PSA: Never buying a (Toyota) nav system again?

[aja8888]

In our Prius I decided not to give in dash navigation and bought a Garmin GPS and stuck it to the windshield. It was a very nice GPS unit. But, it was constantly falling off the windshield which is to say the least distracting while driving. Eventually I gave the Prius to my son and he finally junked the GPS since it wouldn't stay on the windshield. And he didn't like having something on the windshield.

You can get dashboard mounts which I think are preferable to windshield mount but not everyone wants something on the dashboard.

I don't think you can blame the Garmin for the improper or defective mount. My Garmin stays mounted on the windshield 24/7 and it does not fall off on its own. To mount these properly, it's important to have a clean windshield and clean cup surface. I use a wipe cloth with alcohol that I use for my glasses to clean the surfaces. There are also vent mounts that work quite well.

This is my mount with dedicated power wire:

 

[Katsmeow]

I don't think you can blame the Garmin for the improper or defective mount. My Garmin stays mounted on the windshield 24/7 and it does not fall off on its own. To mount these properly, it's important to have a clean windshield and clean cup surface. I use a wipe cloth with alcohol that I use for my glasses to clean the surfaces. There are also vent mounts that work quite well.

This is my mount with dedicated power wire:

View attachment 19514

We cleaned multiple times. I've used one before (at one point we had three vehicles with Garmin windshield mounts so had a lot of practice). So, I have had them where they stayed on. But, this one stayed on for awhile most of the time, then just keep falling off constantly. Not real sure what happened there, but it was annoying. This was not user error.

So I most certainly think I can blame Garmin for it. That is not to say that I think that all of them are defective, but this one most certainly was.

 

[braumeister]

Using the Garmin suction cup mounts, I've only had them come loose when the car was left out in the sun and it got extremely hot inside.

The best trick for me has been to use one of those little disposable alcohol wipes that are meant for cleaning eyeglasses. Wipe down both the suction cup and the surface it will go on, before applying it. Lasts for many months.

 

[Walt34]

A sign painter gave me this tip. Do not use Windex to clean your windows. According to him it contains petroleum products that leave a film and attracts dust. I use one of the super concentrated mixes aimed at pro window cleaners from Lowes or HD and is diluted at 32:1 water/product ratio or something like that so a gallon lasts "forever". We haven't had any problems with the suction cups falling off. Except when DW uses Windex....

 

[REWahoo]

For Father's Day DW gave me a cool little mounting device you can use for a phone or a Garmin. A little pricey but it really works great: Amazon.com: Nite Ize STCK-11-R8 Steelie Car Mount Kit for Cellphones

 

[MichaelB]

For Father's Day DW gave me a cool little mounting device you can use for a phone or a Garmin. A little pricey but it really works great: Amazon.com: Nite Ize STCK-11-R8 Steelie Car Mount Kit for Cellphones

That company has some nice accessories. Further research is in order.

I used a Garmin portable friction mount. It worked very well until the base got slippery. Twice it (with the nuvi) slid off the dashboard. First time the connector broke, second time the nuvi died.

 

[NW-Bound]

No bitty portable GPS or smartphone screens for me during my RV treks. Instead, a big (relatively) screen of a netbook is used to run MS Streets & Trips, along with a USB dongle GPS.

I have ordered an OBDII bluetooth device with the intention of using it with a second netbook to display engine parameters like rpm, temperature, mpg, etc... Will I dedicate a 2nd netbook for the engine display, so as not to detract from the map display of the 1st netbook if one netbook has to host both apps?

The wide and deep dashboard of the class C is a secure perch for the laptops/netbooks. And the big windshield means that I can have 2 of them there, heck even 3, without obstructing the vision any. So, two displays it is.

And I still have that 3rd netbook. And my laptop. I need to think of something to display on them too, to keep my copilot busy. Heh heh heh...

 

[easysurfer]

That company has some nice accessories. Further research is in order.

I used a Garmin portable friction mount. It worked very well until the base got slippery. Twice it (with the nuvi) slid off the dashboard. First time the connector broke, second time the nuvi died.

I had a similar thing happen with my old Garmin bean bag friction mount.

I did fix that problem with some extra anti-slip grip tape.

Amazon.com: Incom RE3952 Black Gator Grip Anti Slip Safety Grit Tape, 4-Inch by 15-Foot: Home Improvement

 

[travelover]

I had a similar thing happen with my old Garmin bean bag friction mount.

I did fix that problem with some extra anti-slip grip tape.

Amazon.com: Incom RE3952 Black Gator Grip Anti Slip Safety Grit Tape, 4-Inch by 15-Foot: Home Improvement

I smeared silicone caulk all over the bottom of mine once it got slippery and that worked for a long time. As I live on a dirt road, eventually the dust worked its way into the silicone and it, too, became slippery.

 

[MBAustin]

I didn't want the NAV unit when I bought my 2010 Prius, but for me a sunroof is a must - I never thought I would want one until I ended up with one when I got a hand-me-down car from my parents about 20 years ago. On the Prius that year, the only way to get the sunroof was with the NAV package. So far no issues, but I refuse to pay the hundreds of dollars for a map update so sometimes I have to use my phone because the maps are too old.

 

[Gumby]

Edit: On the backup camera -- I totally agree with bUU. We are about to buy a vehicle for my daughter and I won't consider one that doesn't have a backup camera.

W2R you see way more with the backup camera than you do without it. I have backup cameras on several cars and it gives me a much greater field of vision.

I think the backup camera is a fine option for those who see some value in it. I don't think it should be mandatory for everyone.

 

[ERD50]

I think the backup camera is a fine option for those who see some value in it. I don't think it should be mandatory for everyone.

I would need to see the math to determine if it makes reasonable sense as a regulation, but I would not dismiss it out of hand.

It obviously makes cars safer if you can see more with a camera than without. And I think these cameras and displays are pretty cheap these days, and the display gets multi-use in many cases.

People back up w/o looking at all (camera or not), I don't think we can fix that (hmmm.... retina scans? no backwards acceleration until the eyes have focused on the mirrors/cameras? That could work, but it's a ways off!). But it seems these cameras show more than most of us can see w/o one, so it seems to be a positive. I'm making an educated guess that it is a pretty good bang for the buck, I lean towards making it mandatory (and I think the govt over-regulates in general), unless someone can show a better return for the investment.

Note to bUU: see, I'm agreeing with you on this one!

-ERD50

 

[easysurfer]

Another feature talked about (saw the story on the morning news) for the future is smarter cars to sense when I child in left inside. As sadly, the backup cameras came about after the horrible experiences of kids run over while backing up.

In that story, what was in a way a "you gotta be kidding" is there are apps that tell if your child is still in the car. Silly in the sense that folks are now so glued the the smartphones that an app is needed instead of just turning around and checking? But I guess some get distracted and forget

 

[Katsmeow]

I would need to see the math to determine if it makes reasonable sense as a regulation, but I would not dismiss it out of hand.

It is mandated as of May, 2018. This has a lot of information about why it is being mandated:

https://www.federalregister.gov/art...otor-vehicle-safety-standards-rear-visibility

Rear visibility systems meeting the requirements of today's final rule are predicted to have an effectiveness of between 28 and 33 percent—substantially higher than other systems (e.g., sensor-only systems) that are currently available. Applying that estimated effectiveness to the latest information on the target population, the aforementioned systems are expected to save 58 to 69 lives each year (not including injuries prevented) once the entire on road vehicle fleet is equipped with systems meeting today's rules requirements (anticipated by approximately 2054).

 

[Texas Proud]

We cleaned multiple times. I've used one before (at one point we had three vehicles with Garmin windshield mounts so had a lot of practice). So, I have had them where they stayed on. But, this one stayed on for awhile most of the time, then just keep falling off constantly. Not real sure what happened there, but it was annoying. This was not user error.

So I most certainly think I can blame Garmin for it. That is not to say that I think that all of them are defective, but this one most certainly was.

Not sure, but it could be where you live.... I have bought 4 mounts for our Garmin and all seem to eventually 'dry up'... and we do not use them that much... just sit in the glove box most of the time....

 

[bUU]

I think the backup camera is a fine option for those who see some value in it. I don't think it should be mandatory for everyone.

Folks said the same thing about safety belts, and passenger side mirrors.

For many of these things, the value in it is perceived by people we interact with: the car driving alongside of us on the highway; the person walking behind our car as we're pulling out of a space in the parking lot; etc. In addition, for many things, widespread adoption greatly reduces the cost and therefore the price, and so the value others perceive, in the context of the reduced cost, may make things even more worthwhile despite the failure of others to see any value.

Note to bUU: see, I'm agreeing with you on this one!

Ring the bell!!

 

[Gumby]

Using the numbers provided by Katsmeow above, it appears that between 58 and 69 lives per year will be saved - when it is fully implemented in 2054. Let's assume the high end. Let's also assume that the camera setup increases the price of the car by only $100 initially and that it never needs repaired. We know that approximately 15 million new cars are sold every year. So we will spend $60 billion dollars (15 M cars/yr x $100 x 40 years) before we get to the point where we are even saving 69 lives. That's $869 million per life. I acknowledge that some lives will be saved in the interim, but even if we only took the annual expense ($100 x 15 million = $1.5 billion), you are still spending $21.74 million ($1.5B / 69) to save a single life. I'll agree that backing over a child is a tragedy, but don't you think that $21.74 million could save a lot more than one child if it were used for proper prenatal care and pediatric medicine? This is one of those "feel good" solutions that doesn't make economic sense.

 

[athena53]

It obviously makes cars safer if you can see more with a camera than without. And I think these cameras and displays are pretty cheap these days, and the display gets multi-use in many cases.

Well, yes, they're cheap initially, but then the manufacturer adds on a markup. And then it becomes obsolete or stops working and replacement is NOT cheap. Every time they add something else electronic to a car I think, "more stuff that will cost a bundle to fix if it breaks down". Have you ever tried to replace an electronic key fob?

 

[bUU]

This is one of those "feel good" solutions that doesn't make economic sense.

Like democracy, and liberty, and justice.

 

[athena53]

<snip> So we will spend $60 billion dollars (15 M cars/yr x $100 x 40 years) before we get to the point where we are even saving 69 lives. <snip>I'll agree that backing over a child is a tragedy, but don't you think that $21.74 million could save a lot more than one child if it were used for proper prenatal care and pediatric medicine? This is one of those "feel good" solutions that doesn't make economic sense.

I'm a retired actuary so this type of analysis warms my heart. There's not enough of it. I've always said that if we want safer cars we could all drive around in tanks, but (thank God) the market won't support that because they'd be too expensive, wouldn't go fast enough and would probably get 2 mpg. At some point you need to make an intelligent decision about what you're spending to prevent something and whether the money would be better spent elsewhere.

 

[bUU]

At some point you need to make an intelligent decision about what you're spending to prevent something and whether the money would be better spent elsewhere.

Yet when our society does that, folks who don't like the answer try to claim that their own personal appraisal of what is an "intelligent decision" should trump that of everyone else.

 

[easysurfer]

... This is one of those "feel good" solutions that doesn't make economic sense.

The situation is still very subjective. A cost benefit analysis and it may not make economic sense, except for the families that suffer the tragedy then saving just one life at any cost makes perfect sense.

Do the needs of the few outweigh the needs of the many? Ah..flashbacks of Star Trek movie.

 

[ERD50]

Using the numbers provided by Katsmeow above, it appears that between 58 and 69 lives per year will be saved - when it is fully implemented in 2054. .... but even if we only took the annual expense ($100 x 15 million = $1.5 billion), you are still spending $21.74 million ($1.5B / 69) to save a single life. ... This is one of those "feel good" solutions that doesn't make economic sense.

Well, I said we should run the numbers and not dismiss it out of hand. So those numbers are enlightening, but we also need some context.

How many injuries, how many life-long disabilities? Surely not everyone who is backed over dies. I imagine most deaths occur if the tires run over you, and the car is much wider than the tires are, and I would guess there are far more injuries than deaths. So add the cost of injuries and lifetimes of care to that, and also property damage, and the costs/benefit ratio will be lower. Plus, it has some value as a convenience in parking, it isn't all 'cost' for safety.

Just thinking of property damage, a simple 'fender-bender' from backing into a car that wasn't seen can easily run $1000 per vehicle. If that happens in the life of one out of twenty cars (for illustration, I don't know the number), the $100 is paid back.

Likely there is better use of the money, we'd need to see some alternatives for comparison. I think there is an emotional side of this too. Often, the kid that is run over is a relative or neighbor, and the guilt factor must be terrible. Some other deaths do not have such a direct cause - they are just as sad, but it is different I think.

BTW, the deaths versus injuries issue is one I bring up regarding auto versus airline stats. Most airline crashes result in deaths, not injuries. So comparing airline deaths to auto deaths is misleading, as autos have far more injuries than deaths. Airlines are even safer than they appear on a death per mile or trip comparison.

-ERD50

 

[Free To Canoe]

I think the backup camera is a fine option for those who see some value in it. I don't think it should be mandatory for everyone.

I'm with Gumby.
Having a back up camera gives car designers an excuse for not designing a car that has good visibility.

 

[Katsmeow]

If you look at the link I gave they do an analysis of costs v. Benefits which I found interesting. For example, property damage to cars is also reduced through this because people hit fewer things.

Anyway if you go to that link they do analyze the costs in great detail.