UKC

I would normally buy Ordnance Survey 1:25000 maps but wondered if anyone had opinions on the BMC maps for the Cairngorms?

Given that they are 1:40000 are they detailed enough for walking routes etc?

Thanks.

In reply to stewieb:

BMC maps are very good. I like the 1:40,000 scale because gives just enough detail for micro navigation but also the zoomed out view gives a much better perspective of roughly where you are on the map compared to 1:25,000. I prefer the contour rendering to OS too.

They are also printed on tough water resistant paper, always a bonus if you drop it in a puddle!

In reply to stewieb: I really like the 1:40,000 mountain maps and find them more than sufficiently detailed once on the tops, although I haven't specifically used the Cairngorms one.

I currently prefer using a 1:50,000 map in the Cairngorms and my 1:25,000 generally stays in the rucsac. Therefore I'd be more than happy to head out with just the BMC map.

Thanks for both replies. I will buy this one and see how I get on, may well end up a convert from OS maps!

In reply to stewieb:

Basically produced by Harvey maps for bmc. Harvey maps are very good and started with lakes maps many years ago.

In reply to stewieb:

OS 1:25000 has too much (irrelevant) detail, 1:50000 too little.

Harvey maps 1:40000 are excellent for relevant detail (eg walls, fences, types of land, wood and forest, and prominent boulders and cairns). Only downside is getting used to the scale and learning your 15 and 75 times tables for countours.

In reply to stewieb: there excellent maps and when you get used to them u dont want to go back to os maps. iv been using them for a few years mainly the cairngorm one and it has just the right amount of detail for walking skiing and climbing in the area i find the os 1:25 too crowded with detail that most of the time i dont need. also waterproof and very tough as i never use a map case and just fold it up shove it in a rucksack pocket etc and its still going strong. another neat feature is the colour coding for the different height contours so just with a quick glance its easier to pick out high and low areas.

In reply to davy_boy: It is a good map and along with its predecesors my first choice.

Good to see them go back to 1:40k - a very clear scale. For the Mounth with its swelling plateaux and big area hills, 1:25k is too big a scale.

Just wish they would ditch the colours.

In reply to Fat Bumbly2:

I like the colours