Google Maps

Jamie2k9

How accurate are the journey times stated for routes?

Took a route recently around 13.6 km and was given a time of 14 minutes to complete and it was only possible by speeding for over 10.2 km. One thing to consider is the route is marked as motorway even though it does not have M in front of it on the map so wondering if it could impact on the time given and would 120 km/h be used instead of 100 km/h which the route is.

Thoie

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

How accurate are the journey times stated for routes?

Took a route recently around 13.6 km and was given a time of 14 minutes to complete and it was only possible by speeding for over 10.2 km. One thing to consider is the route is marked as motorway even though it does not have M in front of it on the map so wondering if it could impact on the time given and would 120 km/h be used instead of 100 km/h which the route is.

I've always found it to be pretty accurate. There are some dual carriageways that are 120kph zones, while there are some motorways with lower speeds. For example, the dual carriageway from Cork to Carrigtwohill is 120kph from roughly Dunkettle to Carrigtwohill. The M50 is only 100kph from Sandyford to... somewhere further north (if it switches back at all).

Jamie2k9

Thoie wrote: »

I've always found it to be pretty accurate. There are some dual carriageways that are 120kph zones, while there are some motorways with lower speeds. For example, the dual carriageway from Cork to Carrigtwohill is 120kph from roughly Dunkettle to Carrigtwohill. The M50 is only 100kph from Sandyford to... somewhere further north (if it switches back at all).

The Dual Carriageway in question is 100, it should be 120 but that's another matter. The time also included passing a toll bridge to.

Even a longer route which I take a lot seems impossible in the time stated on the site to.

The DC in Cork with 120km/h are stil marked as N roads but this N road has a section between 2 junctions in dark orange and the rest of the DC in light yellow!

Alun

13.6km in 14 mins is an average of roughly only 60km/h over the whole route. Care to share the route in question?

Jamie2k9

Alun wrote: »

13.6km in 14 mins is an average of roughly only 60km/h over the whole route. Care to share the route in question?

See file attached. Only 10.2km of the route are 100km/h and the rest is 50 and 60km/h.

The DC starts from first roundabout but between the first and second exit it changes to the dark orange as in a motorway so just wondering are they calculating speeds of 120km/h over this section.

Just to add the other options shown on the map are impossible to do in the time stated to as I usually use one of the others.

I was not driving but the person would of being doing 120 km/h+ on the DC section.

Spook_ie

Why not just test drive it at the sort of times you intend traveling?
No map can anticipate delays on your actual journey from tractors/pedestrians/cyclists/horses/buses/taxis or whatever

markpb

Between the data being sent by Android devices and by Waze users, I'd expect Google Maps to be reasonably accurate, notwithstanding what Spook said.

Jamie2k9

markpb wrote: »

Between the data being sent by Android devices and by Waze users, I'd expect Google Maps to be reasonably accurate, notwithstanding what Spook said.

Route was completely clear and the 9 minutes was only possible by doing 70 in a 60 zone on the bypass.

I expect many people speed on the bypass which could impact on times issued by Google.

Bing and Apple maps both allow 13 minutes for the journey and it can be done within normal speeds.

LXFlyer

From the link below, the journey times are based on a range of average timings.

I'm not sure you can extrapolate the reliability or otherwise of google maps based on single observation though......

http://www.techradar.com/news/software/applications/ex-googler-explains-how-google-maps-calculates-your-journey-eta-1211099

Google Maps' estimated journey times have always been a vital part of what makes the service such a useful travel tool, helping us decide when to leave and allowing us to notify friends of our ETA.

Now one ex-employee has revealed how the company decides how long it'll take you to get from A to B.

Posting on Quora, former Google engineer Richard Russell said a number of factors are in play, such as historical speed averages on roads, traffic data, and information it has gleaned from previous journeys.

"Like in similar products, Google maps ETAs are based on a variety of things, depending on the data available in a particular area," he wrote.

Historical and real time data
"These things range from official speed limits and recommended speeds, likely speeds derived from road types, historical average speed data over certain time periods (sometimes just averages, sometimes at particular times of day), actual travel times from previous users, and real-time traffic information.


"They mix data from whichever sources they have, and come up with the best prediction they can make. The companies who have access to the best usage data (ie those who are best able to compare their predictions against reality, which means those who have the most usage) are likely to end up with the best predictions in the medium to long term."

Qualitymark

Is there any way of seeing distance easily on the new Google Maps? There used to be a 'legend' at the bottom giving a guide in kilometres or miles; without this, I can't see how to calculate how far places are from each other unless I use a workaround like setting a route - but if I change how close-in or far-out the view is, I have to do this all over again.

Alun

Qualitymark wrote: »

Is there any way of seeing distance easily on the new Google Maps? There used to be a 'legend' at the bottom giving a guide in kilometres or miles; without this, I can't see how to calculate how far places are from each other unless I use a workaround like setting a route - but if I change how close-in or far-out the view is, I have to do this all over again.

Is this what you mean?



Still there on the new Google Maps.

LXFlyer

You can of course set the presentation back to the classic format if you so wish.

ThisRegard

Qualitymark wrote: »

Is there any way of seeing distance easily on the new Google Maps? There used to be a 'legend' at the bottom giving a guide in kilometres or miles; without this, I can't see how to calculate how far places are from each other unless I use a workaround like setting a route - but if I change how close-in or far-out the view is, I have to do this all over again.

Right click on a point and select Measure Distance from the context menu. Then click on where you want to measure the distance to. It will give you a straight line initially but you can then drag it around to manipulate it to follow certain roads etc.

Qualitymark

ThisRegard wrote: »

Right click on a point and select Measure Distance from the context menu. Then click on where you want to measure the distance to. It will give you a straight line initially but you can then drag it around to manipulate it to follow certain roads etc.

That's the workaround I already use. Much better to have the legend on the bottom, so you don't have to do it again and again as you increase or reduce the view size to see how near somewhere is to different places. The legend used to change with the view size, and you'd see easily how far, say, Sandycove was from Howth, and Sandycove was from Dun Laoghaire, without having to continually fooster around with clicking on points.
This 'improvement' and the fact that Google Maps doesn't use counties at all in Northern Ireland are the two worst things about the maps. Oh, and getting "An Post Museum" when you look for the GPO!

ThisRegard

I might be misunderstanding what your issue is. Are you saying when you zoom in and out, the legend on the bottom right does not change or appear, and also that the line you set up to measure the distance between the 2 points disappears as you do ?

When I zoom in and out, the legend at the bottom adjusts accordingly, and the distance measurement I set up remains on the screen.

Qualitymark

I take it back! The legend is still there, just concealed almost invisibly on bottom right!

Alun

Qualitymark wrote: »

I take it back! The legend is still there, just concealed almost invisibly on bottom right!

Like I said