What's new
By:

Gravity Nav HERE map routing

S

Saksak

Active Member

Verified Owner
Supporting Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2025
Messages
823
Reaction score
1,276
Cars
Model X, XC90, S4, LS460
Air DE Number
1
Gravity DE Number
160
Referral Code
34DTL9L0
One thing I noticed about the Gravity HERE maps navigation that I like: it shows both time difference as well as charge difference on alternate routes. I also like that I can click on those boxes to select an alternate route, much like Google maps alternate route selection.

I started noticing the default route may not be the most time efficient, but rather the most charge efficient, so the navigation algorithm weighting may need some tuning. I’ve had to select “-1 min/+1%” to match what I normally expect through Google/Apple Maps; most of us want min time and not min charge.
 
Sometimes I just like to randomly drive around and listen to tunes. Here in La with HERE maps I don't have to pick a random course. All I have to do is put in a known LA landmark and HERE will find the most convoluted route to get there, avoiding traffic by finding even more horrific traffic. It will continually, without asking dig deeper and deeper into the rabbit hole of west LA traffic. Kind of funny what it comes up with sometimes.
 
Smorgasbord said:
Neither my wife nor I can get over having "the five-eighty" (580) announced to us as "route five-hundred and eighty."
Click to expand...
To me it sounds like someone trying to read the signs when they forgot their glasses 🤓
 
One data point for 3.4.1 routing under rush-hour, heavy congestion, with over a one hour commute. With no traffic, travel time is under 30 minutes.
  • Both Google Maps (iPhone) and Gravity HERE Maps bypassed all highway and took city streets.
  • Google map route ETA was 17:39.
  • HERE map route ETA was 17:24.
  • Followed HERE route. Google maps rerouted for a new ETA of 17:35. Google failed to find this faster route in its initial search.
  • Continue to ignore Google and followed HERE. When both Google and HERE routes finally synced up (time kept dropping for Google on every reroute) with about 15 min left in my commute:
    • HERE ETA was 17:29.
    • Google ETA was 17:32
  • Arrival time was 17:31.
In general:
  • Google maps does not always find the fastest route. It tends to follow major roads. I relied on Tesla in-car maps, as it has better route planning than Google phone app.
  • Google/Tesla map ETA is spot on. I usually arrive within a few minutes of ETA if I follow the route, in all traffic conditions, unless there is an accident, etc.
  • HERE maps is generally optimistic during congested periods. It’s not unusual to arrive 10 minutes after the initial projected ETA on a 1-hour drive.
  • HERE maps routing has been good enough. I’ve been using HERE maps exclusively since getting my Gravity, although I did get a weird detour once, which I ignored. I’m hoping 3.4.1 will have fixed that issue.
  • If I’m going to an unknown area, I tend to cross check with Apple Maps for significant route differences, anyway.
 
Saksak said:
One data point for 3.4.1 routing under rush-hour, heavy congestion, with over a one hour commute. With no traffic, travel time is under 30 minutes.
  • Both Google Maps (iPhone) and Gravity HERE Maps bypassed all highway and took city streets.
  • Google map route ETA was 17:39.
  • HERE map route ETA was 17:24.
  • Followed HERE route. Google maps rerouted for a new ETA of 17:35. Google failed to find this faster route in its initial search.
  • Continue to ignore Google and followed HERE. When both Google and HERE routes finally synced up (time kept dropping for Google on every reroute) with about 15 min left in my commute:
    • HERE ETA was 17:29.
    • Google ETA was 17:32
  • Arrival time was 17:31.
In general:
  • Google maps does not always find the fastest route. It tends to follow major roads. I relied on Tesla in-car maps, as it has better route planning than Google phone app.
  • Google/Tesla map ETA is spot on. I usually arrive within a few minutes of ETA if I follow the route, in all traffic conditions, unless there is an accident, etc.
  • HERE maps is generally optimistic during congested periods. It’s not unusual to arrive 10 minutes after the initial projected ETA on a 1-hour drive.
  • HERE maps routing has been good enough. I’ve been using HERE maps exclusively since getting my Gravity, although I did get a weird detour once, which I ignored. I’m hoping 3.4.1 will have fixed that issue.
  • If I’m going to an unknown area, I tend to cross check with Apple Maps for significant route differences, anyway.
Click to expand...
I'd be interested in seeing that same test done against Waze.
 
Some data points:

Google Maps is your traditional navigation app....Waze, on the other hand...is always analyzing conditions to try and get you there the fastest possible way.

Both services can determine traffic conditions from the number of users on the road, but Waze actually does something about it. But Google Maps has changed the way it calculated its calculates its routes in recent years. The service will now use a number of factors, including real time traffic conditions and number of traffic lights, to make the proposed route safer, and more eco-friendly. In other words Google Maps will take more than just your final ETA into account when it tells you where to go.

Waze is built around one thing, and one thing only: minimizing your time on the road and getting you to your destination as quickly as possible. That means it doesn’t ask permission to alter your route mid-trip, and automatically offers up directions that get you around obstacles that have popped up. All in the name of getting you somewhere in the shortest amount of time. For that reason Waze users often find they get sent to some very random places, as the app works to get them where they need to go.

The downside to Waze’s system is that it’s reliant on other active users on the road. So if you’re the only Waze user for hundreds of miles, the app has no idea what’s going on up ahead.
Click to expand...

I know there are a few different traffic information providers, so which navigation service is best in Gravity/Air may be dependent on which provider Lucid selected for HERE to use. And then, different traffic information providers tend to be better in some countries than others, and even in some areas of the same country than others.

Also, there are re-routing threhold variables, some of which may be exposed to users, but others hard-coded into the implementation. Tesla, for instance, has a feature that lets you set the minimum time threshold saved for re-routing - it won't reroute to save you less than that time.

Also see:
 
doubletwist said:
I'd be interested in seeing that same test done against Waze.
Click to expand...
Waze is ridiculously aggressive! it will have you get off an exit ramp then proceed to the on ramp in order to get you ahead by 1 min.
 
HC_79 said:
Waze is ridiculously aggressive! it will have you get off an exit ramp then proceed to the on ramp in order to get you ahead by 1 min.
Click to expand...
To be fair, this was my experience with Tesla's routing a lot of the time too. It would often tell me to get off the highway and go up one or two traffic lights to get back on again, usually causing my trip to be longer because of the lights! I went to Austin in 2024 for a week and because I was using the nav so much to get around it was annoying because it would do it in succession causing me to get off and on the highway. Once I realized it was being stupid we'd pay more attention and ignore that routing.
 
RandomDesign said:
To be fair, this was my experience with Tesla's routing a lot of the time too. It would often tell me to get off the highway and go up one or two traffic lights to get back on again, usually causing my trip to be longer because of the lights! I went to Austin in 2024 for a week and because I was using the nav so much to get around it was annoying because it would do it in succession causing me to get off and on the highway. Once I realized it was being stupid we'd pay more attention and ignore that routing.
Click to expand...
You could have just set your threshold to 5 minutes for re-routing, like my wife did. I personally chose 2 minutes as that was aggressive, but didn't do silly things.
 
Smorgasbord said:
You could have just set your threshold to 5 minutes for re-routing, like my wife did. I personally chose 2 minutes as that was aggressive, but didn't do silly things.
Click to expand...

I did. For some reason specifically in Austin, TX it was very insistent about rerouting to surface streets in traffic. It also got lost a few times but I was willing to chalk that up to all the construction at the time.
 
Frankly, after 6M of Gravity ownership I am SICK of HERE maps!
I have posted elsewhere that it contains numerous errors, missing streets (eg my daughter’s who has lived there 5 years), incorrect names and speed limits
Yesterday evening driving out of Boston seaport on I90 ( yes the one that goes to Seattle) HERE maps gets totally lost. The system thinks i am in downtown, rather than I90, so bombards me with a series of turn and u turn instructions! It only recognizes I am on I90 after 10 minutes of 40 mph driving
Thing is my car 10 + years ago was better!
I reiterate getting CarPlay ( or android) is imperative in order to access Google Maps
I love ( almost) everything about my Gravity but HERE maps is a major hassle and in the absence of CarPlay my only reason for NOT recommending Gravity
Lucid please kindly address this asap
 
HERE navigation reminds me of the experience of using a mounted TomTom or similar GPS brand 20+ years ago, both in performance and look and feel. It's awful given the expectations people have after having been using Google maps, Apple maps or Tesla navigation for so many years. I know other car manufacturers use it as well, but that doesn't make it any more digestible.
 
I'll be looking for a phone mount for my Gravity for this reason.
 
It’s not all doom and gloom with HERE maps. I’ve been following its routes for the last 1.5 months, all the while comparing the routing to Google maps, and it has been performing well.

Google’s routing leaves something to be desired. It sticks to the major routes while HERE maps will often find a better route during times of heavy congestion. This is corroborated by Google maps itself. When following the HERE route, Google maps will eventually reroute and the time to destination will drop.

It’s clear that Google maps is the best when it comes to the completeness of its database for businesses and points of interest, as I’m sure Google is incorporating results from its Web crawl. However, when the destination exists on HERE maps, it’s pretty good. I have yet to find a place I couldn’t find on HERE.
 
Saksak said:
...I have yet to find a place I couldn’t find on HERE.
Click to expand...
I've had many. The latest was the Lodge at Bodega Bay. HERE calls it Bodega Bay Lodge. If you enter "Lodge at Bodega Bay" into the car's nav, you get nothing. I finally found it by scrolling the map around manually.

In addition to missing POIs, many are misplaced, sometimes by miles.
 
DeaneG said:
I've had many. The latest was the Lodge at Bodega Bay. HERE calls it Bodega Bay Lodge. If you enter "Lodge at Bodega Bay" into the car's nav, you get nothing. I finally found it by scrolling the map around manually.

In addition to missing POIs, many are misplaced, sometimes by miles.
Click to expand...
I've had plenty of similar fails with Google. Two days ago I was looking for a local business, and searched for "Safari Land", which Google found in Thailand (completely different country!). Once we found it another way, I discovered that Google Maps has it listed as "Safariland", and was also too dumb to overcome the space variation in its search algorithm. Luckily the result was so eggriously wrong that it didn't lead me astray.

Of course, Google gets it right most of the time. But back when I worked at Google, bay area people would regularly contact me pleading for help in correcting map errors for their homes (Saratoga people in the hills seemed to have it particularly bad). I'd have to tell them it was a totally different part of the company from mine, and that I had no idea how to help.
 
I like the level of vocal instruction you get with the Lucid Nav. She focuses more on turns and exits calling out stop signs or lights and not naming streets 2 or 3 times per turn. I find with Google Maps (or worse Waze) that there was so much chatter that I would mentally tune it out and then miss turns because of it. The Lucid Nav seems to be better at only talking when there's actually something you need to pay attention to.
 
Britishlion said:
[…] The system thinks i am in downtown, rather than I90, so bombards me with a series of turn and u turn instructions! It only recognizes I am on I90 after 10 minutes of 40 mph driving
[…]
Click to expand...
I also get this problem occasionally, and it’s extremely annoying. Luckily, when this has happened, I was using navigation only for traffic routing and knew where I was going. If going to an unfamiliar destination, it would be prudent to have the destination programmed into your phone as backup (I’ve been doing this, anyway, for comparison).

This has nothing to do with HERE maps, though. The Gravity is somehow not integrating GPS position signal with inertial navigation data and is getting confused. The 3.4.1 release notes mentioned updates to navigation, and although routing improved, position on the map now goes haywire more often. I filed a few bug reports to swfeedback with data. Hopefully, this is prioritized for the next update.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top