BaseCamp software version 4.0.1.0 Windows

[fugglefeet]

Hi all,

I have always used a good rule of thumb when travelling. I divide the distance by 2 and add 5 to the result. That gives me an estimated travelling time to my destination and has proved pretty accurate when travelling @ 120km/h. This does not however take externalities into account (road works, accidents and weather conditions, etc). It somehow just seems to work no matter what. Hope this helps.

Darryl

[Jan Horn]

I left the settings alone. Over long trips I found the overall traveling time to be within an hour or so. The lower speed settings allow for comfort/refueling and stops and lunch or breakfast at a Wimpy along the way. When I am on holiday with the Caravan in tow all I need to know is the distance to certain planned overnight stops. I normally try to limit myself to a maximum of 400km per day which I can achieve in about 5 hours leaving ample time for a nice breakfast before we set off and a cold one before I light the fire for a braai in the evening.

[F.Viljoen]

Hi all,

I have always used a good rule of thumb when travelling.

Maths wise it does not match, but I use the rule of 5 minutes per 10 kilos at 130 kmh. The losses comes from not always driving at a constant speed.

[fugglefeet]

I think if the original values are used, then that will (as Jan says) give you a good indication of your ETA with all the stops included. Probably the best is to leave the default values then.

[Hennieb]

I have also kept the original values and found them to be accurate enough for my requirements.

[Metro Nomad]

I've lately used the default values as is and found them to be more or less consistent with real life situations.
My original question was raised to see if anyone has played around with those values.

On the other forum Shorty and I once had a discussion about it and some pretty accurate values were posted.
I have a feeling that the default values are now more in line with what we posted than what it were at that point in time.

Unfortunately I seem to have lost those values, but perhaps Shorty still have them and can post them for comparison purposes.

I have also kept the original values and found them to be accurate enough for my requirements.

[Metro Nomad]

I am posting the following on behalf of John:


The ETE that one arrives at for a route is moot, except I do cast an eye on it's reasonableness. On a long trip that will involve a or some meal/rest stops I usually add an hour at least but longer trips (by cage that is) perhaps more, since I will have more stops to make. If Ritha and I share the driving and 'just have to get there' then the speeds still count as below - we just take sarmies and coffee - shaving on stopped time. I have tested my Interstate Highway speed and Major Highways (our R-Routes where one always tends towards more 120 than not) as well as Residential Roads and my averages turn out pretty much as below and is what I use (now, if the old discussion ever appears again :))

20120906 Route Speeds.JPG

My Iron Butt Rides are a different story. my mate worked out a complex (for me) *.csv that lays out everything in great detail. Fuel stops are 6min, I'll spend max 45min for a good breakfast in a Wimpy, fuel & wee stops 10min max and we take into account acceleration time as well as deceleration times too. Of all the baby rides I've done these have all worked out at a leisurely 19 to 20hrs. If one maintains an 80 to 85 OVERALL speed you're well within the ball park. Needless to say the N14 and the R64 are the preferred playgrounds and then some in and around Dordrecht.

[Jan Horn]

Thanks for that Info Johann and S...John. It is handy to have a few tested options available when planning a trip. I guess that each individual will have to find what works best for different situations. Like John pointed out it depends on whether he is in the cage or adding to the callouses on his but or in my case with the box in tow.