Triumphrat

wrench100

I'm getting read to ride from San Francisco to Oklahoma, and I'm planning on sticking to very back roads. I'm wondering if a GPS is a reasonable solution for the way I tend to navigate. I went and looked at a Nuvi and was impressed by the level of detail - the map definitely had all the little county and country roads. Unfortunately, when you zoom out very far, they disappear.

I can see that the device is great if you want to tell it where you going, have it plot a course, and then follow it's directions. But what if you want to use it more like just a map?

"Oh here's a road, where does the map say it goes?"

I can't tell if that's really reasonable on a handheld GPS unit. With a paper map you can see all level of roads at once, and see where they go pretty easily because you get a broader view. Obviously, carrying half a continent's worth of high-res maps isn't exactly practical, either, and therein lies my dilemma.

jfk22

I would recommend both.
I love my GPS but unless I'm only going around the corner I also bring a map (or map[B]s[B]). I use my GPS when I have to get to a specific place, or when I want the closest hotel, gas station, hamburger, largest ball of string, etc. I use my map mostly at night in the hotel that the GPS found. You are right the GPS will plot the fastest or shortest route. If that's all I wanted I would take the cage. Usually I enter the point I want to stop the next day and let the GPS plan a route. Then I look at the map and choose a more interesting route. My GPS leaves a "Bread crumb" trail so I can find that really cool road again later. I only enter the destination if I'm lost, running out of time (That means lost, too), or I need to take a specific exit (I know I will get lost). Most of my best rides have been the result of getting lost. If I put in the route and go for a fun ride I find the constant instructions distracting, especially when I'm trying to get lost.