I've actually got a nice Silva here - it says Type 4/54 on the baseplate - so I'll take that next time.

The are lovely things! :)

Sounds like you were pretty well jinxed last week PW! As Chris says you are probably better off sticking to the standard Silva compasses.

On a slightly different note... has anyone else found the gridlines on the OS 1:25k particularly difficult to see recently? I could barely make them out last week. I know I'm a bit older than when I first began to use them... but even so: they were almost invisible.

There's been quite a bit of discussion of Harveys v OS maps on another thread. But yes, the OS 1:25k are very hard to read, not just gridlines but contours also.

Sorry that's this thread isn't it!!!

A quick comparison of a new Explorer map and an old 80s Outdoor Leisure map suggests they are more difficult to see but not because the lines have changed but because there is less contrast between grid lines and contour lines. On the Explorer map the contour lines are paler than on the Outdoor Leisure one and therefore less easy to distinguish from the pale blue grid lines. And I've just noticed that on some of my old Outdoor Leisure maps the grid lines are black, as they are on Harveys maps, which is much clearer.

I've had a Silva Type 4/54 for over ten years. It's excellent.

I endorse the Ortlieb map case. They are the only ones worth spending money on. Beware, they are not the cheapest to buy but you won't need another for a few years (unless you lose it) so they may prove inexpensive over time. My first Ortlieb case is about 10 years old and the plastic is a bit yellow but still waterproof.

I consider the clips on the Ortlieb map case useless. I have found thenm to slide off the case itself and then you risk losing the map although it will remain dry. Cath has a "deluxe" Ortlieb case where she has tied the lanyard to the map case rather than rely on the clips. I shall be upgrading mine in the same way in readiness for my next outing.

May I suggest that some of you may becoming presbyopic???

;o)

They don't put those magnifiers on compasses for nothing :-)

I can't believe that so many of you like Harveys maps. I have bought a couple in the past and I wouldn't waste money on them again. The colour differentiation for height is useless, the 15m contour gradient is equally useless and so clearly contrived as not to infringe OS copyright its embarassing. The black lines used to denote crags do not help at all as they do not accurately reflect the true topography yet appear that they might as they are drawn as opposed to being a key symbol. The area they cover is far too small making them very expensive and this is often 'sold' as covering distinct areas without having to fold or turn the map but really means you have to buy two maps eg Snowdonia.
I was given a Harveys map for the KIMM last year and the different use of symbols, the 1:40 000 scale made navigation more difficult than it already was.
Harveys...pah wouldn't use them to wipe my %$*&@.

rant over :)

Come on Phil - the crag symbols are no worse than OS 1:25K! ;-)

I've found the topography is reflected more accurately on Harveys maps, one reason I find them easier to use than OS maps (not that OS maps are difficult).

I find them much less expensive than OS maps because they are printed on waterproof paper and so far more durable.

Of course if you're not used to them they will be more difficult to use, especially on a mountain marathon.

I know you prefer them Steve but I'm not just being picky with the crag symbols. OS symbols are just that; symbols that represent the presence of crags, but Harveys seem -to me at least- to be drawn to represent the crag itself. No two are the same. The drawback is that to my eye they do not and cannot represent accurately the crag edge, so why attempt to do so?
Paramo or Gore-tex anyone? :)

Perhaps Chris, because you have mentioned it and brought it to mind, some of my dislike of Harveys maps is this symbol thing. Its a bit like non-standard plugs for mobile phones etc...
Harveys to my mind are 'ripping off' the OS by copying their maps and changing contours, colours, symbols etc so as not to breach copyright. Part of this may be the result of OS intransigence in not producing a more specified range of maps without parish boundaries etc.
I have Anquet maps and it annoys me to death that they are only in 1:50 000 which again I am sure is because OS hold all the cards and can say exactly which maps they will allow competitive companies to use. Maybe there is a case for the deregulation of the OS allowing anyone to use the mapping data and proiduce maps for different markets.

Can't really see how Harvey's representation of crags are different from OS both at 1:50k and 1:25k. On OS maps crags are also drawn in such a way as if they represent the crag itself especially in areas like Glencoe.

As Chris says it's probably a case of being comfortable with the maps people use most.

Phil - not sure about Anquet but Memory Map do OS 1:25K.

Anquet do 1:25,000 OS maps.

And Harveys aren't "ripping off" anyone. These maps are independently surveyed (at great expense). Try overlaying a Harveys on an OS of the same areas and you'll see numerous variations.

As Colin has said, Harveys certainly aren't ripping off or copying the OS. All Harveys maps are surveyed by Harveys. Compare one with an OS map and you'll find many differences.

It's a pity Harveys haven't expanded their range (accepting the cost of doing so). Even sufficient coverage for the Munros would entice many more people to use them.

Their 1:12,500 of the Skye Cuillin should be made compulsory.

I agree that the Harvey's version of the Cuillin is clearer to look at and that their maps show ground textures a little more explicitly due to the background colours employed... however...I am used to OS 1/25 and I can read them very well and their interpretation of outcrops/limestone scars and their topos makes it dead easy to find out where you are as they're pretty much spot-on. If you're used to them, of course.

Those odd contour distances of Harvey maps - why, why, why change what had been the norm? If they hadn't, it would be easier to chop and change from one map to another when one version was superior i.e. in the Cuillin.

Harveys have lost my custom for that alone; I like to be able to look at a map and be able to interpret what I would see pretty much instantly, and with 15m contour intervals and a 1:40 000 scale which doesn't shoe-horn easily into either the 1/25 or the 1/50, then I can't.