Which do you prefer: ROUTE or TRACK?

[Con Hennekens]

@Nomko-Nomden, Navigating "routes-as-tracks" does not take away that feature

[Con Hennekens]

@Jörgen, I prefer a well designed route. That usually means that if I navigate routes from others, I prefer a "route-as-track"

[M. Schrijver]

I do not know which to choose.
Friday i made a trip with "ride as track". With routepoints enabled
Saturday i made a trip with "ride as route"
I saw the same behaviour with both types. So what is the difference?

Some extra info.
When i make a route, i compare the route to at least one different map. This normally causes a lot of routepoints. Which implicates for the navigation that is impossible to create a different route between routepoints.

[Corjan Meijerink]

@M-Schrijver they should both work excellent.
Track navigation was sub optimal but now should be on the same level as route navigation.

It should not matter which one you choose as both should be good! We put a lot of effort in track navigation as people often don’t realise they navigate a track.

Examples of this are generated scenic routes / roundtrips or imported tracks you get from others.

The only difference now is when fully offline. Then track navigation will approximate the track causing some possible deviations from the original. With route navigation you always know what you planned is what you drive, also offline.

[Nomko Nomden]

@Con-Hennekens said in Which do you prefer: ROUTE or TRACK?:

@Nomko-Nomden, Navigating "routes-as-tracks" does not take away that feature

jij hebt het over de app, ik over mijn Zumo XT.
Wel een verschilletje...

[Jörgen]

I originally come from the TomTom world, where initially there were only Routes. Later, when tracks were also possible, I continued to use Routes. They had considerable advantages with the TT compared to a track.

But interesting result up to now.

[Herman Veldhuizen]

@Jörgen I never got the 'skipwaypoint' to work when navigating a route. This is with version 4.3.6 and with automatic recalculation off. The app recalculates anyhow or I need to confirm the skipping by hand.
After I started to navigate a route as track the app worked the way I wanted. So for me the 2 methods are very different. I don't know if this is relevant but my routes are created by importing lists of waypoints in gpx format. Each waypoint is a shaping point , except the first and last (they are viapoints)

[Offenbach]

@Jörgen Ich bevorzuge Route, da werden die Angaben zum nächsten Zwischenstopp bzw. Ziel auf dem Navi angezeigt (Wegpunkte) und die Ansagen der Routenführung, während die Shapingpunkte der Streckenführung dienen.
Der Track wird aber immer parallele mit angezeigt. Falls mal etwas anders geroutet werden sollte sehe ich zumindest wie es geplant war und entscheide dann ob ich der Router oder doch dem (geplanten) Track folge.
Nutze ein Garmin Zumo XT – auf der APP konnte ich das so (parallele Darstellung) noch nicht nachstellen – oder ich weiß nicht wie.
Die Anzeige auf der APP mit dem „weißen“ Strich bei Abweichung durch die gezeigte Route als Wegführung kommt der Sache aber schon recht nahe

[Guzzist]

@Jörgen Usually I plan my (mostly long) trips, using MRA-Routeplaner. If I like to invite others to ride with me, I prepare the Route-Points very detailed, with little descriptions and attached photos and connect the route to an event, I create additionally. So, routes offers me a lot welcome options. I set my Route-Points in that way, no other device or App will calculate the trip by other streets I like to use!
Why should I use it later during navigation as track instead as route?

If I use gpx file from others, then mostly it's a track. With the new functionality in MyRoute-App, I can navigate with the track as it would be a route. That's really comfortable. The time before, I only had the track as a line, as overlay over the map. And must self-aware observe, If I'm still on the right road or not.

Long story short: I use both, for different situations.

[Martin Wilcke]

When navigating a route, I always use "route as track" with "VIA Points only" — best of both worlds. And track navigation for tracks, of course.

[Martin Wilcke]

@Guzzist said in Which do you prefer: ROUTE or TRACK?:

Why should I use it later during navigation as track instead as route?

I usually use "OSM" as routing engine when planning routes.
Navigating these routes with MRA NN will recalculate them using HERE, which can lead to unwanted results. That's why I use navigating "routes as tracks", which preserves the original planned route (at least as a "white line"). As an extra benefit, I eliminate all shaping points I don't need when navigating.

[JP d]

Navigating as a route you can long press on a POI and add as stop. Last I tried it didn't work when navigating route as track.

[Con Hennekens]

@JP-d, that's correct. You cannot change a track...