stray_pube

What's up with piss poor arrival time estimates of the Acura nav? I've always used a garmin and when comparing routes between the two, same turn by turn directions, the Acura always has a longer, sometimes significantly, arrival time. The Garmin arrival time is spot-on from when a route begins. Again, this is comparing the exact same routing between the 2 units.

phineasboggs

My brief experience with the Acura Nav tells me it's a system to avoid. Too many wrong turns and craziness. I'm sticking with my Garmin, even though the Nav screen is right there.

So far, afaik and can see, that system is a piece of junk.

siliconarrow

Agree on this. Garmin systems are more refined, use touch-screen technology, and will keep rapidly improving with time while the Nav system we get with our Acuras will keep falling behind in technology. Will get a new Garmin soon and use the car's screen for stereo control, status reporting, and for other info.

Also, after using a portable NAV system (Garmin) for years, I don't like the central position for the car Nav screen. It is pretty distracting and a bit unnatural when I have to look right and down every time I need to check on something... Better to have a screen in front of a driver.

catnippants

I think you'll find a substantial group of people that disagree with you on this. YMMV, but I have both a Garmin and the Acura Nav, and they are pretty comparable (with the exception of POIs). My Acura Nav has yet to let me down.

Maybe it depends on your area of the country.

phoward_15

+1 with catnippants. My Acura Navi does a great job in the Northeast. I actually prefer the turn knob over the touchscreen.

MMike1981

maybe because the system in the RDX was made in 1912 when roads werent exactly prevalent.

i find it hilarious that even some of the HONDAS have the 2nd gen nav/screen. ahhh good ole acura. so old fashioned. does the nav have symbols for hitching posts?

XIS

1912... Back when Mike was just a few years old... That's why he is so grumpy. Needs more fiber.