UKH

I was thinking of getting a Harveys map to replace my OS explorer map as they feel more user friendly in terms of the fabric and colours (in the shop - ive not tried them on the hill)
My main concern is that the Harveys is 1:40 and OS is 1:25
Anybody used both and have any comments?

Edit - I use OS maps for climbing, walking, running, cycling and they get wet/ripped often. Ive tried the OS waterproof but they tend to be more bulky and rigid.

In reply to ow arm:

Quite a lot of areas are covered by Harveys maps at 1:25,000 — Lake District, Snowdonia etc. For me they're easier to read at a glance than the OS maps, and a lot tougher, without being bulky and cumbersome like the laminated OS ones. The 1:40,000 ones do have their advantages, because they cover a larger area, but I'd still go for the 1:25,000 OS maps in areas not covered by Harveys at that scale.

In reply to ow arm:

Realised my compass didn't have a 1:40 romer after finishing Castle Ridge and had to do some maths to get to the tourist track! But otherwise I find Harveys maps easier to read and much more durable - you can wipe them dry if you have to. They also have the popular crags marked on them, and some have larger scale maps or topos or geology maps on the back, which is handy.

In reply to ow arm:

I have and still use Harvey maps of Snowdonia – folded, stuffed in pocket, soaked, unfolded, refolded – from when they first came out. Not sure the new "paper" is quite as indescructible, and it's a pity they don't supply them in the older, foldable plastic wallets, but they're excellent maps.

The 1:40k is pretty easy to get used to, though you need to know your 15 times table for the contours, and the info is great except that some sheets don't name as many features as could be wished. By comparison, unless you need all the county boundaries, etc. 1:25k have too much irrelvant info and consequently are harder to read.

Keep an eye on the BMC website: they offer discount on their own/Harvey series of maps from time to time.

In reply to Guy Hurst:
Yes they are the Superwalker maps in 1:25 but compared to the OS they cover a much smaller area
I do like the fact that Harveys do specific maps e.g. paddy buckley round

In reply to ow arm:

I have largely changed to Harveys Superwalker 1;25000 maps in recent years. The main reason for this is that the Harveys 'generally' provide more information that is useful to walkers than OS. In particular the designation of paths/tracks on-the-ground, and intermittent paths/tracks on-the-ground is better than OS. In my experience, indication of walls/fences is also better on Harveys. The 15m contour interval compared to 10m on OS also leads to less dense contouring on the map, making other features more visible, but does need you to make the mental note if used to OS. Some sheets, such as my home turf of Dartmoor are in 1:40000 scale, which again requires some mental retraining if you're used to OS 1:25000 & 1:50000, but the grid squares are still 1km, so its quite easy and Harveys sell a separate roamer inc 1:40000 for £1.
The flip side of the Harvey v. OS debate, and again relevant in areas such as Dartmoor, is that OS maps tend to have more historical data. I can think of several small stone rows, cairns, hut circles etc on Dartmoor that are described on OS maps, but absent from Harveys, and its quite useful to know where they are when you're fogged in.
On balance though, both series are excellent maps and cost less than a tenner each, so why not carry one of each.
N

In reply to ow arm:

I love Harvey maps as I find 1:40k more detailed than 1:50k, but not over detailed as 1:25k is. They are also more colourful and I don't need a bulky map case either. Just roll it and put in the pocket!

However, they don't always cover what I am looking for, so I've got some OS 1:50k maps as well. But they are terrible and you really need to take care of them...

In reply to PPP:
I prefer the Harvey's maps, coming from an orienteering background, I like maps that illustrate the ground rather than get cluttered by boundaries and those sodding purple lines.

The paper is good quality too.

Watch out for the Arran map - it's pants. The Skye maps are something special though.

In reply to ow arm:

Problem with the BMC maps in the Peak is that they miss off a lot of rocks and grouse butts, and there aint much else up there to nav by at times.

1:40 Nice for route planning and ideas but still stick an OS 1:25 back up in the bag. Sure the newer waterproof maps are lighter and thinner, use for MR as they can be written on which is nice.

In reply to Fat Bumbly2:

I love the Harveys map of the cairngorms. Great for nav as it shows humps and bumps that don't cut the contour lines as dotted lines which I find really useful.
Will second the Arran map being pants- or at least the mapped version I tried about 6 years ago, several glaring mistakes (imaginary lochains, other lochains not mapped etc).

In reply to ow arm:
Reassuring comments, having grown up reading the French IGN maps and finding OS maps hard to read, I thought they were an acquired taste, but apparently I'm not the only one here.

The legend is often inconsistent, some major paths are missing or not represented in the proper way. I find OS maps quite useful once out but not very good for preparing your day at home ("is this an actual path?" is a question I often find asking myself).

I also hate the principle of having the map printed on both sides of the paper (once again because I'm used to something different).

I find Harveys easier to read, weatherproof but I'll take a 1:25k over a 1:40k every time for walking.

Edit: oh, and the surrealist gerrymandering of the area covered by the map is sometimes maddening (e.g. OL23 or OL2)

In reply to ow arm:

1:40 is spot on. More than enough detail, but atill covers a large area. The colouring for contour height makes it so much clearer than standard OS.

Thumbs up from me.