Os Maps - 25000 V 50000

[ClanWhippy]

just wondering what are the relative strengths and weakneses of the 25000 and 50000 scale OS maps.

 

say for instance we were planning a trip into the peak district, planning to take a route along a bridleway but possibly wanting to deviate away from the route and go "into the wilderness".

 

would a 50000 scale map be good enough or does a 25000 give usefull extra detail.

 

i should mention i've seen a 50000 map but never laid eyes on a 25000.

 

any info or opinions on the relative pro's and cons of the two scales would be quite usefull to us.

 

thanks...

[markandlynn]

Depends how good at map reading you are and the complexity of the terrain.

My personal preference is for 25,000 ones when walking as the detail is easier to pick up allthough we do occasionally use a 50,000 on simple terrain .

You do however need more of them and walking off the edge of the map can be .....disconcerting.....

For pure bridleway walking and a GPS with tracklog, start point marked and spare batteries a 50,000 should be OK, but it does depend.....

Yes a 25000 does give lots of extra detail

[NickPick]

I'd say the level of detail on 1:25000 is much better than 1:50000.

 

If you look at OS 25k Get-a-map

 

and compare to OS 50k Streetmap

 

You can see the difference

 

Of course, if you're only planning simple walks along marked bridalways, you might not need the increased detail, which helps no end when you're just using a map and compass to navigate across somewhere like Dartmoor (Which I did before we had GPS)

[+Stuey]

i should mention i've seen a 50000 map but never laid eyes on a 25000.

1:25k maps have field boundaries which can be very useful indeed.

 

You can see an example on the OS GetaMap website.

[Deego]

I have 15 1:50k maps, which are fine for caching. I also have a few 1:25k for the peak's etc. and as Stuey says they show field boundaries which can be handy for getting to Trigs that are off the paths

 

But as caches need to have public access and are nearly always on paths a 1:50k should be fine

[SlytherinAlex]

The 1:25k are way more useful. No contest. You can get the digital versions too from Memory Map.

 

-

Travel Bugs for a quid?? I DON'T believe it !!!!!

Yes, it's true - CLICK HERE FOR DETAILS

[+jochta]

1:25k is much better for walking (and caching) in my opinion. It is scaled down 1:10k mapping with rights of way shown. Field boundaries are very useful.

 

If you're going to the Peak District I suggest these maps

 

OS Explorer Map 1 (The Peak District – Dark Peak area) OS shop

 

OS Explorer Map 24 (The Peak District – White Peak area) OS shop

[+Pharisee]

The 1:25k are way more useful. No contest. You can get the digital versions too from Memory Map.

 

-

Travel Bugs for a quid?? I DON'T believe it !!!!!

Yes, it's true - CLICK HERE FOR DETAILS

But £3.75 for postage is a total rip-off when they can go in a small jiffy bag for a single first class stamp.

 

If you want three.... the postage is a staggering £11.25

[+Birders]

1:25,000 often marks buildings on so the detail is much greater than on the 1:50,000.

 

As for cheap TBs.... look how much postage is being charged, a fairly standard ploy on Ebay.

[+littlejim]

The new Countryside Rights Of Way (CROW) Access areas are only going to be marked on the 1:25000 - OS have no plans to update the 1:50000. These are being introduced area by area, so if you are considering purchasing new maps, check to see if they are the latest.

[ClanWhippy]

thanks all, this is really helpfull.

 

i might add we aren't planning on going cross country with map and compass and nothing else. we do own a garmin legend which gets us by for cacheing and obviously we always carry spare batteries.

 

but i think it wont hurt to start learning map skills as a backup.

 

we do have 50000 scale Anquet maps for some of the areas we like to walk and have found print outs from this to be quite good.

 

i think maybe we'll purchase a 25000 scale map and then we can see which we prefer.

 

i am quite amazed at the prices set for map data products. it's a shame because if they were a lot cheaper i'd buy a lot of them.

 

anyway thanks again for the info...

Edited May 3, 2005 by ClanWhippy

[+The Forester]

The 25,000, for a couple of reasons

 

1 It has aboout 4 times as much data

 

2 It is much easier to plot your position onto a 25,000 than onto a 50,000.

[+CuplaKiwis]

Had always used 1:50K maps in NZ (fondly known as Topographicals or just Topo's), and so was surprised to see the 1:25K's over here. Have to say that while they are very useful for seom things, for the most part I find them to be a bit superfluous. Yes, the extra detail is nice to have, but for navigation 'in the field' a 1:50K is sufficient.

 

Besides, if I have a 1:25K query for a specific spot, I can just grab it online

[SlytherinAlex]

 

If you want three.... the postage is a staggering £11.25     

And where else in the UK can you buy three travel bugs for less that the total price John???

 

I thought you would see that the shipping charge is just that price to keep ebay costs down. Do you want to make ebay even richer than they already are??

 

Three bugs shipped from globalpositioningsystems = £15.31

Three bugs shipped from fingertech = £18.04

Three bugs shipped from my ebay ad = £14.22

 

Take your pick !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

But just to be fair, anyone who buys multiples will now be able to say a few pence on postage. I will have altered my advert and posted some more that give discounts for buying 3 or 5.

 

-

Travel Bugs for a quid?? I DON'T believe it !!!!!

Yes, it's true - CLICK HERE FOR DETAILS

Edited May 3, 2005 by SlytherinAlex

[SlytherinAlex]

As for cheap TBs.... look how much postage is being charged, a fairly standard ploy on Ebay.

But still cheaper than buying them anywhere else !!

[+Stuey]

But still cheaper than buying them anywhere else !!

From a very well known supplier, a 5 pack is £17.95 + £3.47 postage = £21.42

 

£4.28 each.

 

Reducing your eBay postage costs from £3.75 to £3.45 for additional tags is a bit shallow , We all know it's a way of minimising eBay costs. To post 5 bug tags costs exactly the same as posting 1 bug tag, and we all know that.

 

Good luck to you though. You might the odd person who wants just one tag I suppose.

[ClanWhippy]

er, no offence but any chance i could have my thread back on topic please?

 

i'm asking about maps not travel bugs.

 

cheers...

[SlytherinAlex]

We all know it's a way of minimising eBay costs.

Of course it is, duh!!

 

-

[+CuplaKiwis]

er, no offence but any chance i could have my thread back on topic please?

 

i'm asking about maps not travel bugs.

 

cheers...

Welcome to the madhouse, ClanWhippy!!

 

These 'diversions' happen periodically - don't worry about them too much - the thread almost always ends up back on topic (?eventually?)

 

Liken it to a conversation down at the pub - usually entertaining, sometimes useful, occasionally totally 'out there'.

 

Enjoy!

[ClanWhippy]

These 'diversions' happen periodically - don't worry about them too much - the thread almost always ends up back on topic (?eventually?)

yeah i know, it's pretty much "the way" with forums. some are worse than others.

i don't mind deviations, like you say, they're bound to happen.

 

just trying to give this thread a gentle nudge back in the direction of my original post.

 

;-)

[+Team Maddie UK]

1:25K for walking, 1:50K for cycling. That's my motto (learned from my Mum and Dad who were keen cyclists in their day).

 

The extra detail may appear superfluous but one day it might just save your bacon.

 

As to the extra cost, this must still be about the cheapest sport on the planet (barring Tiddlywinks perhaps ;)

 

Martin & Lynn.

Edited May 3, 2005 by Team Maddie UK

[davester]

What is shocking on both scales is the sheer number of footpaths which are present on the map and that either simply don't exist or follow a completely different line.

[ClanWhippy]

What is shocking on both scales is the sheer number of footpaths which are present on the map and that either simply don't exist or follow a completely different line.

that's interesting.

 

is that likely to be the maps that are plain wrong, or the maps showing old routes that have gone out of use and been replaced with new ones?

 

i had assumed the maps would be definitive.

[markandlynn]

What is shocking on both scales is the sheer number of footpaths which are present on the map and that either simply don't exist or follow a completely different line.

that's interesting.

 

is that likely to be the maps that are plain wrong, or the maps showing old routes that have gone out of use and been replaced with new ones?

 

i had assumed the maps would be definitive.

The maps are definitive as (Dave will probably put me right here) once it has been designated a ROW it should remain one. It is usually a lack of maintainance / use. There is one near to us I asked the farmer about it and it was an old shortcut between a paper mill and the houses it owned as the paper mill is gone the shortcut fell into disuse and hence the markings were not replaced. However i can still locate its route and officially walk across.The other side of this is that i know of several official green lanes that farmers have put PRIVATE PROPERTY signs on.

There is a link to ROW somewhere (help please)

[+dysdera]

deleted as I have now read to the bottom of the thread DOH

Edited May 3, 2005 by dysdera

[+Morton]

is that likely to be the maps that are plain wrong, or the maps showing old routes that have gone out of use and been replaced with new ones?

 

i had assumed the maps would be definitive.

In England & Wales, each local authority has "definitive maps" which show precisely where the rights of way are. If it's on the map it's a right of way, and if it's not, it isn't. The map can't be wrong - it Is The Law! OS maps are not strictly speaking definitive but the information is copied from the definitive map, so if there is a right of way shown, you can safely assume you are genuinely allowed to walk there.

 

Rights of way can't lapse through disuse in England and Wales, they can only be formally extinguished - which hardly ever happens. If the situation on the ground doesn't match the map, it almost always means the landowner hasn't maintained the right of way properly.

 

In Scotland the position is far more complicated: rights of way are created and destroyed "on the fly", as it were, depending on whether people do or don't use a particular route "as of right" over a 20 year period. As there are no definitive maps to copy from, and as there is often controversy over whether a particular route is or isn't a right of way, OS maps don't show rights of way in Scotland.

 

However, with the new open access laws (which I think I saw being discussed here quite recently), rights of way have become much less important in Scotland than they are in England and Wales.

 

Incidentally, and before anyone complains, I realise this forum isn't just for England & Wales and Scotland... but those are the only countries I know about!

[+Archer4]

What is shocking on both scales is the sheer number of footpaths which are present on the map and that either simply don't exist or follow a completely different line.

I had the OS 1:25000 for The Lakes from Memory-Map and it came with aerial photos of the region. The aerials are unashamedly a toy almost all of the time but you're right - I was surprised how often my tracks were straying from the footpaths on the map but flipping to the aerials showed where the paths actually ran and it emphasized that there are some pretty big blips

[+Teuchters]

25k maps are definitely useful in rural areas, but up here in the Highlands of Scotland, I would rarely use a 25k map in the hills. There is almost far too much info - it looks like almost every rock feature is marked and the maps are a sort of uniform brownish orange colour which is really difficult to read at night with a head torch.

So you can ignore all of this unless you are caching in the mountains at night in thr north............