Machka,

I think that all depends on what you mean by "significantly" -also, you live in Canada right, so I assume you were on relatively long tours in the UK, France, Belgium and Australia? I don't think it's as much the case in Australia, but certainly those European countries also usually have a plethora of roads that can get you from point A to B so even if you take a "wrong" turn it's fairly easy to keep on track.

Though I agree with your point of a general map that doesn't need to be too detailed (hey, I knew I needed to go north west from Prague to the Dutch coast and had an identical approach with no problems at all), again, I think that only holds up when you have the time or the road system allows. A good example is I'm doing a quick tour of the width of Massachusetts this summer, and I only have 3-4 days including getting myself there and back due to time constraints. I can't afford too many mistakes given my time frame, and there are only so many bridges across the Connecticut river. I think it's a very, very good idea to have a detailed map or a GPS if I want to take backroads and see the sites I want to see.

I think it's extremely likely that I won't have a GPS, so it'll be a good a map as I can get. But thinking from a different perspective, I would think I could feel much more liberated with a GPS -knowing that I'm maximizing the time I have by reducing those turns that take me away from where I want to be, plus hopefully no constant stopping to review the map. And of course, a GPS doesn't force you to go anywhere!

What? How much detail are you looking for? I found ACA maps to include every detail that I could possibly want for bicycle touring. Really I think they offer too much detail, and in some ways they kind of take the adventure out of the tour.

I often carry compasses and GPS units when I'm on a tour, but I never use them while cycling. They are strictly part of my backpacking gear, for use off the bike. I see no reason to ever use a GPS or a compass while bicycle touring. A decent set of regular road maps and a reasonable knowledge of how to use them should be totally sufficient. If you want to carry additional instrumentation it is totally up to you, but you should never get yourself into a situation where you are relying on a GPS unit alone.

They are good, but they don't contain everything I'm interested in, such as where's the next spot where I can fill up my water bottles, where's the next outhouse, how much does that campground cost, etc.? They list something they call a "service stop" but that covers a wide range. Sometimes I just need a water fountain.

Yeah, I didn't get that comment either. The route I have experience with (the TA) showed every turn and nearly every place of interest and pretty much every service. It was extremely detailed. I can't imagine them giving any more detail.

What it did lack is maps and details of anything not immediately on the route. If you want to improvise you need to use other maps. For that we just picked up a state map when we entered each state and gave or threw it away when we left the state.

Perhaps some of the other routes are less detailed? Can anyone verify or refute that notion?

What AC route were you on? I felt like they covered most of those questions for the TA at least very well. I wonder if the difference are in our individual expectations or the route.

It would not be practical to give prices as they change frequently. They do give phone numbers for pretty much every service listed. When in doubt we just called ahead.

Pete, I'm looking at the latest Great Parks South maps. They don't specifically mention water and restroom stops. Do the TransAm maps do that? I kind of assumed that all of the ACA maps were similar.

Maybe not specifically, but they listed the campgrounds, hostels, motels, gas stations, groceries, restaurants, post offices, and bike shops. It was typically safe to make assumptions that campgrounds, hostels, motels, gas stations, groceries, restaurants, and bike shops would let you fill water bottles and that campgrounds, gas stations, groceries, and bike shops would let you use the restroom.

The one place I recall that a small town did not have water available at either the post office or the store that was mentioned on the map. That little "town" had no wells or running water. We had made arrangements to get water there any way since the post office lady was the lifeguard at the pool we swam in the night before and was kind enough to take extra water to work for us. As it turned out she also gave us a nice talk about the area.

Thanks Pete. That about covers it, although I was thinking of rest areas, picnic grounds and parks as well.

I missed this comment initially. I believe it is immensely helpful to have as detailed a map as you can find. After all, those little roads in France and Belgium are not going to be found on a general map. One thing that I have learned in my years of touring is that my level of enjoyment while touring is inversely proportional to the level of traffic. If you've just got a general map in France, you're going to be riding on "N" (national) roads, and you will have to endure a high level of traffic. That's a pity, because the network of quiet secondary roads in France is the best I've encountered anywhere in the world.

As for GPS, it sounds like it would have been pretty useless to me in Laos or Sri Lanka at the present time, and completely unnecessary on the GAP Trail/C&O Canal.

I will take another look at the maps when I get home, but I know that many of the small town parks and picnic grounds were listed, but that is because the allowed cyclists to camp. I am not sure if other's were listed that didn't.

Well I'm sort of with Machka on this one, but it just depends..... If I was touring the UK or Holland I wouldn't mind not having a detailed map -there are usually enough country roads with signage to get you there.

However, touring Massachusetts under similar circumstances, I think it's a hugely different kettle of fish (don't get me started, but I think New England road signage off the beaten track is just... well.... really, really bad -and that is kind way of putting it!).

So I think it depends on your time and where you are touring. But it really comes down to horses for courses, and whatever works for you and the kind of tour you are doing. I still see value in GPS for the kind of touring I like to do, but not essential. I think Neil sums it up nicely: a luxury.

My comments were more pertaining to choosing an enjoyable route (enjoyable to me, at least), as opposed to "not getting lost". The signage is indeed good in France, but it makes no sense whatsoever to me to ride along a "route nationale" when there is a nearby "route departementale" devoid of traffic which will get you to wherever you're going. Mais chacun a son gout!

You don't need reception to have the GPS work with your cell phone. Those using AT&T can buy the Garmin software (Chip) for your BlackBerry ($99) and now you have all the US maps stored in your phone available everywhere!

Personally, I can't tell you how many times the GPS bailed me out. During a rain storm, the GPS worked like a charm while my map would have been a mess. Riding at night miles from home would have been a nightmare without a GPS with roads that have no signs. Quite frankly, the prospect of getting lost in 90 degree weather with little shade is no fun at all.

When I think about it, GPS technology is so cheap and prices are dropping all the time. Four years ago, the hardware and software cost close to $450.00 dollars and it was worth every penny. That same purchase today would set me back about $125.00 dollars on Ebay! You don't need the most expensive unit on the market. Heck, I was using a non-color GPS for years quite successfully for many years.

The most important reason I use the GPS is safty. I like to create routes on my PC that avoid highways at ALL costs. This means creating a route that has many turns riding through subdivisions including small and large towns. However, there's no way I could follow such a complex route with a map because it would require taking it out every 5 - 10 minutes!

I've seen too many tourist creating routes and asking forum members their opinion if the roads safe. In almost every case, many of the highways they selected were fat out dangerous. Instead of riding through subdivisions, they selected expressways because it's easier to follow them using a road map. A safe route requires many turns and planning. This reason more than anything else is why I use a GPS.

I personally enjoy riding on expressways. I'm not allowed to do so in my home state, but I often use them when touring in the west. I don't think they are too visually appealing, and you certainly have to be extra cautious when approaching ramps and interchanges. But I never feel safe on any road where there are cars present. At least on an expressway you usually have a broad shoulder to ride on. Expressways can shave a lot of time off of a long ride, whereas, hunting around for small back roads can add lots of miles and hours to a trip, even if you have a GPS to point you in exactly the right direction. If you spend all of your time in subdivisions you end up stopping and starting all the time at stop signs and traffic lights. It's not that I think people should always try to avoid subdivisions, but you're wasting your time and probably missing the scenery if you try to ride in subdivisions as much as possible.

The subdivisions are the scenery! LOL.

You'll see some of the most expensive, beautiful homes in your life. Riding on an expressway during the heat of the summer without any shade or trees smelling nothing but gas with high speed traffic traveling a few feet away is not my idea of a vacation. When the shoulder disappears, the fun ends too.

Out west, you might have no choice but, I find plenty of choices. It is true you add more miles riding through subdivisions. Alot more than taking an expressway and it can be hilly at times. However, there are stores, shops where you can reload on soft drinks and food. The stop lights and stop signs actually make it safer for the cyclist. One more thing, you actually get to meet people.

Yep, exactly. We've somehow managed to cycle in countries all over the world with just a plain ol' paper map. And we've always managed to survive.

I definitely pick the interstate only when it is the only reasonable option. I wondered how safe it would be, but it wasn't that bad. The shoulder was plenty wide to be well away from traffic. The one section of interstate we rode on the TA was not horrible for a short while, but it was ugly, very noisy, and the shoulder was strewn with lots of sharp stuff. I definitely would not want to do a major portion of a tour on a road like that.