I've been doing searches on Amazon for old road atlases. One name consistently pops up: Gousha. I have the Gousha New England Road Atlas, which promises a "pilgrims progress" of the New England States. The other, of course, is Rand McNally. Both were HQ'ed in Chicago. I wonder why one survived and the other foundered? Gousha had this different color scheme for roads. Interstate symbols were black with white numbers. The highways were a pale red color. Turnpikes, of course, green; not that electric green RM uses, but a dark green.
I like Gousha. RM comes in a close second with me. AAA a distant third.
I always liked Rand McNally.
Quote from: CapeCodder on October 17, 2018, 10:12:15 PM
I've been doing searches on Amazon for old road atlases. One name consistently pops up: Gousha. I have the Gousha New England Road Atlas, which promises a "pilgrims progress" of the New England States. The other, of course, is Rand McNally. Both were HQ'ed in Chicago. I wonder why one survived and the other foundered? Gousha had this different color scheme for roads. Interstate symbols were black with white numbers. The highways were a pale red color. Turnpikes, of course, green; not that electric green RM uses, but a dark green.
I like Gousha. RM comes in a close second with me. AAA a distant third.
Gousha actually moved west to California in 1947, and was purchased by RMcN in 1996. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gousha
Anyone remember the "American Map" series from the past 2 decades (also used by National Geographic at one point)? I've liked their style of cartography much better than Rand McNally.
Here's an example (https://www.mappingspecialists.com/files/store/regional-maps/lfa_statemap.png) of their cartography.
Gousha's style was what I preferred. I have their last atlas, the one from 1996.
Rick
My favorites are MapWorks and Jimapco. I also liked MapArt; alas, they're pretty much defunct.
Quote from: vdeane on October 18, 2018, 12:40:57 PM
My favorites are MapWorks and Jimapco.
My Jimapco Finger Lakes Street Atlas is riddled with inaccuracies, many of which I've attempted to fix with white-out and fine point markers. The Thruway's Exit 46 was probably the biggest "construction" project in this regard. This atlas is also close to ten years old - between fixing technical errors and drawing in new neighborhoods I've made a personal contribution to over half of the pages! :-D
Quote from: froggie on October 18, 2018, 12:14:52 PM
Anyone remember the "American Map" series from the past 2 decades (also used by National Geographic at one point)? I've liked their style of cartography much better than Rand McNally.
Here's an example (https://www.mappingspecialists.com/files/store/regional-maps/lfa_statemap.png) of their cartography.
Yes!! I have never understood the love for Rand McNally. My past two atlases have been National Geographic, and the coloration and overall design is a hundred times better; not even comparable IMO. Every time I see a Rand McNally I'm shocked at how faded and antiquated it looks.
Quote from: froggie on October 18, 2018, 12:14:52 PM
Anyone remember the "American Map" series from the past 2 decades (also used by National Geographic at one point)? I've liked their style of cartography much better than Rand McNally.
If I recall correctly, "American Map" was one of several American imprints of ADC, which in turn was a division of Langenscheidt, a German publishing company. I see that Langenscheidt closed its U.S. division (https://www.publishersweekly.com/pw/by-topic/industry-news/financial-reporting/article/45138-langenscheidt-closing-its-u-s-division.html) back in 2010. I had a few ADC maps and liked them well enough.
Having worked at a few AAA clubs over the years and having highlighted countless maps (typically upside-down), I'm partial to AAA's older maps. Around the early 2000s, though, new editions of maps started appearing with a callout on the front proclaiming "New digital cartography!" . But in my opinion, these new maps were a major downgrade in terms of look and feel. But even as many state series maps were transitioned over to the new look, the regional and U.S. map continued to be updated in the older style.
A Rand McNally atlas was my first, so for what it's worth, I've always looked at their maps as being kind of a standard–not necessarily the best, but a solid example of decent cartography.
Honestly, one of may favorite map styles is what's used for PennDOT's Official Transportation Map (http://www.dot7.state.pa.us/BPR_PDF_FILES/MAPS/Statewide/otm/otmplot_web.pdf). I think it provides an excellent level of detail for a state map, and I like the colors, the iconography, etc. I don't know if this is an entirely homegrown map or using a third-party company's cartography.
Quote from: webny99 on October 18, 2018, 12:54:47 PM
Quote from: vdeane on October 18, 2018, 12:40:57 PM
My favorites are MapWorks and Jimapco.
My Jimapco Finger Lakes Street Atlas is riddled with inaccuracies, many of which I've attempted to fix with white-out and fine point markers. The Thruway's Exit 46 was probably the biggest "construction" project in this regard. This atlas is also close to ten years old - between fixing technical errors and drawing in new neighborhoods I've made a personal contribution to over half of the pages! :-D
I should probably clarify that I'm referring to their state level atlases (so the NY and New England ones) and fold-out maps; I don't understand why their regional atlases use a bluish gray monochrome. The fold-out maps used to be in monochrome as well, so there's hope, at least.
I preferred the "American Maps" also. They provided a great deal of information with great clarity.
They used to be General Drafting of Convent Station NJ and provided all of the foldout maps available at ESSO and ENCO stations then.
For road maps & North American atlases; my personal favorite was the pre-1980 Rand McNally graphics.
For street atlases; my favorites were ADC (from about a decade ago) and Arrow (for New England locations).
Always loved Gousha
Quote from: PHLBOS on October 18, 2018, 03:35:40 PM
For road maps & North American atlases; my personal favorite was the pre-1980 Rand McNally graphics.
For street atlases; my favorites were ADC (from about a decade ago) and Arrow (for New England locations).
I loved Arrow. St. Louis has Wunnenbergs. I get one every Christmas.
I have always preferred Gousha to Rand McNally - especially the RMcN post-1980 (which feels loose and sloppy). In modern atlases I much prefer American Map, which has the feel of what RMcN could have been had their standards been higher.
I thought the pre-1980 RMcN maps were certainly better than post-1980, but the all-caps font (Copperplate, I think?) they used for titling and larger cities always felt a little harsh, and the cartography was still a bit loosey-goosey.
More locally, I always thought the CSAA (Northern California/Nevada Auto Club) cartography and design was quite a bit superior to the ACSC (Southern California) version.
Quote from: vdeane on October 18, 2018, 01:35:49 PM
Quote from: webny99 on October 18, 2018, 12:54:47 PM
Quote from: vdeane on October 18, 2018, 12:40:57 PM
My favorites are MapWorks and Jimapco.
My Jimapco Finger Lakes Street Atlas is riddled with inaccuracies, many of which I've attempted to fix with white-out and fine point markers. The Thruway's Exit 46 was probably the biggest "construction" project in this regard. This atlas is also close to ten years old - between fixing technical errors and drawing in new neighborhoods I've made a personal contribution to over half of the pages! :-D
I should probably clarify that I'm referring to their state level atlases (so the NY and New England ones) and fold-out maps; I don't understand why their regional atlases use a bluish gray monochrome. The fold-out maps used to be in monochrome as well, so there's hope, at least.
Yeah, that makes more sense; I'm not a huge fan of the color scheme either. I do like the street-level detail in rural areas, which has come in handy on leaf-peeping trips, among other times. I just wish they did better with freeway interchanges, but overall they aren't bad atlases.
When it comes to atlases, I like the Rand McNallys that divide the US into regions as a complement to some of my others that have pages for the states in alphabetical order.
Always used Rand NcNally. I still see the Jimapco maps near the checkout area of a local supermarket. One thing I like about them is the use of authentic state route shields.
Always partial to Rand McNally (just picked up a new 2018 for short money on eBay), but I carried a Michelen atlas in my car for a few years that was pretty decent.
I am not a big fan of most Michelen Atlases or the 20 miles to the inch ones covering Most of the US. I wish they had used the scale of their New
England and Mid-Atlantic maps for the whole country. Having said that I think their latest editions are not quite as good but still decent.
DeLorme's was my favorite. The showed every single county road and broke down each part of the state very well.
Quote from: cjk374 on October 19, 2018, 11:01:55 PM
DeLorme's was my favorite. The showed every single county road and broke down each part of the state very well.
DeLorme is the absolute best for non-Interstate highway details. For many Western states, Benchmark had some great state-level atlases as well. Rand McNally is adequate for the non-Road Geek crowd.
Quote from: briantroutman on October 18, 2018, 01:27:44 PM
Honestly, one of may favorite map styles is what's used for PennDOT's Official Transportation Map (http://www.dot7.state.pa.us/BPR_PDF_FILES/MAPS/Statewide/otm/otmplot_web.pdf). I think it provides an excellent level of detail for a state map, and I like the colors, the iconography, etc. I don't know if this is an entirely homegrown map or using a third-party company's cartography.
Same here. That's probably my favorite map too.
I really liked the Gousha format, but one Rand McNally fan (in my real life back before internet days in the 80s and 90s) always claimed that Rand McNally was generally a lot more accurate.
Always liked the old Gousha methods of delineating road surfaces, city/town populations, county seats, and interim mileage. But I always found McNally to be more prompt with regards to showing new facilities and alignments. Back in the '60's, when I acquired one of each per year, I used Gousha for detail and navigation and McNally for developmental information (they depicted future Interstate routes early on, whereas Gousha only showed the ones deployed in the field).
How did the two companies compare when it came to listing historical sites, state and national parks, and other sites of interest? That's one of the main things I look for on maps in addition to roads. Most of my collection is state level maps but I know that Rand McNally had separate maps for national parks in an atlas I have from the 1960s.
No mention of MapArt? Their local roads atlas of main metros areas like Vancouver, Toronto and Montreal was cool.
Quote from: sparker on October 21, 2018, 01:21:54 AM
Always liked the old Gousha methods of delineating road surfaces, city/town populations, county seats, and interim mileage. But I always found McNally to be more prompt with regards to showing new facilities and alignments.
That is basically what the friend believed about the two. Part of why I resisted was because about 1985 in their annual rating of cities, McNally declared Pittsburgh to be "America's most livable city". That made me feel like puking all over the floor and it was many years before I trusted McNally again about anything, or wanted buy their atlas.
Quote from: Beltway on October 21, 2018, 04:54:45 PM
Quote from: sparker on October 21, 2018, 01:21:54 AM
Always liked the old Gousha methods of delineating road surfaces, city/town populations, county seats, and interim mileage. But I always found McNally to be more prompt with regards to showing new facilities and alignments.
That is basically what the friend believed about the two. Part of why I resisted was because about 1985 in their annual rating of cities, McNally declared Pittsburgh to be "America's most livable city". That made me feel like puking all over the floor and it was many years before I trusted McNally again about anything, or wanted buy their atlas.
That does sound like a declaration a couple of years too early for Pittsburgh's rennaisance, but it's a great city now.
Quote from: Rothman on October 22, 2018, 06:12:22 AM
Quote from: Beltway on October 21, 2018, 04:54:45 PM
That is basically what the friend believed about the two. Part of why I resisted was because about 1985 in their annual rating of cities, McNally declared Pittsburgh to be "America's most livable city". That made me feel like puking all over the floor and it was many years before I trusted McNally again about anything, or wanted buy their atlas.
That does sound like a declaration a couple of years too early for Pittsburgh's rennaisance, but it's a great city now.
It's a fairly decent city but IMHO has never been #1 or anywhere near that. Directly on the subject of roads and highways, while there are some interesting features, overall the road system is difficult and substandard, thru then and true today. Transit is good but about average compared to the many other U.S. cities that have at least several passenger rail transit lines.
The city has seen massive declines in population since 1950. C'mon.
1950 676,806
1960 604,332 −10.7%
1970 520,117 −13.9%
1980 423,938 −18.5%
1990 369,879 −12.8%
2000 334,563 −9.5%
2010 305,704 −8.6%
2017 302,407 −1.1%
Quote from: Beltway on October 22, 2018, 06:16:27 AM
Quote from: Rothman on October 22, 2018, 06:12:22 AM
Quote from: Beltway on October 21, 2018, 04:54:45 PM
That is basically what the friend believed about the two. Part of why I resisted was because about 1985 in their annual rating of cities, McNally declared Pittsburgh to be "America's most livable city". That made me feel like puking all over the floor and it was many years before I trusted McNally again about anything, or wanted buy their atlas.
That does sound like a declaration a couple of years too early for Pittsburgh's rennaisance, but it's a great city now.
It's a fairly decent city but IMHO has never been #1 or anywhere near that. Directly on the subject of roads and highways, while there are some interesting features, overall the road system is difficult and substandard, thru then and true today. Transit is good but about average compared to the many other U.S. cities that have at least several passenger rail transit lines.
The city has seen massive declines in population since 1950. C'mon.
Keep in mind, population declines tend to lower prices for housing, among other things. Hence making a city more "livable", i.e. easier to survive with less money. No, Pittsburgh may not be as desirable as San Fran or LA, but it is certainly more livable if you have the average US income.
Quote from: webny99 on October 22, 2018, 09:37:42 AM
Quote from: Beltway on October 22, 2018, 06:16:27 AM
The city has seen massive declines in population since 1950.
Keep in mind, population declines tend to lower prices for housing, among other things. Hence making a city more "livable", i.e. easier to survive with less money. No, Pittsburgh may not be as desirable as San Fran or LA, but it is certainly more livable if you have the average US income.
"Livable" is a rather fuzzy concept. Just because a place has lower cost of living (and there are plenty of places that do), doesn't mean that someone wants to "live" there.
As a long time-collector of road maps, and having over around 4000 in my collection (one dating to 1906), I've seen a lot of maps. I've consistently found Gousha to be the best maps. Unlike Rand McNally, they never really completely overhauled their cartography. They just made tweaks to fonts, symbols and colors over the years. Rand McNally a few times completely re-did their cartography (most notably around 1966-1968). General Drafting maps looked exactly the same over the years, but I have found they are not as easy to read as Gousha maps. Rand McNally has had some good cartography and some crummy cartography. In my opinion at least, their best years were the late 1950's and early 1960's. When they re-did everything in the mid-late 1960's, the maps lost a lot of detail, but the cartography was still decent. Rand McNally did another overhaul in the late 1990's, and since, their maps look very sloppy and lazy.
In the Pacific Northwest, a few local companies that were good back in the day were Metsker's, Pittmon, and Kroll. Pittmon and Kroll are still around, but Metsker's (at least the map-making part of the company) folded in the late 1990's. All three companies' maps were/ are very detailed, but Metsker's were somewhat hard to read. Also, the problem with Metsker's is that they weren't always updated when they needed to be, so it would be common to see a highway on a Metsker map that no longer existed. Plus, Metsker's were very rarely dated, so from a collecting standpoint, Metsker's are very hard to date.
Another local one that has great cartography was Northwest Mapping Service, based in Seattle. I have not seen a map made by them after the mid-1970's. Their maps were very clean and easy to read, and they had contracts with the State of Washington, Auto Club of Washington, and various small tourist agencies/ chambers of commerce.
Finally for auto clubs, AAA maps are OK. The cartography currently used was mostly phased-in in the late 1990's- early 2000's. The previous style I think was much better, and was introduced circa-1970. I would argue that the maps made by both California State Automobile Association and Auto Club of Southern California in the past were some of the best maps one could get their hands on. It seems to me that the detail of those maps is unmatched by any other cartographer.
Say what you want about Rand McNally, but to me, their atlases always provided the most bang for the buck. I've been a fan of theirs since childhood, and whenever I get a new atlas, I always make sure to track the changes that have occurred since the last time I bought one.
Found another "mom and pop" map company: Geographia. Apparently they're out of NYC/NJ.
My vote goes to Thomas Brothers.