crox

Curious on how well other users of the Onstar Turn by Turn system liked this upgrade package.
Personally, I have tried it 3 to 4 times and it only was useful once. Not sure who they have downloading the instructions and getting the location of my vehicle, but so far it is very lacking.
A few times they could not even locate a specific location for me. In this instance it was a 'mall' that has existed for 13 years. Go figure ??? I will probably spend this extra money on a portable GPS system when it comes time to renew,,,,,

anyone else having better success with this GM feature ????
Guess I should be reporting this lack of service to OnStar, huh ??

hulksdaddy

We tried it once on my wifes new Equinox. She had just activated it and they tiold us about the turn by turn. Well, we were going to a friends new house, so we figured we'd give it a try. They tried to download it three times, then gave up and told us it was offline.

Complete waste of time. If it doesn't work the first time, you'll never try it again.

User 020720

All that comes to mind when I think of this feature is a recent chic flick I saw that had the mother driving her Prius with the dog in the front seat and she was cussing out the turn by turn computer.

bluman

used it once, worked great, the only drawback was no music could be heard/played in the vehicle !

Tahoe Dave

I have yet to use it however, now I'm curious, when you receive the directions are they from a "live" person or is it a recorded message?

VettinFan

I haven't upgraded my OnStar to it's directional features 'cause I'm just way to comfortable with my Garmin unit.

~AL~

RACN1320

I think that this glaring design flaw makes the feature worthless

Vetteoholic

It's better than nothing but I prefer the actual navigation system. Atleast Onstar is there for other things as well like unlocking your doors, ect ect. It's a good thing to have

ronkh

My wife has it in her Enclave, we've used it a few times and it works pretty well. One nice thing, is you don't need to know the address of where you're going. We were going to a funeral in a strange city, called up OnStar asked for directions to Yada Funeral Home, the On Star guy looked it up, downloaded the directions and off we went.

We did have one instance where they could not locate an address, but it was a new street in Picayune Mississippi (really), so I didn't fault them for that.

AZ_WHT_LTNG

I would get a nav system.. I have onstar in another on of my cars and tried to get directions once. As I was driving I figured out in about 2 minutes that the reps was taking me back to my house. I guess she did not like my choice for dinner

crox

Tahoe Dave,,,,
You get a live person on the initial call, then they download the driving directions to your corvette and it gives you vocal turn by turn directions after the fact. It will also recalculates your directions, if you get off the initial route,,,,

Sounds cool,,,but you are fully dependent upon the OnStar rep and their competance.

bluman

recorded massage

bluman

b4i4getit

OnStar turn by turn is just another attempt by them to capture your money with monthly payments. I think they are dreaming up ways to keep their product credible. A good NAV system is better.

4EVER16

Tried it one time, it got lost. Never got it to go to the correct adddress, pulled out my Garmin and went direct to the correct location.

Georgie

I've used my 1 free trial so far, and tried to put it through it's paces, having them look up a somewhat obscure place, and intentionally going off-route to see how well it recalculated, etc.

I really like the concept in general. The advantages are that you can enter a destination and start navigation while driving because you're talking to a live person that does all the work. I had no problem with them looking up my destination. I just gave them the name of the inn and the city. The routing, rerouting, and directions worked very well. I have a touch-screen nav in my other vehicle and have realized I don't look at the screen much anyway, so I don't mind that it's verbal only. Contrary to another poster, I'm pretty sure I was listening to music during the navigation, can't remember if it was CD or radio, though. I was even using the OnStar phone at the same time. Managed everything well. The other thing I like is that for the cost of the upgrade ($99/yr.) you can get about 20 years of service for the same cost of upgrading to the touch-screen nav system. However the touch-screen nav will be horribly outdated in about 5 years.

The only problem I had with it was that the destination was off by about a block and on the opposite side of the road. So it took some driving around to actually find my destination. Although I tested out a Garmin once and that happened with it as well. Need a lot more data points to really determine how accurate the map data is.

bksnoopy

I like preloading my Garmin. Hands on devices are much better.

btw .. Are phone calls you make and receive included in the first year free service???

rockethead7

My 2-cents says this:

- I personally know the program manager of OnStar (at least a few years ago... I don't know if it's still the same guy or not), and my opinion is that he's not the brightest bulb in the socket.

- I have had (in my pre-GPS days) about 2-3 cars with the Onstar service. I always upgraded to the service level where they gave you turn-by-turn directions. The service in my experience was lousy. And, I don't mean because the turn-by-turn directions aren't as convenient as having a nice screen right in front of you to refer to (though, that aspect is true also). My real problem was that the people handling my turn-by-turn requests were, more often than not, morons. I once hit the OnStar button for directions to the Wisconsin Dells, only to be asked repeatedly by the operator "what state is that in?"... sigh. OK, fine, give them a street address, and they can go to an online map service and robotically read you the turn-by-turn instructions, fine, ok. But, if you ask them to figure out where something is by name, cross your fingers and hope that the agent knows how to read and write, because in my exprerience, most of them couldn't.

- When GPS units came out, and evolved to the point that I liked their user interface, I stopped subscribing to the OnStar turn-by-turn service, and stuck with the basic level. I was a much happier man.

- When I factory ordered my C6, I specifically did NOT get OnStar at all.

- It's my opinion that these guys handled the cell phone OnStar technology and its interface all wrong. They should just do like some other manufacturers, and let you use your own cell phone service, and just make the car be a bluetooth device or something like that (so you can use it hands free through the car speakers, etc.). I have never liked the fact that the OnStar cell phone costs so much, and doesn't really have a way for you to input numbers after a call is connected. Try to dial a phone number that hits an autoattendant ("press 1 for service, press 2 for parts"... blah blah blah). Good luck. There is no way to input additional numbers once the call is connected (at least not when I had the service). So, it's simply not practical in today's world where 50% of the company phone numbers you dial have NO WAY to get to a person without pressing another number. And, combine the lousy/expensive OnStar cell service with the fact that their lines are staffed with people that are only slightly above the level of "trained monkey" status, and I think OnStar service will eventually die off. GM is really really pushing that product like there's no tomorrow... you practically can't buy a GM car without them shoving that thing down your throat. But, I think it represents their desperate attempt to save a dying product, and NOT that it's so great that you have to have it. GPS/NAVs and bluetooth cell phone interfaces through your car are the technology to have today... not lousy agents giving bad verbal directions, and an expensive built-in cell phone that has a different phone number than the one that you carry around all the time.

- I say to OnStar, feerrrgit it.