[pct-l] PCT Atlas

[enyapjr at comcast.net]

Some observations (I had too much spare time working graveyard shift last night!):

The PCT Atlas SoCal volume (Mexican border to Tehachapi Pass) is approx. 1/4" x 4 3/4" x 8", which is 9.5 cubic inches and ~4.1 ounces.

The WP SoCal Guidebook for the same stretch of trail is approx. 3/8" x 6" x 9", which is 20.25 cubic inches and ~9.2 ounces.  (The entire SoCal volume is ~7/8" thick and 21.4 ounces.)

BTW, WP over the years has taken the guidebooks from 'pocket size' to a larger 'library size'...
The 1973 Volume 1, California (yes, ALL of CA), is approx. 9/16" x 4 3/4" x 7 1/2", which is 20 cubic inches and 9.5 ounces.

> So no one else thinks that the pct atlas is to(o) expensive as is?
> I've been looking at the $150 price tag...

Depends on how you look at it...  it's less than 6 cents per PCT mile from a different perspective...
If one is on a very limited budget, then yes it's relatively 'expensive' (but, however, you would spend $90-$100 total for the 3 WP guidebooks, Data Book, and Yogi's Handbook; so it depends on what one WANTS and NEEDS for while on the trail)...

> I guess the days of...  ...pieced together top(o) maps are long gone.

Thank heavens!  And if it wasn't for mapping software such as National Geographic TOPO!, just think how much it would cost to buy all the separate quads for the PCT from the USGS!!  Anyone want to figure that out?

Speaking of NG TOPO!, if you use Halfmile's maps for CA sections A through E that's 64 pages of maps = 
32 pages if printed on both sides...  Using regular ink jet paper, that's ~1/8" x 8 1/2" x 11" = 11.5+ cubic inches and 5.1 ounces without the ink weight...  If one uses 'waterproof' paper for printing, it would be slightly thicker and heavier than regular ink jet paper...  Halfmile's maps are 'free', but don't forget the paper and ink costs - plus the time you spend printing all of them (and he has only completed CA so far)...

> ...(PCT Atlas) has different mileage points. The reason it has different mileage points is because the
> mileage was taken with a GPS, not a wheel or measuring tape. This contradicts the national parks and
> other pre measured trail sections.

The PCT Atlas mileages are not 'off' by much (comparing them to the January 2005 Data Book)...  Again, a matter of perspective - the PCT Atlas differs 0.8 mile at the Canadian border, which is only 0.03% (three hundredths of one percent)...  Most can 'live' with that small %age of 'error' from other, older data, IMHO...  If one does NOT compare it to said older "contradicting" information, the point is moot...  What happened to all those hikers that didn't buy the 'new' Data Book in 2005, but used the older 2001 edition?  I don't recall any widespread mass confusion being reported then...

The NPS and USFS mileages in many cases are VERY OLD and haven't been updated, many times simply because they cannot 'afford' to replace their mileage signs...  

> ...the trail changes every year, and no matter what you decide to use, you will find differences, and mistakes.

Enough said with that?  Even the WP Data Book has the disclaimer regarding "changes to the trail's routing, thereby changing or invalidating the information."  All of these books are 'guides' to ASSIST you, not lead you by the hand every step of the way along the trail (though the WP guidebooks excessive prose and info tends toward that direction)...

> ...the people who use map and data only, do not realize they are walking by many natural and historical
> facts, that the data book has to offer.

I believe he meant to say "guidebook"...  The Data Book, for instance, has no mention of Eagle Rock before
Warner Springs - a well visited spot by most thrus...

If one does some homework BEFORE the trek, one will know plenty of "natural and historical facts" without having to rely on (and carry) the WP guidebook(s) while on the trail...  For ME, the WP guidebooks have TOO MUCH info - leaving no sense of 'adventure' or mystery of what's over the next rise or around the bend for most portions of the trail...  See something 'interesting' to you that you don't know about? - look it up at the next available library at a town stop (you'll probably remember it far longer that way, too)...

Finally, one doesn't have to have completed a thru-hike in order to be comfortable with their preferences - I thought that is why "HYOH" gets thrown about so much...  Or perhaps I was totally wrong per some people in only taking the maps needed from the back of the OR/WA guidebook (without any of the 'descriptive prose') when I hiked the Oregon Skyline trail in the '70s (??)...  For ME, however, it was a fantastic adventure and worked out great!

The most important thing is to get out there and experience the PCT - not exactly how one goes about it (and we are all so very different)...  So pick what is comfortable for YOU, what YOU will be happy with using on your trek...

Time to go to work...
Happy trails!!!
Jim / PITA