Happened to check the local Wal-Mart after work today and found the 2011 Rand. Here are some of the changes:
Symbology changes:
- Old style exit numbers have been replaced with a green box with white lettering, just like AAA
- Incorporated and unincorporated places are now differentiated by different town circles. Incorporated places are still the black dot with unincorporated places now being a hollow circle
- Subtle difference in the shields in this edition. Three digit U.S. highway shields look wider now
- Symbology now shown for Historic U.S. 66, The Lincoln Highway, The Lewis & Clark Highway, and The Great Circle Route. The Great River Road symbol has also been improved
- Time zone boundary has been re-symbolized
- Scales for the maps have been changed
- POI's in city insets such as golf courses are now green instead of red
Some Road Changes (not all) (listed by state):
- AR: U.S. 67 is now shown as complete to AR 226 in Craighead County and U.C. up to AR 230, which is now shown with a shield on the map
- AR: The forever proposed extension of U.S. 270 is finally off the Hot Springs inset
- CA San Diego inset: CA 905 is now shown as complete along the eastern portion west of CA 125.
- CA San Diego inset: Also shown is the completion of CA 52 to CA 67 (though I am not sure if this will be done this year
- IN: U.S. 24 shown as freeway now, but not quite to I-469 near Fort Wayne
- PA: I-99 now shown as complete and also shown in the College State inset
Some other changes include what looks like an improved map base (though it is missing many newly completed alignments). Routes look more authentic to how it is aligned in the real world than they have for the past several years. My first comparison at Alabama showed a difference in the alignment of Alabama 24 from 2010 and 2011. The 2010 edition showed a portion of Alabama 24 as a straight line between Russellville and just west of Moulton where the 2011 edition now shows a more proper alignment (with bends in the alignment). Also, there is more road detail in adjoining states. I noticed that some of the city insets have been shuffled around, such as Flagstaff and Prescott. Their positions have been switched for the 2011 edition, probably for better geographical continuity.
Now onto some of the more notable errors and road completions/roads under construction NOT shown:
- MD: [ERROR] Rand has decided to resurrect I-170 in the Central Baltimore inset!!! (look towards the upper left edge)
- GA and SC: I-520 is still not shown as complete (in either state nor the Augusta inset)
- LA: No new U.C. for Future I-49 north of Shreveport
- IN: [ERROR] U.S. 27 has been once again extended north of Fort Wayne along I-69!!!
- MS: [ERROR] U.S. 98 still goes to Natchez according to Rand
- MO: I-64 is still not shown as being completed as a freeway to I-70
- NC: [ERROR (sort of)] I-295 is shown on the state map now. This is still a Future route and should not be shown
- PA: For all you I-279 fans, it is still intact and I-376 has not taken it over, nor PA 60, unlike the real world...
- WA: The proposed U.S. 395 freeway in Spokane is not shown at all...
My take on this years edition is that while there were some subtle improvements, overall, I am not impressed. The integrity of the atlas has gone by the wayside in my honest opinion. When you have many important road projects that have been completed (i.e. I-520, I-64 as a freeway) and no proper research and/or push to show these improvements is taken to show them on your product, it shows me that profit is the only thing in the masterminds at Rand, and nothing more. Having worked at a couple of mapping companies, it pains me to look at these atlases now days and be disappointed page after page at the lack on integrity on the cartographers part...
I give the mapping industry a few more years before there is only one or two left, and its very unfortunate I already know who those are more than likely going to be...
Anyway, if you see any other improvements, errors, blunders, etc., feel free to post them here!!
Man, I wish that Rand McNally would use the actual shields (or a rendition) used on the various state routes. Thomas Guide only did that with Arizona, Nevada and California. I'm not sure if they still do that, since they've been bought out.
IN: [ERROR] U.S. 27 has been once again extended north of Fort Wayne along I-69!!![/li][/list]
It's inexcusable. US 27 was decomissioned in Michigan and northern Indiana about a decade ago. It's funny Rand labels the old 66 route, but is not able to take the US 27 off of the I-69. The Rand McNally Atlas is still my bible, but I recommend the company hire people who know roads.
[/quote]
Wow, Rand McNally is getting worse each year. Looks like Google Maps is killing them...
Quote from: Hellfighter on April 27, 2010, 12:06:07 AM
Wow, Rand McNally is getting worse each year. Looks like Google Maps is killing them...
McNally is that bad?
It's kind of amazing that private map companies are getting so bad that even Wikipedia maps can show them up.
Quote from: Scott5114 on April 27, 2010, 12:31:10 AM
Quote from: Hellfighter on April 27, 2010, 12:06:07 AM
Wow, Rand McNally is getting worse each year. Looks like Google Maps is killing them...
McNally is that bad?
It's kind of amazing that private map companies are getting so bad that even Wikipedia maps can show them up.
Two factors, they trust the data too much and have people that are computer savy and not cartography-savy.
IOW, anymore map makers do not research enough to find out if the data is bad or incorrect or out of date...
Or aren't getting paid to field check.
"Like hell am I paying you to take a three-week vacation for a road trip! Now make that map or I fire you!"
Quote from: Bickendan on April 27, 2010, 01:31:00 AM
Or aren't getting paid to field check.
"Like hell am I paying you to take a three-week vacation for a road trip! Now make that map or I fire you!"
With the internet, they have no need to send people out in the field. Some of the smaller map companies (the few that are still hanging on) may still do this, but the larger ones certainly do not. They rely upon aerials, GIS, DOT maps, and phone calls.
I worked for a company that did do field research, and as laborious as it was driving around noting every point of interest, looking for new sprawl, dealing with tailgaters because you are driving slower while speaking into a tape recorder, it was a great job! I coupled that with clinching every signed route, noting which routes were unsigned, and getting to add the data in myself once the trip was said and done.
Unfortunately, the need to do that is pretty much gone with things like GSV, Bing Maps birds eye view, etc. How a researcher cannot see new alignments on aerial photos in time to be published in this day and age is beyond me. Interstate 520 not shown as complete, let alone as u/c, on the Augusta, GA inset? That's poor research... :thumbdown:
Quote from: flaroadgeek on April 26, 2010, 10:19:21 PM
Happened to check the local Wal-Mart after work today and found the 2011 Rand. Here are some of the changes:
Wow, the RMcNs are getting issued earlier and earlier every year (maybe RMcN really needs the money). At this rate, could we see the 2016 editions come out in time for Christmas 2014?
Quote from: oscar on April 27, 2010, 04:18:36 AM
Wow, the RMcNs are getting issued earlier and earlier every year (maybe RMcN really needs the money). At this rate, could we see the 2016 editions come out in time for Christmas 2014?
It's almost like car model years. Maybe if they get too far ahead, they'll issue a 2013 1/2 issue to correct the numbering?
What, does the cover looks like a cartoon now? No more amazing pics?
http://store.randmcnally.com/road-atlas/2011-rand-mcnally-large-scale-road-atlas.html (http://store.randmcnally.com/road-atlas/2011-rand-mcnally-large-scale-road-atlas.html)
Quote from: Hellfighter on April 27, 2010, 12:06:07 AM
Wow, Rand McNally is getting worse each year. Looks like Google Maps is killing them...
No, Google Maps is just showing them that it doesn't matter if the data is bad.
Quote from: AARoads on April 27, 2010, 02:03:20 AM
Unfortunately, the need to do that is pretty much gone with things like GSV, Bing Maps birds eye view, etc. How a researcher cannot see new alignments on aerial photos in time to be published in this day and age is beyond me. Interstate 520 not shown as complete, let alone as u/c, on the Augusta, GA inset? That's poor research... :thumbdown:
Or perhaps they have a couple or no researchers at all anymore!! It's almost like RMcN cut their research staff to maybe one or two at most. And we both know when you have limited research personnel what happens...
I bought a AAA atlas last year. I'm not sure if it's necessarily better than Rand, but it has better features. With AAA, I like the fact that actual city limits are shown on all city insets rather than just on the selected bigger cities and their suburbs. The one thing I like Rand over AAA is that Rand will update population figures on the back pages, while AAA sticks with the official 2000 census.
Quote from: flaroadgeek on April 26, 2010, 10:19:21 PM
Some Road Changes (not all) (listed by state):
- IN: U.S. 24 shown as freeway now, but not quite to I-469 near Fort Wayne
This is correct, as that part of the new roadway isn't scheduled to be completed to I-469 until 2012, and as of yet, I don't believe the funding is in place for the interchange rebuild, whether that makes any difference on how Rand will mark the roadway if the interchange isn't freeway-to-freeway. I'll be interested to see if the part in Ohio is marked right, since the portion from the state line to Defiance is expressway, not freeway.
Quote from: oscar on April 27, 2010, 04:18:36 AM
Wow, the RMcNs are getting issued earlier and earlier every year (maybe RMcN really needs the money). At this rate, could we see the 2016 editions come out in time for Christmas 2014?
I swore I had the 2010 in either February or March of last year, so April seems just a tad late compared to last year's edition.
Quote from: flaroadgeek on April 26, 2010, 10:19:21 PM
MD: [ERROR] Rand has decided to resurrect I-170 in the Central Baltimore inset!!! (look towards the upper left edge)
Okay, now that's hilarious. I-170 has been dead for, what, 30 years? :pan:
Who actually buys maps these days? When I need to go somewhere and I don't already have a detailed map of the area I simply print out a screengrab of Google Maps.
QuoteWho actually buys maps these days? When I need to go somewhere and I don't already have a detailed map of the area I simply print out a screengrab of Google Maps.
Yeah, I use DOT tourist maps which are generally free for navigation anyway. That said, I still like to keep a Rand McNally in my car in case A) I'm traveling through an area with no DOT map, B) I don't really know what route I'm taking until I get on the road and just shoot by whims (this generally happens at least once per roadtrip) and a Google Map would be impractical. Beyond that, I like the feeling of holding a Rand McNally in my hand more than a Google Map- a printout just feels so binding, like I can't change my mind at will when it's in my possession
Quote from: Truvelo on April 27, 2010, 01:59:26 PM
Who actually buys maps these days? When I need to go somewhere and I don't already have a detailed map of the area I simply print out a screengrab of Google Maps.
I buy a lot of them -- up to four per year (even though not that much changes), which is why I had so many extras to give away at the Baltimore meet two weekends ago. One for home (for route planning and other purposes), one for the car and one for the truck (for last-minute itinerary changes), and one for the office (geography matters in my line of work, and I use the map stand in my office to lure in coworkers much as others use candy dishes). Of course, the discounted WalMart versions of the RMcN make this semi-affordable, with the directory of WalMarts as a bonus for when I need to resupply on the road.
I was most curious about two things, and my I-376 question was already answered.
Has anyone told them that I-80 ends at I-95, not at the GWB? Every edition I can remember (I'm looking at '10 right now) has an I-80/I-95 shield between exits 70 and 72 on both the Newark and New York City "insets".
In CT, US 7 Expressway extends up towards New Milford now, not US 202 in Brookfield. This was completed back in November. It's not even a broken line, which would mean it's under construction.
So how about this then - if the Rand McNally is such a bad atlas, are there any good ones? I've always like the Rand McNally maps in the atlas. I find them much easier to read than the DOT maps, and having an actual book-form atlas is much more convenient on long road-trips than having to unfold a full size map or deal with internet printouts.
Of course, for around town, the local maps in the atlas are essentially worthless! And I find the ubiquitous Rand McNally folding local maps to be very cluttered and difficult to read.
Quote from: corco on April 27, 2010, 02:13:42 PM
QuoteWho actually buys maps these days? When I need to go somewhere and I don't already have a detailed map of the area I simply print out a screengrab of Google Maps.
Yeah, I use DOT tourist maps which are generally free for navigation anyway. That said, I still like to keep a Rand McNally in my car in case A) I'm traveling through an area with no DOT map, B) I don't really know what route I'm taking until I get on the road and just shoot by whims (this generally happens at least once per roadtrip) and a Google Map would be impractical. Beyond that, I like the feeling of holding a Rand McNally in my hand more than a Google Map- a printout just feels so binding, like I can't change my mind at will when it's in my possession
I concur with corco and add the following:
1) It is still easier to view a paper map when trying to get the "feel" for an area.
2) Even though I have Google Maps on my Droid, it is useless if I don't have Verizon 3G or WiFi internet access or if my battery is dead.)
Quote from: Kacie Jane on April 27, 2010, 04:26:20 PM
I was most curious about two things, and my I-376 question was already answered.
Has anyone told them that I-80 ends at I-95, not at the GWB? Every edition I can remember (I'm looking at '10 right now) has an I-80/I-95 shield between exits 70 and 72 on both the Newark and New York City "insets".
Technically, doesn't 80 run concurrently with 95 to the bridge?
I'm pretty sure it's signed that way in the field as well, but the only time I ever traveled in that area was at night with a lot of traffic and I wasn't about to try to take photos. I guess I could check my videos, though. to see what they show. Or Street View...
Quote from: Truvelo on April 27, 2010, 01:59:26 PM
Who actually buys maps these days? When I need to go somewhere and I don't already have a detailed map of the area I simply print out a screengrab of Google Maps.
I do. I'll usually grab at least two copies of each year's Rand McNally at Wally World, I'll keep one in the truck and take one inside for trip planning. Plus I am a bit of a map collector and they might have some value (either financial or historic) in 30 years or so.
I concur with those who have said it's easy to grab the atlas and plot a route while you're on the road and looking for a different route to get from where you are to your eventual destination. I've done this on a few occasions when I found I had more time to get to where I was going than I originally though. For instance, the atlas helped me plot a route using US 29 and US 501 to get over to I-81 and US 11 to head south to Roanoke when I was in Danville a few years ago, instead of the direct route over to US 220 and then head north.
I have a Palm with DeLorme Street Atlas, a Garmin GPS and an iPhone with Google Maps, but for a broader view of the territory, nothing beats an atlas or a map.
Quote from: Truvelo on April 27, 2010, 01:59:26 PM
Who actually buys maps these days? When I need to go somewhere and I don't already have a detailed map of the area I simply print out a screengrab of Google Maps.
I prefer to have a paper map, but I don't buy them. I usually try to get the official DOT map for the state and use that. They tend to be more accurate, IMHO, and they have the advantage of being free.
Quote from: Brandon on April 27, 2010, 11:05:48 PM
I prefer to have a paper map, but I don't buy them. I usually try to get the official DOT map for the state and use that. They tend to be more accurate, IMHO, and they have the advantage of being free.
I try to get those, too.
But, I can also say this about an Atlas. (in addition to what I said earlier)
1) I only have to look for and lay my hands on one thing to be covered for everything. (as I am a pack rat, that is a very good thing!) That said, I try and take the DOT maps if I have them and can find them.
2) A consistent legend. The legend/symbology of DOT maps ranges from excellent to one that a third grader might have done and it seems that no two states use the same legend.
Quote from: Truvelo on April 27, 2010, 01:59:26 PM
Who actually buys maps these days? When I need to go somewhere and I don't already have a detailed map of the area I simply print out a screengrab of Google Maps.
I'll be damned if I know where to find "local" map(s) in Louisiana. Therefore, I bought Rand McNallys of BR & NO. In comparison, I know where to find local maps for 86 of the 88 counties in Ohio (Hamilton/Cincy & Cuyahoga/Cleveland the exceptions) so I don't need Rand McNallys here. State maps from the various DOTs aren't a problem either.
Quote from: osu-lsu on April 28, 2010, 01:12:58 AM
Quote from: Truvelo on April 27, 2010, 01:59:26 PM
Who actually buys maps these days? When I need to go somewhere and I don't already have a detailed map of the area I simply print out a screengrab of Google Maps.
I'll be damned if I know where to find "local" map(s) in Louisiana. Therefore, I bought Rand McNallys of BR & NO. In comparison, I know where to find local maps for 86 of the 88 counties in Ohio (Hamilton/Cincy & Cuyahoga/Cleveland the exceptions) so I don't need Rand McNallys here. State maps from the various DOTs aren't a problem either.
The company I worked for used to own the 'New Orleans Map Company', and they had atlases for most of the parishes of southeastern Louisiana. In the months before it went under, all of the LA bases and remaining product were sold to a guy based out of Slidell. I have no idea of what he did with those or if his map company is still in business.
I know that County Engineers in Ohio are required to publish maps for their respective county. Is that what you are referencing for local maps in OH?
Quote from: AARoads on April 28, 2010, 01:26:40 AM
I know that County Engineers in Ohio are required to publish maps for their respective county. Is that what you are referencing for local maps in OH?
Yes.
I use Thomas Guides.... but then I'm in Southern California :| I find Rand McNally a good quick reference when I need to look up a road for a project though.
Quote from: flaroadgeek on April 26, 2010, 10:19:21 PM
- Symbology now shown for Historic U.S. 66, The Lincoln Highway, The Lewis & Clark Highway, and The Great Circle Route. The Great River Road symbol has also been improved
That's great news, for the organization I am involved with, that they've added a Lincoln Highway symbol.
Quote from: flaroadgeek on April 26, 2010, 10:19:21 PM- PA: I-99 now shown as complete and also shown in the College State inset
Apparently, it also became a French enclave since the 2009 edition :).
Quote from: flaroadgeek on April 26, 2010, 10:19:21 PM- PA: For all you I-279 fans, it is still intact and I-376 has not taken it over, nor PA 60, unlike the real world...
I'm not surprised they don't have the 376 designation extended, even with the PTC and District 1-0 still not acknowledging it existence. Perhaps if they kept to releasing these editions on their original timetable, it would have been included.
Quote from: PAHighways on April 28, 2010, 08:15:03 PM
Quote from: flaroadgeek on April 26, 2010, 10:19:21 PM- PA: I-99 now shown as complete and also shown in the College State inset
Apparently, it also became a French enclave since the 2009 edition :).
Huh? :confused: I assume you referring to a map error but I haven't seen the atlas yet, so what does that mean?
Quote from: osu-lsu on April 28, 2010, 01:12:58 AM
Quote from: Truvelo on April 27, 2010, 01:59:26 PM
Who actually buys maps these days? When I need to go somewhere and I don't already have a detailed map of the area I simply print out a screengrab of Google Maps.
I'll be damned if I know where to find "local" map(s) in Louisiana. Therefore, I bought Rand McNallys of BR & NO. In comparison, I know where to find local maps for 86 of the 88 counties in Ohio (Hamilton/Cincy & Cuyahoga/Cleveland the exceptions) so I don't need Rand McNallys here. State maps from the various DOTs aren't a problem either.
The only ones I know of for Louisiana are the ones Rand McNally has. I've seen them in bookstores here in Jackson for New Orleans and Baton Rouge. I've even seen Shreveport and Monroe a few times.
PA question: Are they still showing a non-existent PA Route 3 in Lycoming County? They've been doing that for quite a long time...
Quote from: mightyace on April 28, 2010, 09:53:46 PM
Quote from: PAHighways on April 28, 2010, 08:15:03 PM
Quote from: flaroadgeek on April 26, 2010, 10:19:21 PM- PA: I-99 now shown as complete and also shown in the College State inset
Apparently, it also became a French enclave since the 2009 edition :).
Huh? :confused: I assume you referring to a map error but I haven't seen the atlas yet, so what does that mean?
I take it that's a reference to the home of the Nittany Lions being called "College State" instead of "State College" but I don't get the joke.
Quote from: hbelkins on April 28, 2010, 10:43:49 PM
Quote from: mightyace on April 28, 2010, 09:53:46 PM
Quote from: PAHighways on April 28, 2010, 08:15:03 PM
Quote from: flaroadgeek on April 26, 2010, 10:19:21 PM- PA: I-99 now shown as complete and also shown in the College State inset
Apparently, it also became a French enclave since the 2009 edition :).
Huh? :confused: I assume you referring to a map error but I haven't seen the atlas yet, so what does that mean?
I take it that's a reference to the home of the Nittany Lions being called "College State" instead of "State College" but I don't get the joke.
There are a lot of college/university campuses that are a state of to themselves.
Quote from: PAHighways on April 28, 2010, 08:15:03 PMQuote from: flaroadgeek on April 26, 2010, 10:19:21 PM- PA: I-99 now shown as complete and also shown in the College State inset
Apparently, it also became a French enclave since the 2009 edition :).
You mean EXclave of France, or is it now surrounded by France? </pedant>
I'm with the others on not understanding this comment.
Quote from: hbelkins on April 27, 2010, 10:54:50 PM
Quote from: Kacie Jane on April 27, 2010, 04:26:20 PM
I was most curious about two things, and my I-376 question was already answered.
Has anyone told them that I-80 ends at I-95, not at the GWB? Every edition I can remember (I'm looking at '10 right now) has an I-80/I-95 shield between exits 70 and 72 on both the Newark and New York City "insets".
Technically, doesn't 80 run concurrently with 95 to the bridge?
I'm pretty sure it's signed that way in the field as well, but the only time I ever traveled in that area was at night with a lot of traffic and I wasn't about to try to take photos. I guess I could check my videos, though. to see what they show. Or Street View...
A photo I took in late 2009 seems to confirm this...
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg214.imageshack.us%2Fimg214%2F3887%2Fkdk0254.jpg&hash=12e8bc428d0c65b2c77711853b9a555f516ca66f)
I don't recall exactly where I took that, but it was somewhere north of where I-95 and I-80 meet.
I'm mad about the whole deal.
They took off elevations for cities!!
However, I am happy to see a more accurate depiction of urbanized areas as more land has that orange background. Half of Connecticut is listed as urban. Lol. Also, I see on the Memphis inset the I-69 label just south of the border.
Quote from: lamsalfl on April 29, 2010, 09:18:37 PM
I'm mad about the whole deal.
They took off elevations for cities!!
However, I am happy to see a more accurate depiction of urbanized areas as more land has that orange background. Half of Connecticut is listed as urban. Lol. Also, I see on the Memphis inset the I-69 label just south of the border.
And scraped off shields where they were inconvenient. Note that the state shields for AL-158 north of Mobile, OH-420 south of Toledo, and CA-7 east of Calexico were simply removed...
Quote from: lamsalfl on April 29, 2010, 09:18:37 PM
They took off elevations for cities!!
I did not even catch that the other night when I was looking over the atlas!! Those bastards!!
Quote from: AARoads on April 29, 2010, 09:23:13 PM
Quote from: lamsalfl on April 29, 2010, 09:18:37 PM
I'm mad about the whole deal.
They took off elevations for cities!!
However, I am happy to see a more accurate depiction of urbanized areas as more land has that orange background. Half of Connecticut is listed as urban. Lol. Also, I see on the Memphis inset the I-69 label just south of the border.
And scraped off shields where they were inconvenient. Note that the state shields for AL-158 north of Mobile, OH-420 south of Toledo, and CA-7 east of Calexico were simply removed...
Maybe they rehired "Mary had no brain" LOL
Quote from: deathtopumpkins on April 29, 2010, 11:28:16 AM
Quote from: hbelkins on April 27, 2010, 10:54:50 PM
Quote from: Kacie Jane on April 27, 2010, 04:26:20 PM
I was most curious about two things, and my I-376 question was already answered.
Has anyone told them that I-80 ends at I-95, not at the GWB? Every edition I can remember (I'm looking at '10 right now) has an I-80/I-95 shield between exits 70 and 72 on both the Newark and New York City "insets".
Technically, doesn't 80 run concurrently with 95 to the bridge?
I'm pretty sure it's signed that way in the field as well, but the only time I ever traveled in that area was at night with a lot of traffic and I wasn't about to try to take photos. I guess I could check my videos, though. to see what they show. Or Street View...
A photo I took in late 2009 seems to confirm this... (Original photo removed) I don't recall exactly where I took that, but it was somewhere north of where I-95 and I-80 meet.
I-80 ends at I-95 in Ridgefield Park, as noted by eastbound signing approaching I-95. No northbound (I-95) signing approaching the GWB contains I-80 shields.
DTP's photo was taken (I think) just into New Jersey off of the GWB, upper deck, I believe. Original DOT signage (prior to NJTA taking over this section) generally said I-95 to I-80.
You're right. Upper deck, just into NJ. I could have sworn that was taken on the trip northbound.
http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=128+River+Walk+Ct,+Hampton,+Virginia+23669&ll=40.854324,-73.966822&spn=0,0.006539&t=k&z=18&layer=c&cbll=40.854625,-73.967355&panoid=WtZ-OSPb0hl7_koIzSCHVA&cbp=12,296.26,,0,1.83
I checked my raw video. I remember seeing that sign when I merged onto I-95 south/I-80 west just after entering from Bridge Plaza North (off NJ 67). I ended up in the local lane.
Looks like after comparing maps that the thickness of the lines of the roads in 2011 have been shrunk by micrometers. I think this is how they were able to present a much cleaner look to the maps, and show more intricacies of road curves and turns. Two thumbs up.
I-64 is complete and signed to I-70. Went thru last week and only minor landscaping work is left on the last exit. Rand McNally for being the gold standard so to speak has let itself slip these days.
Quote from: lamsalfl on May 01, 2010, 02:35:02 PM
Looks like after comparing maps that the thickness of the lines of the roads in 2011 have been shrunk by micrometers. I think this is how they were able to present a much cleaner look to the maps, and show more intricacies of road curves and turns. Two thumbs up.
Well, as I and a few others have said, it does appear that Rand also changed their map base, which would account for the more detailed road layout on the pages. And you are correct in that the thickness have been shrunk, though I did not do as thorough a research as you did :)
Y'all are partially right and partially wrong. I-64 is not shown as complete on the state map, but I-64 shields, blue freeway lines, and exit numbers are perfect on the STL inset.
Checked the Walmart near Man O'War Blvd. and I-75 in Lexington, Ky. today. No 2011 Rand McNally atlases to be found, but still plenty of 2010's.
Same here in Salem, OR.
just noticed that the 2011 Rand shows a US 24 freeway from Defiance, OH to Woodburn, IN. And they can't show freeway u/c for I-49 in LA?
Walmart in Plattville WI had some 2010s left - but the main location of them was empty as were a majority of the impulse buying department (a.k.a. the shelving by the checkouts) indicating they're possibly pulling them off.
Uneven availability out here. The first two WalMarts I checked east of D.C. didn't have the 2011 edition, but I found some at the WalMart at Dunkirk MD.
Too bad the price is $6.97, a dollar higher than last year.
just noticed that the 2011 sees some deletions of freeway on US 71 in Missouri. This time the freeway and interchange at Lamar, Sheldon, Archie, and north of I-435 are gone. Are these accurate?
Quote from: lamsalfl on May 03, 2010, 09:04:13 PM
just noticed that the 2011 sees some deletions of freeway on US 71 in Missouri. This time the freeway and interchange at Lamar, Sheldon, Archie, and north of I-435 are gone. Are these accurate?
They were all interchanges when I was up there last summer. There are lots of interchanges north of I-435. In fact there are only two short sections of 'Texas Style' frontage road expressway, the rest is all freeway.
I noticed this error the other night. For some reason, they put a US 220 shield on the former alignment south of Port Matilda which was not there on the 2009 edition. Going back to what Alex said earlier about map makers not doing research, that segment of old 220 is still indicated by a red line instead of a gray one.
I finally picked up a copy while at a Target today (same price as has been reported at the Wal-Marts), and really the only addition I saw for Michigan was US-31's exit numbers. There is an error of sorts as it shows Muskegon Business 31's new alignment as a gray line rather than an orange one. They don't yet mark M-311, which was marked on MDOT's map beginning this year, but M-107 is still marked.
Rand McNally still refuses to acknowledge exit 98 off DE 1 in the Dover DE insert. It may be a partial interchange but still.
Exit 91 on DE 1 is also not there, as RM shows DE 1 as a regular 4 lane road, not a controlled access highway there.
Quote from: Pilgrimway on May 19, 2010, 08:53:41 PM
Rand McNally still refuses to acknowledge exit 98 off DE 1 in the Dover DE insert. It may be a partial interchange but still.
Exit 91 on DE 1 is also not there, as RM shows DE 1 as a regular 4 lane road, not a controlled access highway there.
And they still do not have the alignment change of DE 141's north end on the Wilmington/Newark inset...
QuoteExit 91 on DE 1 is also not there, as RM shows DE 1 as a regular 4 lane road, not a controlled access highway there.
Technically, only northbound DE 1 is controlled access through there. Southbound still has the intersection at the quarry entrance that used to have a signal.
Found some more substantial errors:
On the Georgia page, Interstate 285 now travels to downtown Atlanta.
On the Florida page, Florida G1A has been resurrected over Florida 300 to St. Georges Island.
On the New Jersey Page, where the N.J. Turnpike splits, it is now signed as Interstates 95E and 95W.
On the New York side of the NJ page, a blatant steal from the 2009 UCrap atlas, Harlem River and FDR Drives are under construction and not open to traffic!
Also on the New York side of the NJ page, I-278E travels the Grand Central Parkway east from I-278, and a number of parkways now include 900 series state shields.
Also on the Florida page, one of the toll bridges in Fort Myers now runs north-south instead of east-west! According to them, the Cape Coral bridge now connects with Florida 867 and Florida 865...
Quote from: AARoads on June 11, 2010, 02:15:12 PM
On the Florida page, Florida G1A has been resurrected over Florida 300 to St. Georges Island.
On the New Jersey Page, where the N.J. Turnpike splits, it is now signed as Interstates 95E and 95W.
Also on the New York side of the NJ page, I-278E travels the Grand Central Parkway east from I-278, and a number of parkways now include 900 series state shields.
please find me example shields of these in the wild :-D
I highly enjoy the unincorporated/incorporated dots for cities and the new insets for Parkersburg, WV and Paducah, KY (there are probably a couple more I forgot.) Yay for new insets! This makes it worth the $6.97.
Quote from: florida on June 11, 2010, 09:27:24 PM
I highly enjoy the unincorporated/incorporated dots for cities and the new insets for Parkersburg, WV and Paducah, KY (there are probably a couple more I forgot.) Yay for new insets! This makes it worth the $6.97.
I'm not sure if incorporated vs unincorporated is a distinction that is dear to many motorists. I'd like to see a distinction between "town with reasonable services, including gas station" vs "what appears to be the remnants of a 1910s motel are found if you carefully examine the ground under the rattlesnake".
Quote from: agentsteel53 on June 11, 2010, 10:05:20 PM
Quote from: florida on June 11, 2010, 09:27:24 PM
I highly enjoy the unincorporated/incorporated dots for cities and the new insets for Parkersburg, WV and Paducah, KY (there are probably a couple more I forgot.) Yay for new insets! This makes it worth the $6.97.
I'm not sure if incorporated vs unincorporated is a distinction that is dear to many motorists. I'd like to see a distinction between "town with reasonable services, including gas station" vs "what appears to be the remnants of a 1910s motel are found if you carefully examine the ground under the rattlesnake".
The bolder the town name the better services they provide? Right? ;)
Other insets:
-Coeur d'Alene, ID
-Cocoa, FL (now because of a merged Titusville-Melbourne inset).
-Iowa City, IA
Is Texarkana (AR page) new?
Also the handful of central/downtown insets and the other merged and extended ones are nice.
Quote from: florida on June 11, 2010, 11:15:53 PM
The bolder the town name the better services they provide? Right? ;)
except in the case of the smallest town gradation. Delta and Scipio, Utah, for example, are shown as the same font and size. Delta is a perfectly good community where I've spent many a night (okay, two) and gotten many a tank of gas (at least four). Scipio has been abandoned every time I've been there, which is as long ago as 1998.
that part of Utah is NOT where you want to be running low on gas, by the way!
Quoteexcept in the case of the smallest town gradation. Delta and Scipio, Utah, for example, are shown as the same font and size. Delta is a perfectly good community where I've spent many a night (okay, two) and gotten many a tank of gas (at least four). Scipio has been abandoned every time I've been there, which is as long ago as 1998.
Wait- there's no gas in Sciopo? This is good to know- I'm going to be there on Sunday on my way back to Idaho and was planning on refueling there
actually, Google Street View shows a Flying J gas station off I-15 to the northwest. New since Nov '08, which is the last time I was there.
Seems like there's been a handful of insets added since the '09 edition I'm looking at right now. Any major layout changes though? The expansion of Arkansas to a two page layout improved one of the states that desperately need that treatment. Louisiana, Mississippi and South Carolina are the others that need 2 pages.
take a look at the Downtown Chicago inset. You will find the Field Museum, Shedd Aquarium, Adler Planetarium, Soldier Field, and McCormick East building blocks conspicuously missing
I noticed that the cover of the standard 2011 Atlas is different from the Wally World version as well.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on June 11, 2010, 11:20:50 PM
Quote from: florida on June 11, 2010, 11:15:53 PM
The bolder the town name the better services they provide? Right? ;)
except in the case of the smallest town gradation. Delta and Scipio, Utah, for example, are shown as the same font and size. Delta is a perfectly good community where I've spent many a night (okay, two) and gotten many a tank of gas (at least four). Scipio has been abandoned every time I've been there, which is as long ago as 1998.
that part of Utah is NOT where you want to be running low on gas, by the way!
I would take my chances with Delta before Scipio. Delta is generic and home-y. Places like that should have services period.
Quote from: florida on June 27, 2010, 12:37:36 PM
Quote from: agentsteel53 on June 11, 2010, 11:20:50 PM
Quote from: florida on June 11, 2010, 11:15:53 PM
The bolder the town name the better services they provide? Right? ;)
except in the case of the smallest town gradation. Delta and Scipio, Utah, for example, are shown as the same font and size. Delta is a perfectly good community where I've spent many a night (okay, two) and gotten many a tank of gas (at least four). Scipio has been abandoned every time I've been there, which is as long ago as 1998.
that part of Utah is NOT where you want to be running low on gas, by the way!
I would take my chances with Delta before Scipio. Delta is generic and home-y. Places like that should have services period.
I spent the night in Delta in 2008. Full traveler services including some chain restaurants and lodgings, and I didn't get gouged at the gas pump. Fortunately, because there's almost nothing west to Ely NV (just the Border Inn, in case you really need to refuel as you enter Nevada, or can't wait to play the slots).
Quote from: oscar on June 27, 2010, 12:53:07 PM
I spent the night in Delta in 2008. Full traveler services including some chain restaurants and lodgings, and I didn't get gouged at the gas pump. Fortunately, because there's almost nothing west to Ely NV (just the Border Inn, in case you really need to refuel as you enter Nevada, or can't wait to play the slots).
alternately, it is your last place to buy fireworks before heading into Nevada.
I've done the Loneliest Road run several times, and I tend to get gas at Delta, Ely, and Fallon, with the knowledge that the state line and Austin are there as well, in case I need them. Tonopah-Ely is a nice fun long run without services as well, along US-6. I forget where the intermediate point is on that route that has services; at the Extraterrestrial Highway branch, maybe?
Quote from: agentsteel53 on June 27, 2010, 12:54:52 PM
I've done the Loneliest Road run several times, and I tend to get gas at Delta, Ely, and Fallon, with the knowledge that the state line and Austin are there as well, in case I need them. Tonopah-Ely is a nice fun long run without services as well, along US-6. I forget where the intermediate point is on that route that has services; at the Extraterrestrial Highway branch, maybe?
When I did the E.T. Highway in 1998, there was nothing but abandoned buildings in serious disrepair at the US 6 junction. Had to wait until Tonopah to refuel (at outrageously high prices, I might add).
Rachel, on the E.T. Highway, does have some traveler services, but it's quite a ways off US 6.
Quote from: oscar on June 27, 2010, 01:32:01 PM
Rachel, on the E.T. Highway, does have some traveler services, but it's quite a ways off US 6.
94 miles, I believe. It's not exactly efficient to detour down to Rachel and then back up 93 or whatnot to get to Ely.
Tonopah has some moderately expensive gas stations, but it's nothing like Bridgeport or - good grief! - Death Valley.
I finally ordered the new Rand McNally here in the Netherlands. (I didn't feel like paying $ 10 for shipping).
There is indeed some style changes, most notably the exit numbers. I'm not sure if I like it, I kind of feel that it draws too much attention. I also feel they could've add more larger metropolitan maps, for example Charlotte, New Orleans, Durham-Raleigh, etc.
The biggest improvement I noticed after a first quick scan seems to be West Virginia, which is now on a better scale.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi27.tinypic.com%2Fvetd1z.jpg&hash=41b4e752f60a98338a68e47b2ea519e92d99f143)
(left: 2011 atlas, right 2010 atlas)
Kennewick/Richland/Pasco, WA still doesn't have a box, even though Yakima does - that's the one thing that jumped out at me that hasn't already been mentioned. I just got my copy Saturday, I'll have to take another look and see if there's anything else.
I noticed that Lordsburg, NM now has a freeway loop! :-D
Quote from: Chris on July 21, 2010, 06:17:47 AM
The biggest improvement I noticed after a first quick scan seems to be West Virginia, which is now on a better scale.
Unfortunately, that is not in all editions. My 2011 Wally-World version has West Virginia on
one page.
Quote from: elsmere241 on August 09, 2010, 09:01:50 AM
Kennewick/Richland/Pasco, WA still doesn't have a box, even though Yakima does - that's the one thing that jumped out at me that hasn't already been mentioned. I just got my copy Saturday, I'll have to take another look and see if there's anything else.
It's only a matter of time. Look how long it took to get an inset for Parkersburg, WV.
Quote from: mightyace on August 09, 2010, 06:17:27 PM
Quote from: Chris on July 21, 2010, 06:17:47 AM
The biggest improvement I noticed after a first quick scan seems to be West Virginia, which is now on a better scale.
Unfortunately, that is not in all editions. My 2011 Wally-World version has West Virginia on one page.
Get a refund. Mine came from there and WV is shown with the updated scale.
I just picked one up recently and was finally pleased to see a Downtown inset for Indianapolis, something that the American Map Atlas has had for years. Personally, I wish they extended the Indy map to show more of the Metro area outside of the city, but as I feel as long as it has to share a two-page spread with Chicago that won't happen.
Quote from: florida on August 11, 2010, 04:06:58 AM
Quote from: mightyace on August 09, 2010, 06:17:27 PM
Unfortunately, that is not in all editions. My 2011 Wally-World version has West Virginia on one page.
Get a refund. Mine came from there and WV is shown with the updated scale.
Well, I've already accidentally rip a page out. Anyway, I don't go through West Virginia that often anyway.
Quote from: mightyace on August 11, 2010, 04:40:09 PM
Well, I've already accidentally rip a page out. Anyway, I don't go through West Virginia that often anyway.
already? I always know it's time for a new RMN when New Mexico starts falling out.
Dang! I still haven't gotten the 2011. The last one I got was the 2010. The '11 one looks interesting. I doubt they'd show the project of Loop 306 being under construction here...
BigMatt
Quote from: agentsteel53 on August 11, 2010, 05:00:35 PM
Quote from: mightyace on August 11, 2010, 04:40:09 PM
Well, I've already accidentally rip a page out. Anyway, I don't go through West Virginia that often anyway.
already? I always know it's time for a new RMN when New Mexico starts falling out.
And I know someone whose NM/NJ page is already torn (came out when I grabbed it to look at it last week... :-o)
Quote from: mightyace on August 11, 2010, 04:40:09 PM
Quote from: florida on August 11, 2010, 04:06:58 AM
Quote from: mightyace on August 09, 2010, 06:17:27 PM
Unfortunately, that is not in all editions. My 2011 Wally-World version has West Virginia on one page.
Get a refund. Mine came from there and WV is shown with the updated scale.
Well, I've already accidentally rip a page out. Anyway, I don't go through West Virginia that often anyway.
That's crap. It could have been sold on Fleabay as an err0r. ;)
My 2011 ordered directly from Rand McNally has WV on one page (the left side), and has the state oriented vertically (ie - no need to turn the atlas to read it properly).
Judging by the spiral-bounding in the shot of where we started this WV discussion, it is most likely 2 pages in the large-scale edition of the atlas.
Quote from: mightyace on August 09, 2010, 06:17:27 PM
Quote from: Chris on July 21, 2010, 06:17:47 AM
The biggest improvement I noticed after a first quick scan seems to be West Virginia, which is now on a better scale.
Unfortunately, that is not in all editions. My 2011 Wally-World version has West Virginia on one page.
It looks like Chris has the large print version.
I e-mailed Rand McNally's customer service about the errors that I found and gave them a link to this thread detailing the others found. So far no response, which is a little disheartening being one of their affiliates. The last time I e-mailed about the resurrected state routes in the Pittsburgh atlas, the response was swift.
Does Rand McNally show the newest gaps of AB-201 and AB-216 in the insets of Calgary and Edmonton in the Alberta section?
Quote from: elsmere241 on August 09, 2010, 09:01:50 AM
Kennewick/Richland/Pasco, WA still doesn't have a box, even though Yakima does - that's the one thing that jumped out at me that hasn't already been mentioned.
I am still waiting for Everett-Lynnwood. Oregon is still missing Bend and Medford.
Quote from: Stephane Dumas on August 12, 2010, 06:05:04 PM
Does Rand McNally show the newest gaps of AB-201 and AB-216 in the insets of Calgary and Edmonton in the Alberta section?
More importantly, can anything be made out for the Calgary and Edmonton insets? I remember editions of the atlas making the two cities look like puny cities just lucky enough to qualify for an inset (when they're both pretty big).
Quote from: PAHighways on August 12, 2010, 04:58:01 PM
I e-mailed Rand McNally's customer service about the errors that I found and gave them a link to this thread detailing the others found. So far no response, which is a little disheartening being one of their affiliates. The last time I e-mailed about the resurrected state routes in the Pittsburgh atlas, the response was swift.
They're probably going, "...not the roadgeek crowd again."
Quote from: agentsteel53 on June 27, 2010, 12:54:52 PM
I've done the Loneliest Road run several times
Or, as the 2011 Rand McNally refers to it twice on the Nevada page, "LONLIEST ROAD." The error wasn't there in the 2010 edition.
Does anyone know how Rand McNally actually designs their maps? Do they use a common software program, or is it something custom?
Quote from: Quillz on August 30, 2010, 10:47:51 PM
Does anyone know how Rand McNally actually designs their maps? Do they use a common software program, or is it something custom?
I'm assuming that they use satellite imagery to make the shaded-relief topography stand out in the map, and have their own map-making software.
Is there any commercially available map-making software that is similar? I've often wanted to try doing some custom maps myself.
I've had good results drawing them in Inkscape, traced from satellite imagery using the path tool.
Rand McNally probably uses some sort of GIS software like ArcGIS. If you're wanting to play around with free GIS software, go get QGIS. Doesn't have enough features to provide something RMcN-level, but we use it on Wikipedia to generate all the state highway locator maps.
Basically, GIS works somewhat like a vector program like Inkscape, but instead of the points being defined relative to a canvas, real world coordinates are used. GIS also allows rows in a database to be stored along with points, so that you can do SQL queries for things like "all highway segments numbered 56" or "all cities with a population greater than 2500". In more advanced programs like ArcGIS you can use such queries to define a legend automatically, but QGIS doesn't have that feature yet.
Quote from: Scott5114 on August 31, 2010, 03:26:56 PM
Rand McNally probably uses some sort of GIS software like ArcGIS. If you're wanting to play around with free GIS software, go get QGIS. Doesn't have enough features to provide something RMcN-level, but we use it on Wikipedia to generate all the state highway locator maps.
Basically, GIS works somewhat like a vector program like Inkscape, but instead of the points being defined relative to a canvas, real world coordinates are used. GIS also allows rows in a database to be stored along with points, so that you can do SQL queries for things like "all highway segments numbered 56" or "all cities with a population greater than 2500". In more advanced programs like ArcGIS you can use such queries to define a legend automatically, but QGIS doesn't have that feature yet.
Interesting.
Although I do custom maps, literally. Like, I do concepts that feature routes that either don't exist or don't run where I like to place them. Will the software still work if I'm not relying on any actual GIS data?
Rand McNally uses ArcGIS and probably an Illustrator-type app to finish it up.
Quote from: Quillz on August 31, 2010, 04:52:18 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on August 31, 2010, 03:26:56 PM
Rand McNally probably uses some sort of GIS software like ArcGIS. If you're wanting to play around with free GIS software, go get QGIS. Doesn't have enough features to provide something RMcN-level, but we use it on Wikipedia to generate all the state highway locator maps.
Basically, GIS works somewhat like a vector program like Inkscape, but instead of the points being defined relative to a canvas, real world coordinates are used. GIS also allows rows in a database to be stored along with points, so that you can do SQL queries for things like "all highway segments numbered 56" or "all cities with a population greater than 2500". In more advanced programs like ArcGIS you can use such queries to define a legend automatically, but QGIS doesn't have that feature yet.
Interesting.
Although I do custom maps, literally. Like, I do concepts that feature routes that either don't exist or don't run where I like to place them. Will the software still work if I'm not relying on any actual GIS data?
You certainly could digitize your own data by placing it on some arbitrary point on the Earth's surface. The digitizing mode in QGIS is pretty much just a thing where you click to create points, which are joined into lines or polygons if you're using a line or polygon layer. Of course the intention is for you to have a raster satellite image beneath it that you're tracing over, but there's nothing to stop you from freehanding your own data.
Last week while planning my trip to Rochester, I noticed that PA 17 in Erie County has been resurrected after 10 years. In fact, where the I-86 shield has been on the map since the 2001 edition, is where the 17 circle is located once again.
I thought they just use the previous year's templates and revise from there.
I suspect that might be a GIS error. The line segment is tagged as I-86 and SR 17; most instances the I-86 shield shows up. Change the scale slightly and the SR 17 shield shows instead.
Quote from: PAHighways on September 06, 2010, 03:36:06 PM
Last week while planning my trip to Rochester, I noticed that PA 17 in Erie County has been resurrected after 10 years. In fact, where the I-86 shield has been on the map since the 2001 edition, is where the 17 circle is located once again.
I thought they just use the previous year's templates and revise from there.
I missed that erroneous 17 in Erie County; thanks for pointing that out.
I see that they still have the erroneous PA 3 in Lycoming County.
Speaking of PA, has anyone noticed that Interstate 99 is now shown with a direct interchange at the PA Turnpike, of course which is not the case...
Now that you mention it. Yes, I did.
It's not like there's even a plan to make such a connection.
Now, the 2009 PA map shows I-99 as continuous freeway to I-80 when it falls just short.
I just got the 2011 Rand McNally road atlas, and it shows a portion of the future I-69 in Mississippi as complete.
Quote from: Quillz on September 09, 2010, 12:21:25 PM
I just got the 2011 Rand McNally road atlas, and it shows a portion of the future I-69 in Mississippi as complete.
It's not "future," that segment has had regular I-69 Interstate signage for a few years, and has shown up in RMcNs since at least 2009 (the earliest edition I have at hand).
Quote from: oscar on September 09, 2010, 01:13:17 PM
Quote from: Quillz on September 09, 2010, 12:21:25 PM
I just got the 2011 Rand McNally road atlas, and it shows a portion of the future I-69 in Mississippi as complete.
It's not "future," that segment has had regular I-69 Interstate signage for a few years, and has shown up in RMcNs since at least 2009 (the earliest edition I have at hand).
I meant "future" in that it's intended to be a border-to-border highway.
Quote from: flaroads on September 08, 2010, 10:33:24 PMSpeaking of PA, has anyone noticed that Interstate 99 is now shown with a direct interchange at the PA Turnpike, of course which is not the case...
Looks like someone playing with the mouse, as the interchange box disappeared from the Business US 220 connector.
Quote from: mightyace on September 09, 2010, 09:48:41 AMNow, the 2009 PA map shows I-99 as continuous freeway to I-80 when it falls just short.
Turnpike 66 has been identified as a free, limited-access route between Business 66 and US 22 since the turn of the century on both RMcN and PennDOT maps, even though there is an at-grade intersection between those two points. Prior to 2000, both correctly marked that section as a divided highway.
Of course, if they didn't, there would be no indication that US-22 / PA-66 junction with an interchange instead of a surface intersection. (Though I suppose someone who didn't know the area would assume that 66 was the "free-flowing" section.
Also, a very minor error the last couple of years in both RM & PennDOT maps (can't vouch for 2011), possibly only cared about by me, is that PA 31 just East of PA-982 should be shown as 4-lane divided for the ~2 miles where it traverses 3 Mile Hill, and is the border between Westmoreland & Fayette counties.
Quote from: Mr_Northside on September 10, 2010, 11:59:42 AMOf course, if they didn't, there would be no indication that US-22 / PA-66 junction with an interchange instead of a surface intersection. (Though I suppose someone who didn't know the area would assume that 66 was the "free-flowing" section.
They could just ignore the SPDI much as they did the old 22/66 cloverleaf last century. PennDOT ignores the 22/66 interchange being part of Turnpike 66 anyway since there are no exit tabs on the guide signs.
I just found out this week about Route 66 being shown in Rand McNally's 2011 Road Atlas. I think it's great! Another old road I wish Rand McNally would show is US-99. :coffee:
UPDATE: Someone who went out and bought the 2011 Rand McNally says the Route 66 designation is shown as a gray box with a US-66 shield in it. :coffee:
*thread revival*
Was highlighting my next road trip (Hampton Roads to Amherst, MA - leaving on Tuesday) in my copy of the 2011 Rand McNally, and I happened to notice crammed in along the far left edge of the Central Baltimore inset is an I-170 shield. Now I'm all for Rand McNally showing old highways, but I think this might lead to quite a bit of confusion for the average motorist.
Quote from: deathtopumpkins on April 03, 2011, 03:46:24 PM
*thread revival*
Was highlighting my next road trip (Hampton Roads to Amherst, MA - leaving on Tuesday) in my copy of the 2011 Rand McNally, and I happened to notice crammed in along the far left edge of the Central Baltimore inset is an I-170 shield. Now I'm all for Rand McNally showing old highways, but I think this might lead to quite a bit of confusion for the average motorist.
Yeah I think I mentioned about that particular shield. Well, motorists will still be confused this year as its in the 2012 Rand... *shakes head*
Quote from: Tom on September 17, 2010, 07:22:56 PM
UPDATE: Someone who went out and bought the 2011 Rand McNally says the Route 66 designation is shown as a gray box with a US-66 shield in it. :coffee:
I wonder if someone could take a scan of the Route 66 designation? The Rand McNally maps seems to be less popular in my neck of woods since MapArt rised in popularity here.
Quote from: Tom on September 17, 2010, 07:22:56 PM
I just found out this week about Route 66 being shown in Rand McNally's 2011 Road Atlas. I think it's great! Another old road I wish Rand McNally would show is US-99. :coffee:
UPDATE: Someone who went out and bought the 2011 Rand McNally says the Route 66 designation is shown as a gray box with a US-66 shield in it. :coffee:
I know US-30, US-66 and US-99 are all being "revived" via historic signage (in the case of US-30, Oregon is signing the original roadway, since the route has now been realigned onto I-84.) Thus, perhaps future versions of McNally will recognize the other two in addition to US-66.
Quote from: Quillz on April 11, 2011, 06:07:19 AM
Quote from: Tom on September 17, 2010, 07:22:56 PM
I just found out this week about Route 66 being shown in Rand McNally's 2011 Road Atlas. I think it's great! Another old road I wish Rand McNally would show is US-99. :coffee:
UPDATE: Someone who went out and bought the 2011 Rand McNally says the Route 66 designation is shown as a gray box with a US-66 shield in it. :coffee:
I know US-30, US-66 and US-99 are all being "revived" via historic signage (in the case of US-30, Oregon is signing the original roadway, since the route has now been realigned onto I-84.) Thus, perhaps future versions of McNally will recognize the other two in addition to US-66.
Add US 80 to that list. Possibly 395 as well, but I've already seen an 80 on El Cajon in San Diego.