34

I understand that Google Maps works out travel times based on the speed limit for the road and the current traffic on the road. (When selecting the driving function).

When using the cycling/walking function, I assume it works out the travel times by using the average walking pace(~3mph) and the average cycling pace.(~9.6mph)

But does it increase the time if your journey includes a lot of upwards hills, as you would obviously be travelling slower if walking or cycling? And does it decrease the time when there are lots of downwards hills, as you would be travelling quicker (maybe not by foot but definitely on bike)?

Michael Hampton
  • 62,556
  • 7
  • 143
  • 263
JackU
  • 451
  • 1
  • 4
  • 6

4 Answers4

46

Surprisingly, it appears that the answer is YES, Google Maps does make a distinction between uphill and downhill.

I routed out a couple of bicycle rides from my home (in Germany) to a city either 90 km away (with a 700 m climb) or 60 km away (with a 1000 m climb), depending on the route taken. I then reversed both routes.

In both cases, Google Maps shows a noticeably shorter ride time for the downhill direction than the uphill one.

The 60 km route is 5h1m going up or 4h24m going down. The longer route is listed as 5h34m going up or 4h48m going down.

Of course, Google Maps doesn't know exactly how fast I ride, but I would guess you can take the percentage difference between the uphill and downhill and do some multiplication to figure out your likely actual time based on your average speed.

Kyralessa
  • 4,004
  • 2
  • 27
  • 34
33

No. Google Maps works a different way.

Google Maps learns travel times by monitoring the pace of other riders.

The Google Maps app "constantly" sends data about your location back to the Google servers. It knows you're on a bike, not driving, because you requested a bike route, and because your travel time is not an outlier from other people doing the same.

And that's also true for driving; though of course Google gets more data for drivers, so driving data is fresher.

Yes, really. Google "spies on you" and observes your movement, nominally for this exact purpose (but they won't refuse a subpoena in most cases). And yes, you agreed to be a lodestar for others, at some point when you clicked "agree" on a term-of-service while interacting with a Google product. You can deny Maps access to your location, but then of course, it wouldn't work at all.

This tracking is fairly continuous, even when the screen is off, which means Google knows when you stop for a break, and excludes that time from the data.

This provides a very authentic transit time without having to do deep calculation on the effect of grades, tight curves, congestion and road condition on ideal travel times. For instance if a flat, straight rail-trail is heavily overgrown with brush to where you must slow to maneuver around a thicket of overhanging branches, it captures that reality.

Harper - Reinstate Monica
  • 35,849
  • 4
  • 66
  • 145
17

At least for bikes it does (assuming the topographical information mentioned in the comment is available).

I just checked with two cycling routes near my home, both 4,2km long according to Google, one almost flat, the other with a climb towards the end (obviously going downhill the other direction). Result:

  1. 4,2km almost flat but slightly downhill: 14min
  2. 4,2km almost flat but slightly uphill: 15min
  3. 4,2km mostly flat (3km), but a climb towards the end (1,2km): 17min
  4. 4,2km mostly flat (3km) and going downhill at the beginning (1,2km): 12min

If these numbers are of any relevance certainly depends on your bike and your fitness level (and probably some other factors, too). I hate riding uphill and my bike isn't made for it, so whenever I had to "cycle" up the hill at the end of no. 3 I would get off my bike and push it, certainly losing more than two minutes compared to a flat route. The same goes for downhill, I doubt I was ever letting my bike run so fast I would acutally gain two minutes...

Sabine
  • 4,947
  • 1
  • 19
  • 28
4

Short answer: Yes absolutely google maps is aware of elevation changes.

Longer answer: ...but its fairly far from correct.

Example - There's a well-travelled local climb of 2.5 km and 140 metres elevation change. Its an average of 5% but is 10% at the top with a flat bit at the bottom.

Google maps predicts 13 minutes to descend and 18 minutes to climb. That's roughly 40% longer to climb than to descend, which is utterly wrong.

I personally descended in 3:25 and best climb in 10:30, for a 300% increase in climb time vs descent time.

The 20 top riders have descended in under 2:30 and have climbed it in under 6:00 minutes for a 240% difference.

So google maps should be predicting a climb in 39 minutes for a descent of 13 minutes
or a climb of 18 minutes and a descent in 7:30.

tl:dr yes google maps is aware of elevation changes and does try to take that into account, but doesn't fully account for the increased work required to climb a gradient.

Further info:

Walking is predicted to be 40 minutes to climb and 34 to descend.

Driving is predicted to be 3 minutes either way.

Link to route on Google Maps

Strava segment for uphill

Strava segment for downhill

Site is in New Zealand, near Christchurch. I'm roughly in the middle of times for riders on those segments, slower uphill and faster downhill (mass advantage there!)

Criggie
  • 631
  • 8
  • 11