At the time of this writing (end of January, 2001) there has been a lot of discussion on the LD Rider list about the best programs for optimizing a route. Ron Ayres did a test run using Automap Pro, inputting leg 2 of an Iron Butt Rally from Gorham Me to Kennewick WA. I decided to enter the same route and bonuses using MapNGo 6.0. Inputting the checkpoints in the sequence Ron did , MnG did the same optimization EXCEPT for the cluster in North Dakota and Manitoba (see the routes below). This is the same type of discrepancy we saw last year when comparing our routing packages. It was intuitively obvious that the checkpoints were out of sequence. A couple of minutes to re-arrange them and the route came out even shorter than Automap. Then, since the route was in MnG, there is no need to input the waypoints in a different program for uploading to the GPS. This no doubt more than made up for the time to re-sequence the waypoints.

The number of directions totalled 241 which, in eMap, would necessitate breaking the overall route into 5 subroutes, a real pain! This is the one thing Garmin needs to fix. With the capacity to store 2500 waypoints, it is ridiculous that you can have only 50 per route in eMap - even less in the III+ and Streetpilot at 30. I guess SP doesn't need more because of it's rubber banding. I assume that you can just put in the 21 waypoints in SP and it does the rest. This will not work in eMap as it would take you as the crow flies. It would be tricky getting from Escanaba to Thunder Bay.

Interestingly, using Automap's sequence, MnG came up with 6501 miles vs Automap's 6711. I don't know if it was a result of different road selections or just a different distance calculations. It could also be that MnG has more road detail than Automap, allowing a shorter route. We'll have to compare route details to see where the differences may be.

MnG actually routed me down a ferry ride. Inserting a VIA put took the ferry ride out.

Also, when I looked at the route the Automap sequence generated, the route from Madawaska to Sault Ste. Marie went via Ottawa and North Bay. I tried changing the sequence to go through Traverse City then Mackinaw City then Sault Ste. Marie. The route then went via Toronto and Port Huron. It added 75 miles to the route BUT, knowing the two routes, I believe I could make up the 75 miles time-wise by staying on the interstate. The road up through North Bay is all two lane and, depending on the time of day, you cannot make particularly good time (either traffic in the daytime or wildlife at night).

So, given the above facts, in my mind, Map'nGo is the way to go, no pun intended.

There is one scenario where MnG does not work well and that is where the start and end are the same point. It really does not know how to optimize waypoints in this situation. Automap and S&T shine in this situation. I input the 44 Texas checkpoints from the 2000 Eyes of Texas Grand Tour into S&T 2001. It took about 30 minutes to optimize and came up with 3595 miles. I input the same waypoints in the same order in MnG and it came up with 4108 miles and it would take quite a bit of work to optimize them manually. Inserting waypoints in MnG with the same start and end point just does not work well, especially when there are 44 of them scattered all over the state. In this case I would put them into S&T or Automap, optimize and then transfer the sequence to MnG for routing and uploading to the GPS.