BajaNomad

GPS maps

jack - 4-3-2006 at 12:51 PM

For my next trip to the Baja I was thinking on buying a Baja GPS map. From what I can find the two best are the Baja "Navigator" GPS map and the Baja "Expeditioner" Topo GPS map. I wonder if anyone has any views as to how good these are? Is it worth moving up to the more expensive topo map? Is the detail on these as good as the Baja California Almanac?

Roberto - 4-3-2006 at 01:05 PM

It all depends on what you are after. Bottom line, if you travel only (or almost only) paved roads, the Baja Navigator is what you want. If you go on dirt roads quite a bit, I would get the other one.

In terms of comparison to the Baja Almanac, the Almanac has more detail (in most, but not all cases), but is notoriously inaccurate in terms of where things are. The expeditioner is quite accurate.

[Edited on 4-3-2006 by Roberto]

Wow, Roberto--------

Barry A. - 4-3-2006 at 01:20 PM

------------it surprises me when you say the "Atlas" has inaccuracies----------from my experience, it is the most accurate map of Baja I have ever used, albiet there are a few mistakes, as ALL maps have. Of course, I have never compared the Atlas to actual GPS readings-----is that where the inaccuracies show up???

The "Expeditioner" software must be really fantastic!!!

bajalou - 4-3-2006 at 03:06 PM

They certainly show up when comparing to GPS locations - but - it's still the best available paper maps.

Roberto - 4-3-2006 at 04:02 PM

Yes, the map is wildly inaccurate when compared to GPS readings. The INEGI maps are right on the money but are missing some detail, though not a lot especially outside populated areas.

P.S. The Expeditioner map is created directly from INEGI vector data.

[Edited on 4-3-2006 by Roberto]

Mike Supino - 4-3-2006 at 04:10 PM

Re: inaccuracies.
I've head that almost all maps have intentional inaccuracies.
Some type of copyright issues????
Other posters may be better informed.

At the risk of over-killing this subject------

Barry A. - 4-3-2006 at 04:10 PM

-----is the problem with the Atlas that the Lat. and Long. coordinates are not correct, or are the maps actually distorted??

(if this is getting entirely too technical, then just ignor the question)

Roberto - 4-3-2006 at 06:25 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Barry A.
-----is the problem with the Atlas that the Lat. and Long. coordinates are not correct, or are the maps actually distorted??

(if this is getting entirely too technical, then just ignor the question)


Barry, the coordinates are wrong, plain and simple - in some cases more than others, but pick virtually any spot on any page, and it will be incorrect. I haven't noticed distortion, other than what seems to be caused by the splitting of the maps into multiple pages, particularly the case where one map is split into left and right sections. But the errors are of different kinds. Each page seems to follow it's own rules - for example sections where more than one map covers the same area have different coordinates.

There are other errors as well, such as missing/extra roads, for example. Now most of this won't make much difference if you're driving down the road with a copy of the Almanac in your lap and occasionally use the GPS to figure out, mas o menos, where you are. You will be able to do that. But if you're an anal retentive engineer (that's me) who has digitized the maps and often uses OZI to monitor location, measure distance, etc., etc., you will find yourself driving in the ocean, or several miles from where the map says you are.

Roberto, great response---and now I understand.

Barry A. - 4-3-2006 at 06:29 PM

-----thank you very much.

wornout - 4-3-2006 at 07:24 PM

Personally I would go with the Expeditioner. I have the Navigator (because I bought it before the Expeditioner was out) and it is a great product but the Expeditioner is full of good off-road stuff. I don't think paper maps come in to play here as you can't put a papermap in the GPSr and your original question was about the best map for a GPSr.

Roberto - 4-3-2006 at 08:20 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by wornout
Personally I would go with the Expeditioner. I have the Navigator (because I bought it before the Expeditioner was out) and it is a great product but the Expeditioner is full of good off-road stuff. I don't think paper maps come in to play here as you can't put a papermap in the GPSr and your original question was about the best map for a GPSr.


Yes, but he was asking for a comparison of the level of detail with the Baja Almanac - and you CAN put a paper map in the GPS, it just takes a little work.:O

David K - 4-3-2006 at 09:17 PM

Roberto is right on on this Barry...

When the latest Almanac came out, I made a list of errors or emissions I noticed in a casual look over and posted that on Amigos... I am sure I have made simular posts here on Nomad as well... I also have the older, bigger, more detail Baja Atlas (one with notes that is worn, and one that is untouched I picked up at the used book store for something like 8 dollars!!!

The new Almanac pages are not all on the same scale... Landon sized each one to fit the page, I guess... You need to use the scale bar on each map just for THAT map...

jack - 4-4-2006 at 01:20 AM

Wow, I never expected so many replies. I will be using the GPS maps for finding my way around cities but mostly I will be using them for guidance and locating my position for exploring back roads and hard to reach areas with my motorcycle. Map accuracy and detail is quite important and these products sound better than the Almanac which I believed to be one of the best. The topo GPS map cost $30 more than the other. I don't mind paying the extra $30 but only if the map is $30 better. My big concern is map clarity with the topo map. With Topo Canada the contour lines make it just about impossible to see secondary roads. I wonder if this might be the case with the Expeditioner map. On the internet they show sample screen shots from both products but its pretty hard to tell which is the best from those few shots.

Map/Chart

Cypress - 4-4-2006 at 06:13 AM

What's the best chart available that covers the areas of the Sea of Cortez north and south of Mulege? Where to obtain it? Thanks.:?::?:

Roberto - 4-4-2006 at 07:05 AM

If you are using the map for exploring back roads, get the Expeditioner.

The "best" map - it's a compromise the INEGI maps (1:250,000) are the most accurate, period. In fact, they are dead on. They have, in some cases less detail than the Almanac. They are at http://www.bicimapas.com.mx.

But since you use the term chart, I'm guessing you're looking for a marine map? This gets more difficult than even the land maps. As far as I know ALL marine charts for Mexico are based on the same set of surveys, some done quite some time ago, and accuracy, in some areas can be an issue. I have the Garmin BlueChart charts, which are as good as any. You will need to supplement with local knowledge, books, etc for navigation, as they are, as I said, inaccurate in some places and incomplete in others. For paper charts, the same applies - check MapTech http://www.maptech.com

Neal Johns - 4-4-2006 at 07:32 AM

Good posts, Roberto.
I have been gone, so there is nothing left to add.
(I have the Expeditioner and think it is the best available non-paper map available)

Taco de Baja - 4-4-2006 at 07:46 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Cypress
What's the best chart available that covers the areas of the Sea of Cortez north and south of Mulege? Where to obtain it? Thanks.:?::?:


For GPS the best is probably Garmin. But you have to have a Garmin chart plotter....
[EDIT] These will work on ANY garmin that accepts micro SD cards like the handheld Garmin 60csx, 60cx, 76csx, 76cx, Legend cx, or Vista cx.

Blue Chart - West Coast

List of charts used


[Edited on 4-4-2006 by Taco de Baja]

leadmoto - 4-4-2006 at 09:44 AM

A color GPS works best for clarity for the Baja "Expeditioner" topo. I have both the "Navigator" GPS map and the Baja "Expeditioner". I haven't had time to put the Expeditioner to the test yet. I am happy with what I have seen so far. A couple of years ago nothing was available, so I am stoked that LBmaps has made this software available.

Pescador - 4-4-2006 at 09:51 AM

I use a Garmin 172 chartplotter and it is very accurate and detailed but I made a big mistake when I bought the Garmin Blue Charts for Mexico. I live at San Lucas Cove in the winter and my achorage is about 1 to 1 1/2 miles on shore according to the chart. I have spent the last two months talkiing to Garmin about this problem and so far have not gotten anywhere. On the old Furono's it was possible to recenter to take care of the discrepencies of actual location and map location, and then as long as you were within a couple hundred miles, everything was very accurate. I guess Garmin never figured on anything like that and assumed that the charts were good. You can imagine that it makes it real exciting to come in and out of San Lucas Cove with that inaccuracy or trying to go to the harbor at Santa Rosalia in the dark. Guess the Mexicans are smarter with their triangulation after all.

Roberto - 4-4-2006 at 10:40 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Pescador
I use a Garmin 172 chartplotter and it is very accurate and detailed but I made a big mistake when I bought the Garmin Blue Charts for Mexico. I live at San Lucas Cove in the winter and my achorage is about 1 to 1 1/2 miles on shore according to the chart. I have spent the last two months talkiing to Garmin about this problem and so far have not gotten anywhere. On the old Furono's it was possible to recenter to take care of the discrepencies of actual location and map location, and then as long as you were within a couple hundred miles, everything was very accurate. I guess Garmin never figured on anything like that and assumed that the charts were good. You can imagine that it makes it real exciting to come in and out of San Lucas Cove with that inaccuracy or trying to go to the harbor at Santa Rosalia in the dark. Guess the Mexicans are smarter with their triangulation after all.


Pescador, this is exactly what I was referring to in my post above. The problem is not with the Garmin charts, the problem is with the survey they are based on. Check out this letter from Jerry Cunningham:
Quote:

picked up a copy of the Latitude's free First Timer's Cruising Guide To Mexico as I left the Crew List Party at the Encinal YC, and I want to commend you on an excellent piece of work. It should be required reading for any cruiser going to Mexico, no matter if they are going on the Ha-Ha or not.

But I'd like make one clarification. When it comes to your comments on 'Charts and Cruising Guides', you write the following: "When Charlie and the other authors say their charts are 'Not to be used for navigation,' they mean it." I don't know if you've noticed or not, but there are no such caveats on the various cruising guides I produce for the Sea of Cortez. You see, I assume that the reason cruisers buy charts is to aid their safe navigation of those waters. As such, I do not use the old 1873-5 government charts for my grids and shorelines. True, these Defense Mapping Agency charts served me well for over 40 years in the Sea of Cortez when we sailed with nothing but a compass and my eyes for navigation. However, now that we have GPS telling us within feet of where we actually are, such inaccurate charts can be dangerous.

And these charts can be more than a little inaccurate and dangerous. For example, #21008 Golfo De California, Northern Part, is as much as two miles off station at Santa Rosalia and to the north. And it's a mile off around Conception Bay, up at Puerto Refugio, and north of San Carlos on the mainland. These errors are naturally perpetuated in all of the copies of these charts, whether paper or electronic. This is why I use the only modern survey made of the Sea of Cortez. Back in the '60s, the United States and Mexico did a well controlled aerial survey of all of Mexico, and all the current topographical charts for Mexico are based on that data. These maps have proved out nicely with GPS.

A few weeks ago, we had occasion to make our way into the little harbor at Santa Rosalia. There was a rambunctious squall, and naturally it was the middle of the night. We'd plotted a waypoint off the harbor entrance from my Santa Rosalia Mini-Guide, and as nearly as we could tell in the dark, it put us right where we expected to be. Had we taken this waypoint off #21008, we would have been a mile or so inland.

Although using those original charts may be 'romantic', you have to remember they are not accurate. The 'Not For Navigation' caveat should be on those oldies as well as many of the current 'sketch charts'.

Gerry Cunningham
Patagonia, Arizona

Readers - Gerry Cunningham has been cruising the Sea of Cortez since the mid-'60s and knows what he's talking about. He is the author of the Cruising Guide to the Middle Gulf, the Cruising Guide to the Lower Gulf, and several other guides to the Sea of Cortez. Our comments about not using charts for navigation was aimed at the sketches of anchorages, so we're glad he reminded us of the problems with the main charts.

Just to remind everyone, if you take off for Mexico - or just about anywhere else - and rely solely on GPS and charts, you're asking for big trouble. The problem is not with GPS, which is very accurate, but with the charts, which in many cases are based on very old and sometimes imprecise data. If you sail close to shore down the Pacific Coast of Baja and check your GPS positions versus the paper charts, you'll see that they often don't agree. This is yet another reason why mariners are always advised never to rely on just one aid to navigation. Unless it's perfectly clear when we're approaching the coast, we'll use our paper charts, GPS, depthsounder, radar and one or more cruising guides. There's just no such thing as too much information.



P.S. the "shoreline" survey he's referring to is what you will find in the INEGI maps. Unfortunately, they are not marine charts, and do not have depth contours, rocks, reefs, etc.

Cypress - 4-4-2006 at 02:07 PM

Thanks for the info!

Loreto Area

wornout - 4-4-2006 at 02:11 PM

Baja Expeditioner

[Edited on 4-4-2006 by wornout]

Followed by Navigator

Followed by City Select North America V7

[Edited on 4-4-2006 by wornout]

wornout - 4-4-2006 at 02:14 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by wornout
Baja Expeditioner



Followed by Navigator

wornout - 4-4-2006 at 02:15 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by wornout
Quote:
Originally posted by wornout
Baja Expeditioner



Followed by Navigator


Followed by City Select North America V7

wornout - 4-4-2006 at 02:16 PM

So, now you see why we say spend the extra $30 and get the Expeditioner.

jack - 4-4-2006 at 02:50 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by wornout
So, now you see why we say spend the extra $30 and get the Expeditioner.


Your right. That is exactly the kind of comparison I wanted to see. For what I want the Expeditioner is the one to get. Thanks for going to the trouble of posting those images.

Pescador - 4-6-2006 at 10:07 AM

This discussion really led to some valuable information and I have spent the last couple of days with the cartography guys at Garmin, Lowrance, and Furuno. Now they all advertise that they have the best thing going with their units, etc. but the stark reality is that as far as blue charts are concerned, they all copy their maps off of the US21008 charts which are horribly inaccurate. Furono used to allow you to recenter your chartplotter for local adjustment, but I can not get anyone to verify that they will allow you to do that any longer, and Lowrance and Garmin both admit that there is no adjustment built in to their charts. The topo maps all show coastline but have no information as to very far offshore, so they are pretty much worthless for chart navigation as well. In the US where the charts are really accurate, it is almost possible to slide in to your dock and decide on the basis of your chart whether or not you want to park in your slip right or left sided. But in Northern Baja, the whole navigation thing is pretty much worthless.

Cypress - 4-6-2006 at 11:12 AM

Charts!!?? Just looking for a good depth, wreck, snag, hang, etc. chart. Don't need a guide for backing in to the dock!

Cypress - 4-6-2006 at 12:07 PM

Guess my frustration is showing! Sorry.:O:O

Pescador - 4-6-2006 at 05:01 PM

:lol: I agree, I don't want to even find the dock, I just want to be able to find the entrance to San Lucas Cove in the dark and be able to get up to Santa Rosalia for bait in the dark and figured that $100 or so would be money well spent. Then the first day I plugged the Blue Chart in to my chartplotter and found that I was a mile north and about 2 miles inland, I was pretty frustrated. :(

Roberto - 4-6-2006 at 05:39 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Pescador
This discussion really led to some valuable information and I have spent the last couple of days with the cartography guys at Garmin, Lowrance, and Furuno. Now they all advertise that they have the best thing going with their units, etc. but the stark reality is that as far as blue charts are concerned, they all copy their maps off of the US21008 charts which are horribly inaccurate. Furono used to allow you to recenter your chartplotter for local adjustment, but I can not get anyone to verify that they will allow you to do that any longer, and Lowrance and Garmin both admit that there is no adjustment built in to their charts. The topo maps all show coastline but have no information as to very far offshore, so they are pretty much worthless for chart navigation as well. In the US where the charts are really accurate, it is almost possible to slide in to your dock and decide on the basis of your chart whether or not you want to park in your slip right or left sided. But in Northern Baja, the whole navigation thing is pretty much worthless.


I understand your frustration. Now that you are armed with the facts, you can decide how to solve the problem. There are a few possibilities. The simplest is to set your own waypoints, that you know are accurate. Remember that GPS (at least civilian GPS) is not intended to be accurate enough to do what you describe safely. At night, I rely on my own waypoints, my vision, my ears, the GPS and radar. You have not really enjoyed life until you have come into a busy port, at night, in the fog, without radar. :o:o

Even with radar, it's pretty interesting and stressing to say the least - those 500+ foot boats don't exactly stop on a dime (IF they can even see you).

Anyway, here's the bottom line from my standpoint. Navigation in the dark, fog, bad sea conditions, etc., is much too dangerous and delicate to trust solely to instruments. You need a variety of them, and lookouts, experience and great care. If you don't have them, can't afford them, whatever, stay out of the water until you don't need them. Think of it as IFR for boats.

Good Luck, fisherperson.

[Edited on 4-7-2006 by Roberto]

Oso - 4-6-2006 at 06:25 PM

You just can't rely on anything anymore. The labels on bottles of Buzzard's Bay Brewing products have an interesting chart, but then the back labels state "Chart on front not meant for navigational purposes". And I was figuring that after a doce, that would be the best guide back to port.:mad:

Bruce R Leech - 4-6-2006 at 06:47 PM

Wow Roberto you really have your stuff together. I couldn't agree more with all you have written here.

Roberto - 4-6-2006 at 08:48 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Bruce R Leech
Wow Roberto you really have your stuff together. I couldn't agree more with all you have written here.


Why thank you, Bruce. But you gotta be careful, me being a powerboater and all, and not a slowboater (er, I meant sailboater) :lol::lol:

Roberto , you mean well, but you're not completely correct !!

beercan - 4-6-2006 at 10:11 PM

Capt mike and I fly on just instruments regularly. You just can't turn or stop our airplanes on a dime either. He and I trust our instruments ---GPS
I have flown to the tip (Sur) many times and use just a standard Lowrance Airmap 300 GPS (about 8 years old), and it is accurate to less than 300 ft. and that is without WAAS.

It is right on at Loreto, Lapaz, San Jose, and any other spots in Baja!!!!!!!!!!

It only has a 3 inch screen , but shows all the coast lines , major roads and even islands !!!
Quote:

Even with radar, it's pretty interesting and stressing to say the least - those 500+ foot boats don't exactly stop on a dime (IF they can even see you).

Roberto - 4-7-2006 at 12:01 AM

So let me get this straight beercan. Would you land your airplane with the aid of nothing but your "better than 300 foor accuracy" GPS/chartplotter, that has a chart loaded that MIGHT be as much as 1-2 miles off in places? :o

Because THAT was my point.


[Edited on 4-7-2006 by Roberto]

Charts

Cypress - 4-7-2006 at 05:06 AM

Thanks Nomads, Will get the best paper chart available and make corrections as needed. Have not used GPS very much. Used LORAN C years back. Know that GPS is better. Plan to get back into bottom fishing etc. Don't expect to be doing much on the water in adverse conditions, but you never know.

Pescador - 4-7-2006 at 09:28 AM

As a follow up, I talked with Furono and Lowrance. Guess what, they all use the US21008 charts, so no help with different companies. Following is the e-mail I got this morning from Garmin Cartography department.

:no:

Pescador - 4-7-2006 at 09:29 AM

oops, maybe this is better.

I took a look at the coverage for that area and it looks as if it is a chart issue. What you have in that area is a small scale and very old chart. We usually try to use local charts whenever possible but we have been unable to come to a licensing agreement with Mexico?s hydrographic office. Therefore, the maps that we have available to us in Mexico are limited. Hopefully in the near future we will work out a deal and our detailed coverage for Mexico will be better. Sorry for any problems this may cause. Garmin and our data vendors do everything possible to provide the most up to data and accurate maps possible.



Please let me know if you have any other questions and thank you for your interest in Garmin.



Regards,



Nathan

________________________________________

Roberto --YES !!

beercan - 4-7-2006 at 01:49 PM

Reread my post ! It is right on !!From Florida to Canada to the tip . It is as I stated !

Roberto - 4-7-2006 at 06:22 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by beercan
Reread my post ! It is right on !!From Florida to Canada to the tip . It is as I stated !


Beercan, re-read the posts, and put your thinking cap on. It is clear that you do not understand what was posted.

Here is a quiz for you:

1. What is the difference between GPS and the cartography used by a chartplotter?
2. If GPS accuracy is less than 300 feet what happens to that submerged rock that can sink your boat?
3. Even if GPS accuracy is less than 1 foot, what happens to that point that is charted to be two miles from where it actually is, I am in the middle of the night and can't see further than six feet because of fog and I have no radar and seas are 20 feet?

Please note that the inaccuracy of the charts for much of the Sea of Cortez (not the GPS) is an aknowledged fact by all GPS manufacturers - as Pescador was told when he called them.

I have been there and done that with these facts, sir, and my experience does not in any way affect your knowledge in flying an aircraft.

[Edited on 4-8-2006 by Roberto]

PJC - 4-7-2006 at 09:53 PM

Do the Aircraft GPS units not use accurate lat and long for airstrips, landing fields and navaids rather than simply using map/chart data?

[Edited on 4-8-2006 by PJC]

Aircraft GPS--

beercan - 4-8-2006 at 05:57 AM

Yes, airports are referenced bylat& long---however the the topo items that I mentioned are RIGHT ON!

The newer panel mount Garmin in my plane is accurate to about 1 meter. It agrees with the older Lowrance portable .

Pescador - 4-8-2006 at 08:52 AM

Beercan, I am a pilot and I know that the charts are Aeronautical charts in the GPS Aviation and the Charts in the Blue charts are Marine. Now if I wanted to land at the airport in my Center Console I would be in great shape. :lol:

Bruce R Leech - 4-8-2006 at 09:08 AM

apples and oranges

Pompano - 4-8-2006 at 09:14 AM

Cypress and other fishermen.....rely only on 'your OWN waypoints on YOUR best gps' for your marine needs. I have all the old sea charts, maps, cards, etc. on every pile of rocks, points, and fishing holes from Sta. Rosalia to Punta Pulpito. No two are alike. My own stored waypoints have brought me home through the fog many a time...and sometimes even in the boat.

As far as getting into an airplane...that is an unnatural act.

PJC - 4-8-2006 at 11:43 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Pompano
My own stored waypoints have brought me home through the fog many a time...and sometimes even in the boat.


What kinda fog ya talkin' about there?

PJC..no fogs in Fugi? We have a variety of them here....

Pompano - 4-9-2006 at 08:05 AM

This is one...

appearing out of the fog...'Osprey Rock', next to the old mine at Pt. Conception.

We had motored about 25 miles offshore chasing dorado when a dense peasoup fog rolled in..cutting visibilty to almost zero. I set a course on my gps's waypoint for the Osprey Rock and found the familiar landmark coming out of...da-dum...da-dum....the FOG.

more fog...

Pompano - 4-9-2006 at 08:06 AM

near Jesus Maria and Laguna Manuela....rolling across the desert.

foggy a lot here...

Pompano - 4-9-2006 at 08:08 AM

Oregon Coast...beautiful, but chilly at times.

[Edited on 4-9-2006 by Pompano]

got a little foggy myself once.....

Pompano - 4-9-2006 at 08:09 AM

the end.

[Edited on 4-9-2006 by Pompano]