Adventure Cycling Maps SUCK!

NYC XYZ wrote:
Steven M. O'Neill wrote:


But is it waterproof?

--
Steven O'Neill
Brooklyn, NY


It's foolproof! Treat a queen like a whore and a whore like a
queen....

Oh, here's another helpful thing for her on long journeys:


http://www.exalte.com/SexToysArticle/151

Reminiscent of a device from the now defunct HRS blog!

--
Tom Sherman - Behind the Cheddar Curtain

I have used them once or twice.. they were ok. I have done numerous tours
without them as well.

I doubt I would use them again. Not because of the paper or anything ,,
just personal preference.

------------------------
"NYC XYZ" wrote in message
ups.com...

They're printed on plain paper! And they're so small, and packed with
somewhat superfluous info (who the hell cares about restaurants along
the way, really).

Just disappointed. They should be laminated, at the least, or printed
on sturdier paper -- this is for touring, after all! Also, they really
should be bigger -- perhaps better as a spiral-bound book? And more
comprehensive -- I find googlemaps more useful!

"NYC XYZ" wrote in message
ups.com...

Steven M. O'Neill wrote:


But is it waterproof?

--
Steven O'Neill
Brooklyn, NY


It's foolproof! Treat a queen like a whore and a whore like a
queen....

Oh, here's another helpful thing for her on long journeys:


http://www.exalte.com/SexToysArticle/151

On-topic troll wasn't successful enough so you move to this?

In article . com,
"NYC XYZ" wrote:

They're printed on plain paper!

Mine aren't. They're printed on heavy coated paper.

And they're so small, and packed with somewhat superfluous info (who
the hell cares about restaurants along the way, really).

Anyone who would like to eat when out on tour, perhaps.

Just disappointed. They should be laminated, at the least, or
printed on sturdier paper -- this is for touring, after all! Also,
they really should be bigger -- perhaps better as a spiral-bound
book? And more comprehensive -- I find googlemaps more useful!

Well, I bought my maps about 2000, so perhaps things have changed. Mine
were very good, both in terms of the material and also the information
on the maps. Sorry to hear you were disappointed.

Made ya look?



Mike Kruger wrote:

On-topic troll wasn't successful enough so you move to this?

R Brickston wrote:


How could you possibly know any of what you need to do or not to do?

Imagination. Vision. The ability to conceive the future.

By your own admission, you've never been on a long range bicycle tour.

I've never done many things, but that needn't prevent a successful
first attempt.

Thomas Wentworth wrote:
I have used them once or twice.. they were ok. I have done numerous tours
without them as well.

I doubt I would use them again. Not because of the paper or anything ,,
just personal preference.


Well, paper quality wasn't my biggest complaint, only the first and
most obvious.

What kinds of "personal preferences"? You mean routes, or what?

Just curious.

Tim McNamara wrote:


Mine aren't. They're printed on heavy coated paper.

Nit-picking over details won't help your argument at all.

Someone's already pointed out that they're waterproof. While a
dramatic and welcome improvement over my original diagnosis, the spirit
of my disappointment remains: paper just isn't rugged enough. If it
were laminated, it would not only be waterproof, but also tear-proof!
Plus, you'd be able to mark it up with grease pencils, for those of you
who were in the infantry.

Anyone who would like to eat when out on tour, perhaps.

Yeah, and what's the point of using up all that space for info which
needs to be updated, given how many places move or close altogether?
Doesn't anyone just ask a local anymore?

Well, I bought my maps about 2000, so perhaps things have changed. Mine
were very good, both in terms of the material and also the information
on the maps. Sorry to hear you were disappointed.

I'm sorry too. I believe in their mission and I still support them, of
course, but I'm quite puzzled why the obvious has escaped them for so
long.

To wit:

1) Lamination means waterproof, tear-proof, and markable.

2) Spiral-bound means convenience and even more durability.

3) Alternate routes, even if available separately, not only shows real
expertise and "craftsmanship," but also increases product utility.

4) Enlarged maps (i.e., map panels) afford better readability and do
away with the annoying different directional-orientation from panel to
panel (currently, "north" points every which way from panel to panel
for space-saving purposes).


I don't care if the maps are $40 each. I'd get them if they're
valuable. And I think most anybody else would, too. All bike-lovers
support bike advocacy (as y'all know, Adventure Cycling is a non-profit
public-interest organization), so price wouldn't be too much of an
issue, I believe. Besides, touring cyclists are unlikely to begrudge
the price of a good map.

On 20 Aug 2006 21:05:57 -0700, "NYC XYZ"
wrote:


R Brickston wrote:


How could you possibly know any of what you need to do or not to do?

Imagination. Vision. The ability to conceive the future.

It doesn't take much imagination, vision or the ability to conceive
the future, to understand how you will not have a good a tour as your
second one will be.

By your own admission, you've never been on a long range bicycle tour.

I've never done many things, but that needn't prevent a successful
first attempt.

See above response.

Tim McNamara wrote:


Well, I bought my maps about 2000, so perhaps things have changed. Mine
were very good, both in terms of the material and also the information
on the maps. Sorry to hear you were disappointed.

I just subscribed to Ac so good to hear they sub was
worth it!