I am about to buy a new Accord (2005 V6).
I am still deciding on whethere to get the Honda navigation system.
To anyone who owns a 2004 or 2005 Accord, can you share any raves or
gripes about the system and whethere you would make the same purchase
decision again? Thanks

 

We have a 2003 with Nav, but it's the same system. I can't imagine
owning another car without it. When I get in our other car without
one, it seems like I left home without my Right Guard. Depends upon
how much you value being able to find your way around in a strange
city. Or even the one where you live. One feature I really like is,
when you are several thousand miles from home, and ready to return,
you just click on Home and away you go! Being able to control about
200 things on your A/C, radio, etc. with just voice commands is pretty
cool too.

Dick

On 2 Sep 2005 22:25:02 -0700, techman41973@yahoo.com wrote:

>I am about to buy a new Accord (2005 V6).
>I am still deciding on whethere to get the Honda navigation system.
>To anyone who owns a 2004 or 2005 Accord, can you share any raves or
>gripes about the system and whethere you would make the same purchase
>decision again? Thanks

 

> >I am about to buy a new Accord (2005 V6).
> >I am still deciding on whethere to get the Honda navigation system.
> >To anyone who owns a 2004 or 2005 Accord, can you share any raves or
> >gripes about the system and whethere you would make the same purchase
> >decision again? Thanks

Just bought an Accord 05 with Nav.

The way I thought about it is this: I'd guess the value of the Nav
upon resale / trade depreciates maybe $200-$300/year. For that price,
I thought it was well worth it.

That said, for me the Nav is great. Even if I generally know where I'm
going, I sometimes program the destination in the Nav during rush hour,
so I can turn when I see traffic into unknown side streets and rely on
the Nav to get me where I want to go.

I also like how the voice commands control the temperature and radio.

My only gripe is that its path decision logic seems to prioritize large
roads instead of obvious small-road shortcuts that exist. It does this
much more than mapquest or randmcnally.com

Also, it is fully integrated with the XM and radio, so it would be a
nearly impossible to change to Sirius or an upgraded radio head unit if
you wanted to.

But in my mind, given the $200-$300 per year, I'd definitely choose
this again.

-MVL

 

On 3 Sep 2005 18:04:35 -0700, mvl_groups_user@yahoo.com wrote:

>> >I am about to buy a new Accord (2005 V6).
>> >I am still deciding on whethere to get the Honda navigation system.
>> >To anyone who owns a 2004 or 2005 Accord, can you share any raves or
>> >gripes about the system and whethere you would make the same purchase
>> >decision again? Thanks
>
>Just bought an Accord 05 with Nav.
>

>My only gripe is that its path decision logic seems to prioritize large
>roads instead of obvious small-road shortcuts that exist. It does this
>much more than mapquest or randmcnally.com
>
>-MVL

You have a certain amount of control over the route logic. Although
not necessarily for intra-city travel. You can minimize/maximize
freeways, minimize toll roads, ask it to detour you from the current
route and avoid certain streets. Not perfect, but still a lot of
flexibility.

Dick

 

techman41973@yahoo.com wrote:
> I am about to buy a new Accord (2005 V6).
> I am still deciding on whethere to get the Honda navigation system.
> To anyone who owns a 2004 or 2005 Accord, can you share any raves or
> gripes about the system and whethere you would make the same purchase
> decision again? Thanks

I've got a 2004 MDX and '04 Accord. Didn't get it on either. Don't
miss it, but I don't wander around without a city map either.

I have asked several people who have nav, and every single one of them
can't imagine not having it. Even people like me who were a little
down on it previously.

$300 a year doesn't seem like a lot, but that makes my Mapquest
printout worth about $75 since I do that about 4 times a year.'

There are now dial-in cell phone services to give directions. They
walk you through to the destination with your GPS-enabled cell phone.
You might take a look at that as an alternative.

 

On 3 Sep 2005 21:00:02 -0700, jmattis@attglobal.net wrote:

>
>techman41973@yahoo.com wrote:
>> I am about to buy a new Accord (2005 V6).
>> I am still deciding on whethere to get the Honda navigation system.
>> To anyone who owns a 2004 or 2005 Accord, can you share any raves or
>> gripes about the system and whethere you would make the same purchase
>> decision again? Thanks
>
>I've got a 2004 MDX and '04 Accord. Didn't get it on either. Don't
>miss it, but I don't wander around without a city map either.
>
>I have asked several people who have nav, and every single one of them
>can't imagine not having it. Even people like me who were a little
>down on it previously.
>
>$300 a year doesn't seem like a lot, but that makes my Mapquest
>printout worth about $75 since I do that about 4 times a year.'
>
>There are now dial-in cell phone services to give directions. They
>walk you through to the destination with your GPS-enabled cell phone.
>You might take a look at that as an alternative.

Maps are fine, but there is nothing like a Navigation system on a 3 or
4-thousand mile trip through many cities. Anyway, I can't read a map
and drive. And maps can't find hotels, Office Max stores, etc. Even
in a city like Las Vegas, I find it indispensable. Las Vegas has an
unbelievable number of dead-end streets. When you are trying to find
a store, the nav leads you around all those obstacles. There is a
great deal more to the nav system than just a map. It gives you
average and instantaneous fuel consumption, distance to next turn, a
calculator, an appointment calendar, current altitude, current
location by latitude/longitude, etc. It's full of goodies.

Dick

 

jmattis@attglobal.net wrote:
> techman41973@yahoo.com wrote:
>
>>I am about to buy a new Accord (2005 V6).
>>I am still deciding on whethere to get the Honda navigation system.
>>To anyone who owns a 2004 or 2005 Accord, can you share any raves or
>>gripes about the system and whethere you would make the same purchase
>>decision again? Thanks
>
>
> I've got a 2004 MDX and '04 Accord. Didn't get it on either. Don't
> miss it, but I don't wander around without a city map either.
>
> I have asked several people who have nav, and every single one of them
> can't imagine not having it. Even people like me who were a little
> down on it previously.
>
> $300 a year doesn't seem like a lot, but that makes my Mapquest
> printout worth about $75 since I do that about 4 times a year.'
>
> There are now dial-in cell phone services to give directions. They
> walk you through to the destination with your GPS-enabled cell phone.
> You might take a look at that as an alternative.
>
i got a magellan sportrak map a couple years ago. holds 5Mb worth of
info, equivalent to the whole LA region of SoCal, from encino down to
irvine. every street, points of interest, etc.

it has a built-in "basemap" of every major freeway in the nation. so
even with no "map" loaded, you still have a basic idea where you are.

course, you can set up different "blocks" of regions, like LA,
riverside/OC, las vegas, etc and load as needed, when needed. works
excellent on land and water, on foot and in whatever car or vehicle im
in and only cost $150.

 

Dick wrote:
> On 3 Sep 2005 21:00:02 -0700, jmattis@attglobal.net wrote:
>
>
>>techman41973@yahoo.com wrote:
>>
>>>I am about to buy a new Accord (2005 V6).
>>>I am still deciding on whethere to get the Honda navigation system.
>>>To anyone who owns a 2004 or 2005 Accord, can you share any raves or
>>>gripes about the system and whethere you would make the same purchase
>>>decision again? Thanks
>>
>>I've got a 2004 MDX and '04 Accord. Didn't get it on either. Don't
>>miss it, but I don't wander around without a city map either.
>>
>>I have asked several people who have nav, and every single one of them
>>can't imagine not having it. Even people like me who were a little
>>down on it previously.
>>
>>$300 a year doesn't seem like a lot, but that makes my Mapquest
>>printout worth about $75 since I do that about 4 times a year.'
>>
>>There are now dial-in cell phone services to give directions. They
>>walk you through to the destination with your GPS-enabled cell phone.
>>You might take a look at that as an alternative.
>
>
> Maps are fine, but there is nothing like a Navigation system on a 3 or
> 4-thousand mile trip through many cities. Anyway, I can't read a map

not too many people do trips like that. kinda like all the SUVs with
lift kits that never leave the road... intentionally :)

> and drive. And maps can't find hotels, Office Max stores, etc. Even
> in a city like Las Vegas, I find it indispensable. Las Vegas has an
> unbelievable number of dead-end streets. When you are trying to find
> a store, the nav leads you around all those obstacles. There is a

so does a $150 GPS unit.

> great deal more to the nav system than just a map. It gives you
> average and instantaneous fuel consumption, distance to next turn, a
> calculator, an appointment calendar, current altitude, current
> location by latitude/longitude, etc. It's full of goodies.

mine can do alt, lat/long, true MPH, all the important stuff. for $150,
and can be put in a pocket and moved from vehicle to vehicle.
>
> Dick

 

Dick wrote:

> Maps are fine, but there is nothing like a Navigation system on a 3 or
> 4-thousand mile trip through many cities. Anyway, I can't read a map
> and drive.

You shouldn't use a Nav system and drive at the same time either.

I agree with SoCalMike that a hand-held system would be a better investment.
Not just for the price and portability, but if something goes wrong with it,
you don't have to take the car to the dealer.

 

On Sat, 03 Sep 2005 23:37:35 -0700, SoCalMike
<mikein562athotmail@hotmail.com> wrote:


>> great deal more to the nav system than just a map. It gives you
>> average and instantaneous fuel consumption, distance to next turn, a
>> calculator, an appointment calendar, current altitude, current
>> location by latitude/longitude, etc. It's full of goodies.
>

>mine can do alt, lat/long, true MPH, all the important stuff. for $150,
>and can be put in a pocket and moved from vehicle to vehicle.

I have a Garmin for my Jeep. It can't begin to compare with the
capabilities and readability of the Nav system on the Accord.

Dick

 

I have a 2004 Acura TL and 2005 Honda Accord neither with NAV, wasn't
readily available in my area when I bought TL ( chip shortage they were
claiming,89 Acuras on lot onlt 6 with standard tranny had them ) . So
figured that never had one who cares and for 2k who needs. After first year
and hearing everyone rave about Nav systems I bought a Garmin Street Pilot
2620 for the car. Like so many, couldn't live without it now. My unit is 1k
bought on sale for 800, has 2 gig hard drive builtin all US and Canada. Plug
it into cigg lighter put it on dash board ( incredably stable on beanbag
mount, also has permanent mount included ) and off you go. My concern was
that if it operated like Mapquest always giving strangely convoluted
directions that it would be worthless. Thankfully operates great and all the
routes are right there with what I would have done. Now more than confident
that it knows better and drive never lost. Has all the trip stuff too.

http://www.garmin.com/products/sp2620/

I don't drive in strange areas much but found it worth it just when you have
to bypass something or do go into an area you don't know. Cruised from San
Juan to Norfolk Va. rented a car to drive home to NY. Took Garmin along, got
into rental, plugged it in hit button twice and it took me right to my door.
Found me a nice restaurant along the way.

Drove a friend to LGA, on way home bumper to bumper do to an accident. Got
off parkway with no concern and let it find me another way. In meantime had
it take me to nearest Dunkin Donuts to get me stabilized. Obviously I am pro
navigation. Even my wife who often belittles my needs for " toys " says best
" toy " I ever bought.

The only question now is to stay with portable or next trade get one built
in. I think I will probably get one built in just for the coolness of it all
:)

George in NY

 

On Sun, 4 Sep 2005 08:45:44 -0400, High Tech Misfit <me@privacy.net>
wrote:

>Dick wrote:
>
>> Maps are fine, but there is nothing like a Navigation system on a 3 or
>> 4-thousand mile trip through many cities. Anyway, I can't read a map
>> and drive.
>
>You shouldn't use a Nav system and drive at the same time either.

I presume you mean that you shouldn't try to key data into the system
and drive at the same time. I thoroughly agree with that -- terribly
dangerous.
>
>I agree with SoCalMike that a hand-held system would be a better investment.
>Not just for the price and portability, but if something goes wrong with it,
>you don't have to take the car to the dealer.

That's logical, all right, but as many others have said, once you have
a Honda Nav and live with it for a while, you're not likely to accept
substitutes thereafter. The main difference between this unit and all
the Garmin and Tom-Tom units is the size of the screen, That provides
superior readability, and that's worth the difference in price to most
people who have had a chance to experience both kinds. For those who
still wouldn't want to pay for the Honda system, the alternatives are
pretty good, too.

Ron

 

You are right. I will get built in next car not only for the coolness but
also for screen size. Don't know how I missed mentioning that. Also
eliminates pulling unit out everytime you park and throwing it in the trunk
though a minor inconvenience. Leaving a portable unit visible in the car at
a parking lot simply too much temptation for someone to break in and grab.

George in NY


"Milleron" <millerdot90@SPAMLESSosu.edu> wrote in message
news:lkdnh1dgcbk7eaetn9mg0l8i3dq4finu85@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 4 Sep 2005 08:45:44 -0400, High Tech Misfit <me@privacy.net>
> wrote:
The main difference between this unit and all
> the Garmin and Tom-Tom units is the size of the screen, That provides
> superior readability, and that's worth the difference in price to most
> people who have had a chance to experience both kinds. For those who
> still wouldn't want to pay for the Honda system, the alternatives are
> pretty good, too.
>
> Ron