RDS-FM vs TT Traffic

[Big Calhoun]

Are there any advantages with TT Traffic services vs. using the free RDS-FM option? ...aside from from having to string up the antenna for the RDS receiver.

 

[canderson]

Are there any advantages with TT Traffic services vs. using the free RDS-FM option? ...aside from from having to string up the antenna for the RDS receiver.

The RDS service isn't free after the first year, or whatever they're giving now with the purchase of the RDS unit. Even your first year isn't exactly free -- you do have to buy the unit.

More to the point, the TT Traffic service is still (for now) free. Haven't paid a penny for it since signing up for it last December. Had to call TT to get it renewed once, though.

If you already have a cell data plan, and your data plan offers "tethered" service for no additional charge, that can be the cheapest solution all around. The TT doesn't eat too many bytes to do its job.

 

[Michael Quinlan]

Both services give you traffic information based on where you are (obviously), but I've found that TT Traffic give you more information, and for a greater distance from your current location, than RDS-TMC Traffic does. Does the greater distance help? Probably not, because the traffic situation farther out will likely change before you get close enough to worry about it.

I also found that RDS-TMC Traffic takes much longer to adjust to your current position. For example, if you're traveling from Philadelphia to New York, you'll start out with traffic information for the Philadelphia area. As you progress along your route, you won't care about the Philadelphia traffic, because that's all behind you. However, the RDS-TMC Traffic module will "cling" to that Philadelphia broadcast, as if it's the only signal it will ever see. When the Philadelphia signal finally gone away, RDS-TMC will start searching for a new signal. By the time it finds one, and receives all the information (if there's a lot of data this can take 10 minutes or so), you're already a part of the New York traffic you were trying to avoid. The RDS-TMC system really needs some adjustments, where it will look for signals from areas that are ahead of you on your route, and not cling to the existing signal for dear life.

Finally, the RDS-TMC signal may not be available the areas you normally travel, whereas TT Traffic is available wherever you have a cell phone signal. This doesn't mean that there will be data for your area, but if there is I would recommend TT Traffic of RDS-TMC any day, at least based on how if performs in the NY area.

Also, if your cell phone plan doesn't include tethering, I found a cheap way to do it... do a search for "Boost Mobile" in these forums.

 

[canderson]

Both services give you traffic information based on where you are (obviously), but I've found that TT Traffic give you more information, and for a greater distance from your current location, than RDS-TMC Traffic does. Does the greater distance help?

You raise another good point there, Michael. In my part of the universe, the distance DOES matter a great deal.

The RDS unit would be useless not far west of Denver. They don't put up repeaters for radio stations up there, but they certainly do put up additional cell sites along I-70, and TomTom's cell based traffic reporting goes right on up the road. Especially in the winter, it can be useful to know what's happening up ahead. After I first bought my TT, I was amazed to see it reporting a slowdown clear up near Glenwood Springs. That's a pretty healthy coverage area. It seems that TT sometimes reports traffic conditions a good bit beyond what's indicated on their coverage maps... the maps only show the RDS radio coverage, not the area that's being reported. As an example, the signal is only good towards the western edge of Clear Creek county west of Denver. I see traffic information being reported far west of that point.

Does anyone have any idea where there might be maps that show the actual reported area (vs signal coverage) for TomTom? In the Denver area, they appear to have access to exactly the same data as I see on the traffic map for one of the local TV stations.

 

[schneid]

Location Chart

Is there is palce search for RDS-TMC availability. I live in the Reno, NV, area and it does not work. TT wants me to factory reset my device but I don't think there is even any service here.

 

[dhn]

See post #7 of this thread

 

[schneid]

See post #7 of this thread

Now that's helpful. I am glad all the smart people are here as TT was no help.

By mail they said I needed to reset my 930T.

The first live CS said I had tune my FM radio to a certain station and somehow through osmosis the signal got to the 930T.

Second live CS is trying hard and keeps leaving for 5-10 minutes. She says Reno, nv has coverage but ClearWire says they don't on there maps and there charts.

Second CS came back finally and said Reno in fact has no coverage. She did confirm a cellular data link is the way to go.

 

[pacruiser]

Is there is palce search for RDS-TMC availability. I live in the Reno, NV, area and it does not work. TT wants me to factory reset my device but I don't think there is even any service here.

I just went through this with customer service, I had a new thread on here too and goot great answers. Turned out I didn't need to reboot my tt, make a back up in tt home before doing anything. What happened was simple there's no rds station in my area, but when I got to harrisburg, it worked well, I got the green dot anyway. You can check with clear channel for a station, but the sites not exactly user freindly,

 

[GAW]

You raise another good point there, Michael. In my part of the universe, the distance DOES matter a great deal.

The RDS unit would be useless not far west of Denver. They don't put up repeaters for radio stations up there, but they certainly do put up additional cell sites along I-70, and TomTom's cell based traffic reporting goes right on up the road. Especially in the winter, it can be useful to know what's happening up ahead. After I first bought my TT, I was amazed to see it reporting a slowdown clear up near Glenwood Springs. That's a pretty healthy coverage area. It seems that TT sometimes reports traffic conditions a good bit beyond what's indicated on their coverage maps... the maps only show the RDS radio coverage, not the area that's being reported. As an example, the signal is only good towards the western edge of Clear Creek county west of Denver. I see traffic information being reported far west of that point.

Does anyone have any idea where there might be maps that show the actual reported area (vs signal coverage) for TomTom? In the Denver area, they appear to have access to exactly the same data as I see on the traffic map for one of the local TV stations.

When it is time to renew your traffic subscription with the receiver, if you have a data plan with your cell carrier and a device that can use it with your TomTom, I would recommend you switch to the Plus Service traffic. it will work wherever your cell gets a good signal. I use to live there and when I visit there - I always bring my TT and use the data traffic service there - including in areas that the receiver would not work.

It would show you the heavy traffic on 70 heading back to Denver on Sunday - unfortunately there are no real options to route around it though. I have gotten off the road and had dinner and waited til the traffic on the TT indicated it was clearing up before getting back on.

 

[canderson]

When it is time to renew your traffic subscription with the receiver, if you have a data plan with your cell carrier and a device that can use it with your TomTom, I would recommend you switch to the Plus Service traffic. it will work wherever your cell gets a good signal.

Um.. GAW, I already have the cellular based service! That was my point. It works in areas where the RDS system doesn't have a chance. I'd just be curious to know what the road area is that they are actually covering. It's clearly much greater than the metro area, and the RDS maps only show the RDS radio coverage area. I want to know the areas where they're actually monitoring traffic in realtime and reporting on it.

 

[GAW]

Did not pick up on your having Plus service traffic also, but i think the receiver might still have shown traffic (on major roads only) on your route west as long as you had reception.

I don't know for sure the extent of the coverage, but is appears to be pretty extensive (maybe everywhere there are traffic sensors that are communicating to servers). I have seen delays on interstates in California in areas far from any metro areas, so a good guess it would cover most all the interstates at least (and major roads like 99 in California).

I used traffic in "operate my go" in Home to warn friends coming back from Vegas of a number of delays on their route (which I had entered into my device), and they were all in the middle of nowhere. Unfortunately, traffic does not pick up secondary roads, so the traffic on the local roads around the delays did not show up - but it was also heavy.

Eventually, traffic systems that work off of cell phone signals will fill this void (I believe TT is rolling this out in Europe with a different receiver).

 

[canderson]

Unfortunately, traffic does not pick up secondary roads, so the traffic on the local roads around the delays did not show up - but it was also heavy.

I had thought that, too (secondary roads) until a couple of weeks ago in the evening when there were two fires north of Boulder. US36 NEVER shows up with anything entertaining .. and yet the TT traffic (cell version, can't speak for the other) showed the road blocked both just north of Boulder and just south of Lyons. Had the little "road closed" symbol at both ends.

As you can imagine, that made me more curious than ever as to what was covered where and when.