Recommended maps

DeHoody

Active Member
Location
Rochester, Kent
I am due to go on my first tour shortly, where exactly I haven't decided but it will be in the UK.

I want to avoid as many main roads as I can so need very detailed maps.

Any recommendations appreciated.

Sat Nav not an option

Thanks
 

ASC1951

Guru
Location
Yorkshire
I use the the OS regional maps at 1:200,000. With practice, that is all the detail you need. Depending on where you are, one map is usually enough.
 

summerdays

Cycling in the sun
Location
Bristol
ASC1951 said:
I use the the OS regional maps at 1:200,000. With practice, that is all the detail you need. Depending on where you are, one map is usually enough.
That's too little detail for me... I want to see gradients, buildings, features ... etc ... which is why I like maps at 1:25000 or better!!! Not much good for going any distance though - for that I might use 1:50000
 

Crankarm

Legendary Member
Location
Nr Cambridge
Rhythm Thief said:
1:50 000 will be fine, then. I'd research campsites on the interweb before you go, since they're often not on maps of any scale.
+1 for OS Landranger 1:50,000 maps. Blimey this is becoming spooky agreeing with RT :biggrin:. 2nd time in 7 days .......

1:25,000 Explorer maps don't cover a wide enough area for my liking when cycling. As soon as I've cycled onto one edge I've cycled right across it and off t'other side in no time what so ever. The 2 maps I have are for the Eastern and Western areas of the Brecon Beacons. One is 30 squares wide (30km/18.75miles) and 22 squares tall (22kms/13.75miles) the other 30 squares tall (30km/18.75miles) and 20 squares wide (20km/12.5 miles) which means they do not cover a wide enough area for me if cycle touring. Ideal for hiking in a small area or slow cyclists.

The 1:50,000 maps cover a much wider area 40km/25miles (1 square = 1km) whilst still having more than enough detail on them for cycle touring. I have noticed quite few campsites on them. One can of course mark on campsites and other features you want to visit or passby.

I find the OS Travelmaster series 1:250,000 maps helpful for overall route planning as 1cm = 2.5km. The map is 30 squares across, each square is 4cm meaning each one covers 10km, so the map covers 300km/187.5 miles across. It still has quite a lot of detail in minor unclassified roads which one can always defer to the 1:50,000 map should one wish to.

I spend hours looking at maps of all scales. I love the Times Atlas of the World and my large globe.
 
Crankarm said:
+1 for OS Landranger 1:50,000 maps. Blimey this is becoming spooky agreeing with RT :biggrin:. 2nd time in 7 days .......
:biggrin::biggrin:


I spend hours looking at maps of all scales. I love the Times Atlas of the World and my large globe.
I know the feeling. I love maps, and will often "read" one in bed. I have quite a big collection of 1920s - 1960s one inch OS maps and one of my favourite pastimes is comparing one to the modern 1:50 000 equivalent.:sad:
 

ASC1951

Guru
Location
Yorkshire
summerdays said:
That's too little detail for me... I might use 1:50000
If you have the room for them, there is nothing to beat the OS 1:50,000. Poring over your maps is one of the joys of touring.

Abroad I used the yellow Michelin maps at a similar scale, which have a surprising amount of information when you get used to them. I haven't tried the UK ones.
 

andrew_s

Guru
Location
Gloucester
Crankarm said:
I find the OS Travelmaster series 1:250,000 maps helpful for overall route planning as 1cm = 2.5km. The map is 30 squares across, each square is 4cm meaning each one covers 10km, so the map covers 300km/187.5 miles across. It still has quite a lot of detail in minor unclassified roads which one can always defer to the 1:50,000 map should one wish to.
This series has been discontinued, though there are still some about in the shops.
The replacement "Travel" series is at assorted scales, and mostly worse from a cycling point of view (eg the whole of Scotland on one sheet).
 
Top Bottom