Route width and AutoZoomLevel

Route width and auto zoom are different concepts and should not be confused.

Route width increases slightly with zoom, like all map elements.
If want a thicker route then need to increase it’s scale in settings, not force navigation to zoom.
Eventually we can offer a larger max route width.

yes please, would be nice. 300% would probably be sufficient (500% juicy to see how it looks like, could be taken back in a further version if this is rubbish).

Here is how route appears on zoom 16 with width 400% vs 500%:

Such large widths have minimal use, since no curves can appear.

this is more than 1 kilometer… don’t know how it is in the US (:wink:not to mentioned big cities like Berlin :smile:), but here (Hunsrück, Vogesen, Black Forrest) can be more than 50 curves on this distance and additionally you are using 960800, I use 22001080 pixels… 400% would be good at this resolution I think.

Those are just scaled down large images.

ok “give gotten” (translated 1:1 from german), nevertheless let’s compromise to 400% (it’s just a figure on a scale bar) :flushed:

This sounds weird. Have you also set the off road zoom to 18? It should be the same while navigating. Also you might have enabled the map tilt in the navigation options?

We should first try the current settings and options before changing things in the app. I am not a fan of offering extreme options like max zoom = 20 or even 30 or route width of 300 or even 400. This makes setting usual values like 110% or 130% complicated with the slider it also makes it easy for users to incorrectly configure the app. Also many people will wonder why we offer such extreme values.

So let’s first find the reason why the app zoom does not work as expected for your case. If everything is setup properly on your device and there is still an issue, we can think about what we can change in the app.


No (set to 15) because this is ok for me to have a lower zoom then when being off the planned route.

yes, why not? I like that.

I don’t think so, because it makes no difference if using 111 or 112 or 113%. 1% steps are not necessary in my book, 5% steps or even 10% steps would be sufficient. Then it should be fairly easy to slide also up to 400% if someone doesn’t have paws like a bear or Shrek the Oga. :slightly_smiling_face:

Ah ok, you are using map tilt. If you struggle with reading the map, I would highly recommend to not use map tilt. Map tilt makes it harder to read the map. You can try this yourself, tilting the map is possible by swiping up or down using two fingers. On a tilted map, route widths appear different. It will be way harder to see details.

The same is true for a piece of paper or a computer screen. If you tilt it, readability will be worse compared to looking at it from a 90° angle.

We can think about how we can improve this for tilted navigation. But readability of the map will always suffer by tilting the map.

Ok thanks for the feedback. I have deactivated the tilt and ok it is a little better. I have set every autozoom setting to 18 and routing with at 200%. But nevertheless I would set it to at least 300% if I could and autozoom to 20 if I could. Is it that complicated to extend the values a little bit and just give it a try?

Thanks for the feedback. We can have a look if we can further increase the values :slight_smile:.

Kurviger 1.8.1 offers route width 300% and max auto zoom 20.

Just tested, very good. More is not necessary, looks good together with tilt mode.

Thanks a lot


Hi, as I had some experience yesterday with the min/max-Auto-Zoom level, I read a few posts regarding this topic, but I actually do not understand, what is the last developped version (I have 1.9.3) concerning the way, the zoom level (within he limits I set for min/max) will be applicable: Does it ONLY depend on the distance to the next waypoint / turning point or is it (also?) the speed, which affects the selected level?
I wish there would be at least a speed-affection: As maybe my next waypoint / turningpoint is too far away for a higher zoom-level, but I come to an intersection (<> waypoint!) or other more complicated situation where I slow down because I have to look exactly which is the right way. As long as I understand, I still have to zoom manually (which is not very suitable for me), because my low speed does not cause a higher zoom level.
Could anyone please clarify?
Thanks, Kalle

If mean to include also speed in navigation auto zoom, besides current distance algorithm, that’s a feature we program for the future. Can read more in the auto zoom discussion:

yes, that´s exactly what I mean. I read this threat, but it ends Sep. 18, so I thought there would have been some development in the meantime (maybe without further discussion to find…), as “that’s a feature we program for the future” is a term which is quite open to interpretation :wink:

After all this generous Changelog, if think that Kurviger evolves slowly, can consider that it’s based on 2 people (1 for website + 1 for app) and we don’t have any big company resources to support us. :slightly_smiling_face:

And there is still not(?) any new feature topic for that or any user votes, so to see how popular is that idea in community.

ok, thanks.
a) yes, kurviger pro is already almost perfect and I love to use it.
b) no votes or no discussion in community ist not a proof sign that this is not popular… maybe people do not communicate their (secret) wishes (i.e. as me, I just came over this community, never heard of it before).
If you relate to “what is the users wish”: Is there a kind of survey for all the “wishes”, where at least this (small?) community can poll, which one should be developped with which priority?

In my opinion (and I read this in many other comments here), the speed-related zoom-level is definitely a big wish (at least as an option to set). I would be very glad if this climbes up in your feature-list-prio :wink:

New features category contains several ideas for app and website.
Those not tagged as “implemented” are still open for development (or vote).

Votes are just one coefficient in the non deterministic next feature algorithm.
Often the fast / easy features can be provided before the complicated ones.


ok, thanks. Now I understand (not seen before). I just added it…