, but the map continues moving and showing accurate location, compared to the Garmin. Unless you spend hours out of cell service, it should work reasonably well in spotty cell service.

I was just curious as I don't use it..

Maybe ill give it a whirl

Although I think the Garmin Traffic has gotten better, it's still a long way behind Waze.

Wouldn't it be nice if Waze and Garmin came to some sort of agreement/partnership?

Anyone using Waze with an iPhone 7+ ?

SE here and it works just fine. BTW, they all use the same IOS software, so if it works with one model, it should be working the same for all of them.

Waze is the best traffic assistance product, period. The only time it is inaccurate with traffic reporting is because there are not enough fellow travelers ahead of you using it. In using it in several states covering thousands of miles, I have yet to find it inaccurate. On rural rarely traveled roads you usually won't get any notice of an incident if there, again, is no one ahead of you. Rarely traveled roads usually don't have traffic to worry about. Just my 2 cents.

I only use Waze for red light cameras, speed trap reports and other reports from users. For navigation I stick with Google Maps. Love my Garmin, but I have to remember to carry it whereas my phone is always in my pocket.

I traveled from Page Arizona toward Denver Colorado. On those long desolate roads, there is no cell service and no maps. I was driving along a blank white screen for hours on end. The Garmin happily showed me the way to go without breaking a sweat. Waze cannot even route you between those two locations. I just left it on for grins and giggles. When cell service was present , Waze was far superior for me since I don't have any traffic subscriptions.

I use waze google earth garmin and I bought a rand McNally 2017 road atlas large print . I use garmin and waze and google earth on long trips , garmin on the highways waze in the towns ! google earth and the paper map are on standby lol

Not sure about Waze, but Google Maps and some other phone apps allow you to download a selectable area in advance. That way, you have the maps without a cell signal, and the phone's GPS will still work with the map. No live data, but there's always a compromise.

Waze doesn't allow pre downloaded, that I've found.

Having Driven An 18 wheeler for almost 20 years before my back gave out, I can say Garmin can be very good but can also be very slow. I noticed on long drives it worked very well. on shorter drives not so much, I also noticed if I waited to turn it on right before going somewhere it was next to useless. I don't know how often it updates and waze being crowd fed can be much quicker. also in rural stretches of interstate almost no traffic sensors are in use so no feedback on traffic in those areas with Garmin.

Tough to argue with traffic on Waze ... but I use my Garmin so I can still talk on the phone while a drive.

because Google now owns Waze. Google interface some Waze Data onto their maps.

^^^ This is what happened to us last weekend on the interstate in rural IL. There was quite a significant tie up due to a bad accident in the middle of the afternoon. The Garmin showed nothing while Waze kept saying to get off the interstate and hit the back roads around this growing line of stopped cars/trucks. The trust factor wasn't there with Waze and that was a big mistake on my part. That tie up cost us about an hour.

I'm trying to get a better understanding of Waze and how it works...

I think folk are comparing apples to oranges when they compare Garmin to Waze / Google maps.. Garmin has a static map and uses your position as determined by GPS to place the map relative to your position. As a plus it uses some clever algorithms to plan a route.. and a large (static) database of interesting locations.

Garmin has "tried" to include real time data to show things like traffic.. by using the power supply as an antenna to pick up what ever traffic signals are sent out by a third party. As well as trying to incorporate an app that gets traffic updates from a smartphone.

Technology moves on.. Until / unless Garmin can figure out a way to get real time updates into their units.. as a smart phone can for a monthly fee..without incurring a monthly fee..it will be a loosing battle.

The only solution that I see would be a Garmin that has an absolute single purpose cell phone connection ability.. that would both update the latest maps.. points of interest.. etc. seamlessly depending on your area.. and provide up to date traffic. But.. this would come with a nominal monthly charge..

It is called Smartphone Link and works very well. I don't use Waze, so I can't compare Smartphone Link to Waze, but I do use Android Auto with Google navigation. My experience is that Garmin Smartphone Link is just as good and sometimes better than Google traffic reporting.

I would agree that Garmin's old receiver based FM traffic service is pretty much worthless in most areas. That is why Garmin switched to Smartphone Link as the preferred traffic service and no longer bundles a FM traffic recever with its newest devices.

I use both Garmin Traffic and Waze. City of Toronto shares traffic data with Waze in Toronto. So it is quite good in Toronto but outside Toronto it is hit and miss. Couple of weeks ago my co-worked told me that there was highway RAMP closed in Brampton but Waze did not inform him about the closure at all. I have noticed that Garmin traffic in Toronto area is pretty good as well.

Waze's data consumption is fairly miserly. Have you ever checked in on data consumption with the SmartPhone Link?

Smartphone Link data usage is minimal. For me, in typical local driving, I use a few MB per month. The Google navigation (Android auto) on the other hand can use up quite a lot of data because it loads map segments as well as traffic data. Once Google caches the maps for the local area, the data usage tapers off, but is still more than Smartphone Link

Is one of my favorite app ,very reliable I used all the time.

Garmin chose the provider for their devices. It’s easy to pass the buck, but if Toyota put a defective windshield in their vehicles that shattered, Toyota has a problem, nit just their glass provider.

Waze is more accurate.

I use both Waze and Garmin Smartlink. In my travels, I've found them to be equally accurate. Sometimes one will "scoop" the other but they are mostly in agreement.

Both however fall flat in rural areas with little or no reporting and poor cellular service.

My one complaint with Waze is it's intermittent audio. Using either bluetooth or phone speakers, it works sometimes and sometimes not. This has been the case with 3 different cellular devices and many Waze updates. Since I can't trust the audio, I have to keep checking the screen for alerts which forces me to take my eyes off the road more than I'd like.

Does anyone suspect where you are geographically might influence the behaviour of the two different platforms?

...and didn't like it. It didn't work well enough for me to keep on using it. I use SmartLink and it works better than the in-dash unit that uses XM Traffic. I will probably drop XM when it comes up for renewal this coming Spring. It only has traffic in and around metro areas in the city. Upon getting outside the city, the traffic feature leaves much to be desired. In fact, in some areas, it is non-existent.

No question about it. Location is a definite factor in performance.

Waze wanted way too much of my personal information than needed to function.

I opted out.

We've learned to just trust waze when it tells us to get off of the highway. Conversely, i used a highway that was supposed to be closed but wasn't because waze was telling me that it was the way to go.

If the crowd sourcing app gets enough concurrent notifications AND the routing (actually its a networking) algorithm is REALLY good it's likely waze has the opportunity to be better than any standard kind of GPS.

But in areas with little to no participation, then it's likely a crap shoot.

Looks like the writing may be on the wall.

Garmin is best for remote areas (where cell phone signal is poor).

Google Maps/Waze is best for metro areas.

You can download offline maps for Google maps for use in low signal areas

a 600 mile weekend from Boston to Baltimore and vicinity. I ran SmartLink and Waze side by side. Waze reports infinitely more stuff than the connected Garmin - - I was a bit surprised and disappointed to see this. We didn't encounter any crazy traffic along the I95 corridor or major incidents that would have forced re-routing, so I can't comment on that aspect for either Waze or Garmin.

I think I have Waze set to report essentially all hazards which is probably going to be too much. It seems there's a broken down car every couple of miles, which is of limited value, IMO. I'll probably need to switch that off on longer journeys. So far, I'm mostly impressed with the Waze app. I've been experiencing the app freezing and wanting to shutdown. This happened a number of times.

Yes, you'll have maps but no real time traffic reports. Waze won't display reports either without cell service and neither will Garmin's Live Traffic via smartphone link. You might still get HD traffic on a suitably optioned Garmin GPS though. I've seen this several times in my travels through rural areas.

Just another reason to have both a smartphone and a GPS.

I don't know about data usage, but you will need to plug in your phone at least occasionally for a long trip.