Citroen C4 Cactus Crossover Forum banner
1 - 20 of 33 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
32 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Having now used the Sat Nav a few times, here are my thoughts:

+

• Clear voice - sounds like the actress Gina McKee, north-east accent [good]

• Directions given in good time, with repeat

• Uses the expression: "Destination reached," which makes a change from other sat navs

• Very clear screen, with options to change viewpoint

-

• Key pad is non-qwerty

• Terms used are not always consistent: 'bear left' can sometimes be a turn left. And 'turn left' can
sometimes be a bear left. Also uses the phrase: 'At the end of the street', rather than at the end
of the road. The term: 'At the fork,' is used when it's usually just a junction! And when it is a fork, it
refers to it as a junction!

• POIs are non- specific and when selected, the screen becomes over-populated with icons which then have
to be activated to get information. Seems too random to be of any real use
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
344 Posts
I've had the car for just over a month.
happy enough with the satnav but agree about the keypad being non-qwerty.
Think with satnavs its what you get used to.
I go back far enough to a Palm M515 with Via MIchelin maps.
that could get lost going through the front door :lol:
on other days it got me to my mates house in Amsterdam to with-in 5metres
more recently loved Here maps on my windows phone (and Nokia maps prior to that - free updates - winner)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1 Posts
We know that the memory of destinations is allegedly 200 places, what I would like to do is delete the places from the listing that I am not going to visit again, has anybody managed to do this? The handbook is sadly lacking of info in this department...

Glad of any help. Catcus (I have a dyslexic wife! her version) is 15 plate Diesel Flair with grey body with black bumps and black/silver wheels mirrors. geefouroyx West Midlands
 
G

·
geefouroyx said:
We know that the memory of destinations is allegedly 200 places, what I would like to do is delete the places from the listing that I am not going to visit again, has anybody managed to do this? The handbook is sadly lacking of info in this department... Glad of any help. Catcus (I have a dyslexic wife! her version) is 15 plate Diesel Flair with grey body with black bumps and black/silver wheels mirrors. geefouroyx West Midlands
If you got to Settings the cogs at the top right hand of screen, go to the next page, go to System Setting, at the bottom click Delete Data, there you can delete last information entered, that will delete all destinations on the sat nav. Don't forget after ticking the box press delete and confirm.
 
G

·
I don't have any problem using the sat nav just in its mapping.

When I put in a destination that I know the shortest route and quickest route it gives me something completely different.

Google maps and the route on my phone using Waze both give me the correct journey.

Also going towards another destination the quickest route it gives me is down C roads certainly not the quickest. If I set the sat nave to the same destination 100 yards away it does give me the correct quickest route.

So it will get me out of a bind but I think I will still rely on a printout of Google maps.

I have updated my maps to the latest edition but it made no difference.

The enclosed pictures are for the 1st scenario mentioned. On the criteria the time and distance are not logical, if I'm reading it correctly I'm averaging over 60mph down B & C roads. Also the distance bears no resemblance to Google Maps or Waze. I have double checked I have put in the correct postcode.





 

·
Registered
Joined
·
265 Posts
ExAudi said:
• Terms used are not always consistent: 'bear left' can sometimes be a turn left. And 'turn left' can
sometimes be a bear left. Also uses the phrase: 'At the end of the street', rather than at the end
of the road. The term: 'At the fork,' is used when it's usually just a junction! And when it is a fork, it
refers to it as a junction!
Those are the most annoying things for me too.

Heres a curious thing...

Yesterday we drove from Reading in Berkshire to Bourton on the Water in the Cotswolds for the day. I chose Eco route on leaving home and it took me M4 > A34 > A415 > A40 and then down various nondescript back roads. An interesting route and quite a different way from my previous visits but it was scenic so we didn't care much.

At the end of the day we returned to the car and set the sat nav to home. It took us through different back roads onto the A40 (there was no reason for this change like one way roads etc), then A40 > A415 > A420 then through Abingdon town centre this time, totally ignoring the A34 and eventually onto the A4074 and into Reading via Caversham.

Now while Im quite prepared to believe the route out was economical, there is no way the route home could be described as such. Furthermore there is no reason whatsoever that the route there should change on the return route if Eco was chosen for both trips.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
265 Posts
I'm not sure but i think that Eco is for 'ecological', i mean, less co2, not less economic. It's only my opinion. You can correct me if i'm wrong.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
265 Posts
deeppurple said:
I'm not sure but i think that Eco is for 'ecological', i mean, less co2, not less economic. It's only my opinion. You can correct me if i'm wrong.
hmmm okay but what's your interpretation of that? I kind of assumed they were one in the same :)

To me, ecological would mean to benefit or cause minimal damage to the environment. As the construction & manufacturing process of the car itself can't be taken into account here, I can only relate it in this context to fuel / CO2.

Economical would probably fall under the scenario of using the minimum required resources, i.e. not wasteful of time, effort or resources.

Both of the above to me seem to relate back to minimum use of fuel which in turn relates to minimum release of CO2 gasses. Whichever it is I still cant see how it can think "eco" is better one way, then do a Donald Trump and change its mind for the way back.
Then again if you take ecological to include tyre wear and general wear and tear of the car, the most economical route should have been the shorter one.

Personally I'm of the opinion that the Sat Nav software is crap at determining one or the other.
 
G

·
Mrsstuzilla said:
I don't get that second screen on mine with fast, Short, t dist on mine. Wonder if that's after an update?
Mine has always been like that from purchase (new) April 2015 not just after the map update. It also shows it in the handbook.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
265 Posts
Adrian said:
deeppurple said:
I'm not sure but i think that Eco is for 'ecological', i mean, less co2, not less economic. It's only my opinion. You can correct me if i'm wrong.
hmmm okay but what's your interpretation of that? I kind of assumed they were one in the same :)

To me, ecological would mean to benefit or cause minimal damage to the environment. As the construction & manufacturing process of the car itself can't be taken into account here, I can only relate it in this context to fuel / CO2.

Economical would probably fall under the scenario of using the minimum required resources, i.e. not wasteful of time, effort or resources.

Both of the above to me seem to relate back to minimum use of fuel which in turn relates to minimum release of CO2 gasses. Whichever it is I still cant see how it can think "eco" is better one way, then do a Donald Trump and change its mind for the way back.
Then again if you take ecological to include tyre wear and general wear and tear of the car, the most economical route should have been the shorter one.

Personally I'm of the opinion that the Sat Nav software is crap at determining one or the other.
For 'ecological' is a route where you releases less gases than a fast one. As i told, it's my opinion. Because sometimes the satnav sends me to a route with 2 miles more, 5 rond-point and where you must run under 50 than the fast way. I wouldn't call that economic.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
265 Posts
An ecolological route shouldn't just be about the gasses though so I think you arent seeing the complete picture. As I said, ecological is defined as having "a minimal impact on the environment, or a benefit to it". Therefore in this sense its how much fuel you burn, and yes also gasses you emit, but includes tyre wear, etc, etc.

However all of that is besides the point as you've picked up on one wrong term I used and this doesnt really answer why when I chose eco to get from A to B, on the way home it chose to take me via C when I chose eco. If a route is ecological on the way then surely the same route back must be exactly the same ecologically.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
344 Posts
Don't know how Citroen (or whoever designs the software) define "ECO"
but for what its worth;
co-effieceint of drag goes up by a square rule so 70 mph increases wind resistance by nearly 2 x against 50mph
frictional drag from tyres goes up significantly. (tyre rotation slip increases with speed).
mechanical losses in the drive chain and bearings etc. increases
Don't know about the non turbo and diesel cars but the turbo 110 produces max torque at 1500rpm. and its ft/lbs or Nm that gets you going.

traditional wisdom has always suggested that changing gear at 2000rpm for Diesel and 2500 for petrol was a fuel saving technique.
so is gentle acceration and breaking :geek:

so going further at a lower average speed could be more efficient.

Oh and enjoy the journey :D

(4 wheels moves the body, 2 wheels moves the soul)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
472 Posts
berapotter said:
Don't know how Citroen (or whoever designs the software) define "ECO"
but for what its worth;
co-effieceint of drag goes up by a square rule so 70 mph increases wind resistance by nearly 2 x against 50mph
frictional drag from tyres goes up significantly. (tyre rotation slip increases with speed).
mechanical losses in the drive chain and bearings etc. increases
Don't know about the non turbo and diesel cars but the turbo 110 produces max torque at 1500rpm. and its ft/lbs or Nm that gets you going.

traditional wisdom has always suggested that changing gear at 2000rpm for Diesel and 2500 for petrol was a fuel saving technique.
so is gentle acceration and breaking :geek:

so going further at a lower average speed could be more efficient.

Oh and enjoy the journey :D

(4 wheels moves the body, 2 wheels moves the soul)
Jeeze !! So glad I've got a life. :roll:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
626 Posts
Keith said:
When I put in a destination that I know the shortest route and quickest route it gives me something completely different.

Google maps and the route on my phone using Waze both give me the correct journey.

Also going towards another destination the quickest route it gives me is down C roads certainly not the quickest. If I set the sat nave to the same destination 100 yards away it does give me the correct quickest route.
I don't think this is necessarily a fault of the OEM SatNav and potentially the mapping data provided to the map creators.

My standalone Garmin suffers the same problem. An example is a site I visit for work - the quickest route there, isn't the same as the quickest route home. Essentially you end up at the same roundabout and its simply a toss up between which leg of a triangle you take.
 
G

·
Rich as I said in my original post I know it will get me there which is the main criteria but the distances on the Citroen Nav are 17ml & 16.2ml whereas on the Google Maps the shortest is 12.4ml & the longest 14.1 the Waze is almost identical the shortest is 12.82 ml the longest is 13.63ml both considerably shorter than the Citroen.

Also unless I am reading it wrong the Citroen is giving me an average speed of just under 60mph for the journey. :oops:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
709 Posts
The most economic driving style as has been mentioned a number of times in the forums from practical experience is
to drive at a steady speed, in the speed range 60 to 65 mph.

Applying this approach to assessing how ecological a route is, the properties of the optimum ecological route could
well be :

1 - not necessarily the shortest distance,
2 - if possible avoiding large towns/ cities,
3 - if possible avoiding routes that are slow, winding and having many road junctions with stop/start traffic motion.
4 - possibly a different route at different times of the day.
 
1 - 20 of 33 Posts
Top