Monday, February 22, 2016

BBBC #22

This post is part of the blogger challenge titled BBBC. Today's topic is:

22. Map or GPS

I think that someone is trying to start a fight. The only thing that may start more arguments is "what's better synthetic or dino oil?".  I, personally, like to use both paper maps and a gps. It's not "or". Nothing beats a map while planning even it it's just one day at a time. Also, nothing beats a GPS to get you through a crowded city that you aren't familiar with. On my trip last summer, I would plan my route and probable destination using whatever maps that were available and would set the destination for the day (or several days out) and enter it on the GPS. That way I would generally know how much ground I need to cover for the day. And, if I choose to deviate from the route, I would know how much additional time/distance that change means.

I also switch the GPS to metric when crossing into Canada so I don't have to do any speed conversions. And, the GPS is much easier to read than the bouncing needle on the Ural speedo. In Alaska, you really don't need a GPS for directions as it is a pretty simple state. Not very many roads.

The GPS is a Garmin GPSMAP 60CSx that I've had for about nine years. It has a micro-SD card with street maps for the North America so I get turn by turn directions. I have it wired to the bike but even standalone, It'll run about 25 hours on 2xAA batteries. Completely waterproof and the buttons are usable with gloves.

8 comments:

SonjaM said...

I have tried to travel by GPS only but it is not enough for me. I need to see where I am with a finger on the map. Also for trip planning maps are first choice (and sometimes Google maps). So, it is not either-or but both.

RichardM said...

The GPS has it's place and for winding your way through a city you're not familiar with, it's invaluable. But for planning your route, maps win. And the maps could be on a screen or paper for planning though paper wins if the area is large. It's nice to have the "big picture". On the road, maps are okay if you don't mind stopping to check them. It's handy to just set the GPS for your destination for the day, look at the route, add waypoints if you want to control the calculated route then just glance at it when it beeps (my 60CSx doesn't talk just beeps).

VStar Lady said...

Totally agree .... and my GPS can talk me through the city while I focus on traffic; map can't do that!

ToadMama said...

Right on! Map for planning, GPS for guidance. I like that big picture and knowing where I am in the world.

RichardM said...

There were more than a couple of towns I went through last summer where it was easy to get lost. And having the expected arrival time was really handy.

RichardM said...

I still carried the Milepost book on my last trip. I had tried the iPad version on the previous trip but it was a disaster as it needed Internet access to even open. Worthless software...

ToadMama said...

Sorry to hear about the Milepost software misadventure. Speaking of the Milepost, what a great idea for a travel book. I suspect it's unique to Alaska because there are so few main roads. Does it only focus on the one road? Or are there a couple?

RichardM said...

The Milepost focuses on traveling to Alaska so it not only covers the "Alaska Highway" but also the approach routes extending down into Washington, Idaho and Montana. It also has the alternate routes through Canada, side trips, the marine highway and the all of the highways within the state. And it lists gas stations, hotels, campgrounds, turnouts, etc. along those routes. Even things like gravel turnout with trash can.