| Author |
Message Text |
|
andym
|
We mostly use McKenzies for navigation because the scale is the largest. I’m moving toward Voyageur for planning because the fewest maps cover the whole BW. We’ve also have some fishers and if we are providing maps for tripmates then it is common for us to have two or three types on a trip.
|
|
Ausable
|
I've used the 2 National Geographic Boundary Waters maps and an old version of their TOPO software for planning BWCA trips. I use McKenzie maps for traveling.
|
|
cyclones30
|
We have an assortment of them all. Fisher, McKenzie, Voyageur, Nat geo, etc.
As said, they all have their pros and cons. Some have more depth contours than others, different scale/detail, and voyageur has a bunch of area info on theirs.
We take at least 2 brands in case anything is in the wrong spot on one brand we have another to compare/contrast.
|
|
A1t2o
|
Just ordered a Voyageur map because it looked decent and I liked that I could see the map online before I bought it. I also figure that it is hard to go wrong with maps so I didn't look that hard into it.
I did get to wondering what maps everyone else uses though. Do you use the same map in the wilderness as you do at home for planning? What maps do you use? Is there really a difference?
Also, does anyone ever just print off maps for either lake depth, or that are route specific? I've done both in the past but I never owned my own map, my tripping buddy always brought his. I worry about the route going off the map and needing to switch maps while traveling.
|
|
Jackfish
|
This is going to sound overly simplified, but all maps are good in one way or another. There are little nuances to each that make each helpful. Personally, I like having a couple different maps to look at and use for planning.
I like a larger coverage, larger scale map for general planning, but I like the more detailed, smaller scale maps for travel. Example: I do most of my trips in Quetico. I like to plan with a Chrismar map, but when I'm on the trip, I use the McKenzie maps.
|