Maps, GPS or both?

hill_struggler

I'm cycling through Austria, Germany, Holland and France in August and I'm struggling to find good maps in order to plan my route. Are there any you can recommend? Also is it worth digging deep and investing in a GPS computer? I'd prefer to spend the money on other things and hope for a little adventure along the way but if the majority say GPS then who am I to argue?

Cheers!

Mr Will

Have you got a smartphone? That's be my go-to for GPS mapping these days.

pete_s

Smartphones are OK for mapping and tracking but bear in mind that it'll suck a lot of battery power. You may want to keep it in reserve for emergencies. Maps are alright, I guess, but I find them a right pain in the neck to read and reference them all the time. I could be being a bit of a klutz and just lack the practice, however. :roll:

I don't think you have to dig deep for a decent GPS unit nowadays. The Garmin Edge Tourer seems to get a lot of good reviews and you can have it pre-loaded with maps or put your own on there. I believe that you can put OpenStreet Maps on it which are excellent quality. I also think it's reasonably priced as well.

A downside to the Edge Tourer is that it can only be charged via it's USB port so you better be within range of a mains socket with a euroadaptor.

andrew_s

I use both - paper maps at a scale of around 1:200,000 to 1:400,000 for planning where to go (which the small screen of a GPS or phone makes difficult), and a GPS for actually navigating on the road, either just using the on-screen map as a reminder, or as a series of auto-routed "go to"s over legs of 10 miles or so.

For a GPS, I'd recommend a Garmin eTrex 20, which runs 2 or 3 days on a pair of AAs, and downloaded OpenStreetMap mapping data. The GPS will be about £125 plus a bike mount (it's officially a hiking model).

briantrumpet

Maps for me. I tear pages out of a road atlas (1:200 000) - by far the cheapest way to do the map thing.

Maybe I'm weird, but I like the challenge of trying to keep each day's route in my head once I've planned it - I managed to get down to the Alps from Exeter without GPS. Though I'll admit on Paris to Rome, one of the riders' GPS was useful for getting through complicated cities like Genoa, where all the signage goes to pot. But you still can't beat a map, IMHO - you get a much better idea of where you are in relation to all the area around you.

cycladelic

Take a look at the Michelin site for planning a route....

http://www.viamichelin.co.uk/web/Routes

I still use maps as GPS units seem expensive and the battery life isn't great.

slowbike

Open street maps was superb for us in Sardinia. But bike GPS's are useless for overview - so paper maps (or large screen computer - but that's not always practical) are really helpful to get an idea of where you're going.

I've found GPSs are great for pre-planned routes - which is ok if you've got somewhere set in mind - but on multi-day rides if you've got no set stop points and want to deviate from the course then the GPS loses some of it's value as the inbuilt route planning is not the best - although it will get you there.
However, if you do need to deviate from a pre-planned route then the active mapping can be really helpful.

If you're going without access to power then a solar charger with battery will help keep the GPS turned on - minimising the brightness on the screen, forgo the speed/cadence sensor and heartrate monitors and don't leave the unit displaying the map will preserve battery power.

ligfietser

I use a Garmin Dakota 20 GPS and OpenCyclemap. The greatest advantage is the fact I ride nicer routes than I did when using paper maps. When navigating the traditional way, I tend to choose bigger roads, because it's easier and the chance of getting lost is smaller. With a GPS I choose many small roads and hard-to-find paths without problems or getting slowed down.

pete_s

andrew_s wrote:

For a GPS, I'd recommend a Garmin eTrex 20, which runs 2 or 3 days on a pair of AAs, and downloaded OpenStreetMap mapping data. The GPS will be about £125 plus a bike mount (it's officially a hiking model).

Do you know what the eTrex is like to use on a bike? What's it like keeping up with the faster movement of a bike compared to a hiker? What type of resolution do you get on the maps?

rodgers73

Usually carry a map and compass as a back up in case of the GPS crashing or running out of power.

Really enjoy navigating via maps though so sometimes leave the GPS at home.

freezing77

pete_s wrote:

andrew_s wrote:

For a GPS, I'd recommend a Garmin eTrex 20, which runs 2 or 3 days on a pair of AAs, and downloaded OpenStreetMap mapping data. The GPS will be about £125 plus a bike mount (it's officially a hiking model).

Do you know what the eTrex is like to use on a bike? What's it like keeping up with the faster movement of a bike compared to a hiker? What type of resolution do you get on the maps?

I used my etrex both the h series without mapping and the hcx with mapping long before the edge series existed.

The etrex will have no problem with speeds and tracking.

The map screen is on a par with the edge mapping series.

An older etrex crossing the alps on the way to Rome.

hill_struggler

Thanks for all the info everyone. I think the general consensus is to have both. Will start looking....

priory

one cheap way to fully appreciate the gps experience before getting one is to get a map , cut it up into 2inch squares and set off using them. I cannot be bothered to use mine on the phone (you can get an off-line gps system from nav-free which is free). Abroad or in a very unfamiliar town it might be useful occasionally to get the phone out and check a streetmap .