Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

well one thing i noticed with the new s50 is (after owning both tomtom and navman) is that it has a milage log book in it! this is good if you use your car work work and play... otherwise the tomtom is the go for sure!

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/194976-tomtom-v-navman/#findComment-3494026
Share on other sites

tomtom has a very nice user interface, mush nicer to look at and use in my opinion

but don't forger the garmin models - some have software that actually says street names out to you - this is pretty rare in the GPS market and well worth it imo

(i have tomtom on my PDA and i'm about to get a hardwired garmin unit in my V35)

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/194976-tomtom-v-navman/#findComment-3495642
Share on other sites

I sell them as i work at JB Hi Fi .. i would recommend the tom tom ... much easier user interface and it has advance planning feature ... this gives you pc software to easily plan trip then loading the file to your favourites on the unit.....

However the S50 navman has bluetooth handsfree built in .... depends which features you need..

but if i was choosing on basic ease of use ... i would go the tom tom for sure

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/194976-tomtom-v-navman/#findComment-3497064
Share on other sites

hmm, cheers for the feedback guys, tomtom seems to be the pick of the bunch atm, but i do like some of the navman features,

if i could affor to go more expensive i believe both of the higher models in the tomtom and navman ranges have the feature that reads street names out, but atm thats not an option, and not that much of a priority however cool :(

might have to do a lil more comparing still

thanks

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/194976-tomtom-v-navman/#findComment-3499818
Share on other sites

i would have to add... that for best gps performance, garmin are the winners there. i miss my old c310!

the best feature of the streetpilots is the auto turn on and off feature as per the ACC position! why dont the others have that?!?!?!?

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/194976-tomtom-v-navman/#findComment-3499826
Share on other sites

if anyone knows anything of both or either models battery life, that would be good too, i realise they both come with car chargers, but jus so i know.

the Navman site says it has a life of approximatly 5 hrs while the tomtom site says 2 hrs

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/194976-tomtom-v-navman/#findComment-3500243
Share on other sites

I've had the TomTom ONE XL since it's release early this year. I am happy to say it is the best GPS unit I have ever used, in terms of accuracy, ease of use and interface-appeal. However, it's battery doesn't seem to last all that long. I usually have it stuck in the car-charger.

BTW, I picked up the unit for $499 when it came out! (RRP $599)

Edited by HUAWEI
Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/194976-tomtom-v-navman/#findComment-3500517
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Latest Posts

    • Hi all,   long time listener, first time caller   i was wondering if anyone can help me identify a transistor on the climate control unit board that decided to fry itself   I've circled it in the attached photo   any help would be appreciated
    • I mean, I got two VASS engineers to refuse to cert my own coilovers stating those very laws. Appendix B makes it pretty clear what it considers 'Variable Suspension' to be. In my lived experience they can't certify something that isn't actually in the list as something that requires certification. In the VASS engineering checklist they have to complete (LS3/NCOP11) and sign on there is nothing there. All the references inside NCOP11 state that if it's variable by the driver that height needs to maintain 100mm while the car is in motion. It states the car is lowered lowering blocks and other types of things are acceptable. Dialling out a shock is about as 'user adjustable' as changing any other suspension component lol. I wanted to have it signed off to dissuade HWP and RWC testers to state the suspension is legal to avoid having this discussion with them. The real problem is that Police and RWC/Pink/Blue slip people will say it needs engineering, and the engineers will state it doesn't need engineering. It is hugely irritating when aforementioned people get all "i know the rules mate feck off" when they don't, and the actual engineers are pleasant as all hell and do know the rules. Cars failing RWC for things that aren't listed in the RWC requirements is another thing here entirely!
    • I don't. I mean, mine's not a GTR, but it is a 32 with a lot of GTR stuff on it. But regardless, I typically buy from local suppliers. Getting stuff from Japan is seldom worth the pain. Buying from RHDJapan usually ends up in the final total of your basket being about double what you thought it would be, after all the bullshit fees and such are added on.
    • The hydrocarbon component of E10 can be shittier, and is in fact, shittier, than that used in normal 91RON fuel. That's because the octane boost provided by the ethanol allows them to use stuff that doesn't make the grade without the help. The 1c/L saving typically available on E10 is going to be massively overridden by the increased consumption caused by the ethanol and the crappier HC (ie the HCs will be less dense, meaning that there will definitely be less energy per unit volume than for more dense HCs). That is one of the reasons why P98 will return better fuel consumption than 91 does, even with the ignition timing completely fixed. There is more energy per unit volume because the HCs used in 98 are higher density than in the lawnmower fuel.
    • No, I'd suggest that that is the checklist for pneumatic/hydraulic adjustable systems. I would say, based on my years of reading and complying with Australian Standards and similar regulations, that the narrow interpretation of Clause 3.2 b would be the preferred/expected/intended one, by the author, and those using the standard. Wishful thinking need not apply.
×
×
  • Create New...