Looks like 2013 Rand McNally Road Atlas is coming up soon as about month away. Couple neat new features are: coupons and more cities maps. According to Barnes Nobles website, "Updated U.S. atlas contains maps of every U.S. state and Canadian province, an overview of Mexico, and detailed inset maps of over 350 cities and 20 U.S. national parks. City inset maps were added or expanded in the following state sections: MD, NC, ND, SC and VA. Use the book's scannable tags to point your smartphone to updated road trip content and tools that enhance your travel planning. To download the Microsoft Tag reader, use the web browser on your phone to navigate to randmcnally.com/TAG and click the link provided. Includes coupons for discounts at hotels, restaurants and family attractions so you can save money on your next road trip. Tags keep the offers fresh - scan them with your smartphone to check back for additional deals." http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/2013-gift-road-atlas-rand-mcnally/1108046266?ean=9780528006258&itm=2&usri=2013+rand+mcnally (http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/2013-gift-road-atlas-rand-mcnally/1108046266?ean=9780528006258&itm=2&usri=2013+rand+mcnally)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fstores.thomasmaps.com%2Fcatalog%2FRA_13%2520%282%29.jpg&hash=bd3409f0b2968b4ddf13c448c386171a8b4f08eb)
My guess on the SC city inset expansions is that they added Anderson, Sumter and either Florence or Greenwood.
Another year, another shitty atlas.
Cool cover photo, though.
Quote from: SimMoonXP on March 20, 2012, 01:07:24 AMMicrosoft Tag
good old Microsoft, ignoring a perfectly established standard (QR codes) and instead building something incompatible with it.
Quote from: xonhulu on March 20, 2012, 03:55:36 AM
Cool cover photo, though.
Where was that picture taken? It looks like it is the upper Great Plains. It could be Nebraska or the Dakotas.
Quote from: NE2 on March 20, 2012, 01:25:32 AM
Another year, another shitty atlas.
Another year, another atlas I will buy. I buy a new RMN every year, and I have since 1988 I believe. It's a yearly tradition for me. I would eventually like to have a mint condition collection from 1926-present. I also need to buy the other brand of atlas, the cartography that was used in the National Geographic atlases back in the day.
Quote from: bugo on March 20, 2012, 06:13:53 PM
Where was that picture taken? It looks like it is the upper Great Plains. It could be Nebraska or the Dakotas.
It reminded me of roads through the Palouse country in eastern Washington, but it could easily be from Nebraska or the Dakotas.
Quote from: bugo on March 20, 2012, 06:15:30 PM
Quote from: NE2 on March 20, 2012, 01:25:32 AM
Another year, another shitty atlas.
Another year, another atlas I will buy. I buy a new RMN every year, and I have since 1988 I believe. It's a yearly tradition for me. I would eventually like to have a mint condition collection from 1926-present. I also need to buy the other brand of atlas, the cartography that was used in the National Geographic atlases back in the day.
Also had bought or received a RMcN every year from 1985 onward. When the 2009 came out in April, I decided not to buy it and that ended my buying streak of Rand's. I have a 2011 that I use for my lines (roads traveled), but have bought none others since they upped the release time.
The other cartography (such as was used on the 90s Nat. Geo's) was the Geonova base. It was bought out by another company and from what I heard in the map industry, will not be updated going forward. :-/
Quote from: xonhulu on March 20, 2012, 09:01:50 PM
It reminded me of roads through the Palouse country in eastern Washington, but it could easily be from Nebraska or the Dakotas.
the image looks mildly manipulated, in the sense that the front phone pole looks way too tall. so for all we know that hill, barn, and road come from different locations.
really, that hill could be anywhere. I just drove a road that looked a lot like it: old US-466 just west of Caliente, CA.
Quote from: bugo on March 20, 2012, 06:15:30 PM
Quote from: NE2 on March 20, 2012, 01:25:32 AM
Another year, another shitty atlas.
Another year, another atlas I will buy. I buy a new RMN every year, and I have since 1988 I believe. It's a yearly tradition for me. I would eventually like to have a mint condition collection from 1926-present. I also need to buy the other brand of atlas, the cartography that was used in the National Geographic atlases back in the day.
I'll be buying this one as well.
I think back in '81 or '82, my grandfather on my mom's side gave me my first full-size RMcN. Little did he know back then that he unleashed a roadgeek upon the world! Right now, I think I have at least one copy of the '87 or '88 up until now. These days I usually buy two, since the Wal-Mart version is usually half the price of the standard version.
Quote from: brownpelican on March 20, 2012, 01:23:41 AM
My guess on the SC city inset expansions is that they added Anderson, Sumter and either Florence or Greenwood.
If I were a betting man, I'd say Florence, Anderson, and Rock Hill.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on March 20, 2012, 09:47:34 AM
Quote from: SimMoonXP on March 20, 2012, 01:07:24 AMMicrosoft Tag
good old Microsoft, ignoring a perfectly established standard (QR codes) and instead building something incompatible with it.
Even Gannett wised up and switched to actual QR codes in
USA Today.
I remember back in the day when we didn't have these QR or Microsoft box codes things in our atlases. I come for the maps.
Quote from: tdindy88 on March 21, 2012, 11:05:23 AM
I remember back in the day when we didn't have these QR or Microsoft box codes things in our atlases. I come for the maps.
Touché. And the atlases are no better with them than they were without them.
A scan from my 1991 RMcN for fun, two bases back (three if you count the GIS redo of everything in 2011 that brought back I-170 and added I-278E, I-95E/I-95W, etc.).
(//www.aaroads.com/forum_images/1991_tampa_bay_inset.jpg) (//www.aaroads.com/forum_images/1991_tampa_bay_inset.jpg)
Quote from: Alex on March 21, 2012, 01:50:41 PM
Touché. And the atlases are no better with them than they were without them.
I dunno, those yellow interstate shields in that RMcN version were pretty horrible. I do enjoy seeing the old exit numbers, though.
Quote from: bugo on March 20, 2012, 06:15:30 PM
Another year, another atlas I will buy. I buy a new RMN every year, and I have since 1988 I believe. It's a yearly tradition for me.
Same here. I will probably buy two at Walmart the first time I see them. I'll put one in the vehicle and take one in the house. They're so inexpensive that it's a worthwhile investment. There's a 2003 RMN in my bathroom right now that is my reading material when I conquer the world and take a seat upon my throne.
Quote from: Alex on March 21, 2012, 01:50:41 PM
Quote from: tdindy88 on March 21, 2012, 11:05:23 AM
I remember back in the day when we didn't have these QR or Microsoft box codes things in our atlases. I come for the maps.
Touché. And the atlases are no better with them than they were without them.
A scan from my 1991 RMcN for fun, two bases back (three if you count the GIS redo of everything in 2011 that brought back I-170 and added I-278E, I-95E/I-95W, etc.).
I'd love to hear about the etc. Let's see - I-278E would be the spur of the BQE to head east on GCP, and I-95E/W would have course be in NJ - although the official I-95 routing is NJ's SR 95W, so there's no 95E in the mix at all. (NJTA even acknowledges that the Eastern Spur is not I-95, which is impressive because the Turnpike likes to stand apart from the I-95 designation.)
Quote from: hbelkins on March 22, 2012, 02:12:47 PM
There's a 2003 RMN in my bathroom right now that is my reading material when I conquer the world and take a seat upon my throne.
"You know you're a roadgeek when..."
Quote from: Steve on March 23, 2012, 12:22:47 AM
Quote from: Alex on March 21, 2012, 01:50:41 PM
Quote from: tdindy88 on March 21, 2012, 11:05:23 AM
I remember back in the day when we didn't have these QR or Microsoft box codes things in our atlases. I come for the maps.
Touché. And the atlases are no better with them than they were without them.
A scan from my 1991 RMcN for fun, two bases back (three if you count the GIS redo of everything in 2011 that brought back I-170 and added I-278E, I-95E/I-95W, etc.).
I'd love to hear about the etc. Let's see - I-278E would be the spur of the BQE to head east on GCP, and I-95E/W would have course be in NJ - although the official I-95 routing is NJ's SR 95W, so there's no 95E in the mix at all. (NJTA even acknowledges that the Eastern Spur is not I-95, which is impressive because the Turnpike likes to stand apart from the I-95 designation.)
Quite a number of other etc's in the 2011 Rand Thread (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=2744.0) from the GIS redo:
QuoteIN: [ERROR] U.S. 27 has been once again extended north of Fort Wayne along I-69!!!
QuoteOn 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.
Looking back, it is the Taconic State Parkway shown as 987G (still this way in the 2012).
QuoteLordsburg, NM now has a freeway loop!
I will lay odds that the new inset for ND is Minot.
I'd like to know why Kennewick-Richland-Pasco doesn't have an inset, while Yakima does.
Sorry for the bump, but has anyone found the '13 in stores yet? I haven't bought one in a couple years, so I figure it'll be updated "enough" for me to get this one, and we're going on a trip in a couple weeks.
Rand McNally added the 2013 edition to their online store:
http://store.randmcnally.com/road-atlas.html (http://store.randmcnally.com/road-atlas.html)
It's mid-April 2012. Isn't the 2013 Rand McNally overdue in Walmart now? :-D
Quote from: hbelkins on April 12, 2012, 04:00:35 PM
It's mid-April 2012. Isn't the 2013 Rand McNally overdue in Walmart now? :-D
That's why I rebumped the post. I was wondering if it was going to be out before I left on vacation (two weeks from today).
Over the Easter weekend, I went to 3 Walmarts down in CT... only 2012 atlas to be found, no 2013s.
Great, another new atlas to draw fictional roads on! :pan:
Quote from: bugo on March 20, 2012, 06:15:30 PM
Another year, another atlas I will buy. I buy a new RMN every year, and I have since 1988 I believe. It's a yearly tradition for me. I would eventually like to have a mint condition collection from 1926-present. I also need to buy the other brand of atlas, the cartography that was used in the National Geographic atlases back in the day.
1. I, too, have a yearly tradition to buy/receive the new Rand McNally atlas every year. It is the
best road atlas I have ever used. A few years ago, however, I started getting the "Large Scale" versions, as my eyesight is not as decent as it used to be. I like the "Large
Scale" versions better than the old "Large
Print" ones, because, while both enlarge the map, the "Large Scale" ones keep the scale intact.
2. I want a decent (or better) copy of every Rand McNally road atlas from the beginning to now.
3. I think the other brand is AAA. I can't
stand AAA's cartography. That is why I
never buy one.
I can't wait to see the new one. As I am originally from SC, I want to see the new insets.
I usually buy the Rand McNally every year, but since I just bought the 2012, I may just pass on 2013.
Why? It sounds like it will be great.
I hope indiana 641 is on the new atlas.
Quote from: Morriswa on April 28, 2012, 07:15:09 PM
Why? It sounds like it will be great.
What's wrong with your hearing?
Quote from: sr641 on April 28, 2012, 11:39:39 PM
I hope indiana 641 is on the new atlas.
Indiana 641? I heard somewhere that US 641 used to be in Indiana. I've also heard that that is not true. Does this apply to the Indiana route?
Quote from: Morriswa on April 29, 2012, 02:34:36 PM
Quote from: sr641 on April 28, 2012, 11:39:39 PM
I hope indiana 641 is on the new atlas.
Indiana 641? I heard somewhere that US 641 used to be in Indiana. I've also heard that that is not true. Does this apply to the Indiana route?
Some maps (1950 or 60s?) showed US 41 and US 641 overlap northward into Evansville. That was the extent of US 641 in Indiana.
SR 641 is the designation given to the Terre Haute bypass. Currently it is only open from US 41 northeast to McDaniel Road, but is planned to continue north to I-70 at US 40/SR 46. More info at https://www.aaroads.com/guide.php?page=s0641in
Thank you for giving me more definite info on the possible former path of US 641.
Also, thanks for clearing up the confusion with SR 641.
I saw 2013 RMcN atlases today at a few Sheetz gas stations in the eastern West Virginia panhandle. No Wal-Mart editions of the 2013 atlas yet at the local Wal-Marts.
I'll wait until the Wal-Marts get their version. They cost less, and include a Wal-Mart directory (to help find places to resupply on the road). I find the annual updates to the directory generally more useful than the usually minor annual updates to the maps.
Quote from: Alex on April 29, 2012, 02:41:45 PM
Some maps (1950 or 60s?) showed US 41 and US 641 overlap northward into Evansville. That was the extent of US 641 in Indiana.
I have a map or two that shows US 641 in Indiana, but FWIW, INDOT says that it never did enter the state.
Back to the topic, both Books-a-Million and Amazon web sites claimed they had 2013 atlases in stock (at least for a while).
Silly me was looking at the 2012 atlas today at Wal-Mart, trying to find the changes. All I found was the updated Charleston, SC map, not realizing that the other updates are for 2013.
[just realized that the 2011 in my house had the same Charleston map. :pan: ]
The Barnes and Noble here had the 2013 large print and mid-size editions yet still only the 2012 standard edition on the shelf. Didn't think to check Target while I was in there earlier today for its edition (runs the same price as the W store usually).
I try to get the large scale version.
Quote from: rawmustard on April 30, 2012, 03:43:53 PM
The Barnes and Noble here had the 2013 large print and mid-size editions yet still only the 2012 standard edition on the shelf.
Ironically, my Barnes and Noble had the exact opposite situation (2013 standard, 2012 everything else). Despite preferring the large scale version, I decided to bite the bullet and pick up a copy of the new one.
Here's the situation:
- As noted, I-376 and I-520 were updated in a 2012 B version, and are correct in the 2013. However, that's really all that's been fixed from the 2012 thread here.
- Oh, wait. South Carolina is now spelled correctly on the national map. Yay.
- The Turnpike branches in northern NJ are still labeled as I-95E/W. Likewise, there are still shields for I-278E, NY 907W, and NY 987G. (The latter two are technically correct, but useless for navigational purposes.)
- I-170 is still there.
- WA SR 603 is still there.
- I-285 in Atlanta is still mislabeled.
If you have any other errors or updates you're curious about, save yourself the money and just ask me. I'll take one for the team here.
Hey, at least it's better than Google Maps. For now.
It's a race to the bottom between the two. I'll admit that the 2013 doesn't appear to be any worse than 11/12, which does help to put it above Google. However, a couple of years ago, I certainly would have ranked Google above RMcN.
South Dakota had a shield for a Bus I 194 in the Bismarck inset? What's the story there? It's technically I-194, just not signed right?
Quote from: bassoon1986 on May 03, 2012, 12:58:41 PM
South Dakota had a shield for a Bus I 194 in the Bismarck inset? What's the story there? It's technically I-194, just not signed right?
do you mean North Dakota? having a Bismarck insert, complete with any sort of x94, on the South Dakota page would be quite the error for RMN!
yeah, sorry :banghead:
Once again next year's atlas is out when we're not even half way through the current year :ded:
Quote from: bassoon1986 on May 03, 2012, 12:58:41 PM
South Dakota had a shield for a Bus I 194 in the Bismarck inset? What's the story there? It's technically I-194, just not signed right?
Yes, it should either be a red and blue shield, or no shield. The confusion probably sets in because the exit off I-94 is signed as BL-94 (should probably have a TO, but doesn't).
I've always been amused by SPUR I-270 near DC, which has been shown with a green shield in recent editions.
To reply to the bold underlining in the OP, here's what I found for the city insets for those states:
- MD: The Baltimore inset is larger, and Columbia is now included there, rather than its own inset. Salisbury now gets an inset.
- NC: The Wilmington inset is larger.
- ND: Bismarck and Fargo are both larger. (Note: The BR-194 error was not in the 2012 edition. Yay for more new errors.) Minot gets an inset.
- SC: Greenville and Myrtle Beach are slightly larger.
- VA: Harrisonburg gets an inset.
After reading this thread I went out to check if the nearest bookstore to me had the 2013 edition, they did.
A few observations for my home state of Indiana:
-US 24 is a freeway from Fort Wayne east into Ohio, and I think it's considered a freeway most of the way to Toledo (I didn't really check the Ohio pages.) In either case, I believe this error has been stated before.
-US 31 construction between South Bend and Plymouth, which I think was in the 2012 version as well. Still no mention of construction on the Kokomo bypass. The SR 25 corridor that's under construction is also not shown.
-The new US 231 corridor around West Lafayette and it is mentioned as a freeway under construction. (I'm looking for the facepalm smiley but I am not seeing it.)
-City insets for the Hoosier State are unchanged, though I still wish more of the Indianapolis area would be shown on the previous page.
-I-69 in Southwest Indiana shows up as under construction from SR 68 to US 231 with the segment from I-64 to SR 68 signed as I-69. Of course, once the actual year 2013 comes around, that segment should be open. :banghead:
-New four-lane US 231 corridor in Spencer County is not shown, not really surprised.
Quote from: Kacie Jane on May 03, 2012, 04:54:13 PM
To reply to the bold underlining in the OP, here's what I found for the city insets for those states:
- VA: Harrisonburg gets an inset.
Is VA 280 in it?
Quote from: tdindy88 on May 04, 2012, 04:47:55 PM
After reading this thread I went out to check if the nearest bookstore to me had the 2013 edition, they did.
A few observations for my home state of Indiana:
-US 24 is a freeway from Fort Wayne east into Ohio, and I think it's considered a freeway most of the way to Toledo (I didn't really check the Ohio pages.) In either case, I believe this error has been stated before.
-US 31 construction between South Bend and Plymouth, which I think was in the 2012 version as well. Still no mention of construction on the Kokomo bypass. The SR 25 corridor that's under construction is also not shown.
-The new US 231 corridor around West Lafayette and it is mentioned as a freeway under construction. (I'm looking for the facepalm smiley but I am not seeing it.)
-City insets for the Hoosier State are unchanged, though I still wish more of the Indianapolis area would be shown on the previous page.
-I-69 in Southwest Indiana shows up as under construction from SR 68 to US 231 with the segment from I-64 to SR 68 signed as I-69. Of course, once the actual year 2013 comes around, that segment should be open. :banghead:
-New four-lane US 231 corridor in Spencer County is not shown, not really surprised.
Sounds like it went from no updates at all in 2012 to inconsistent/incomplete updates in 2013. I guess that is good for Rand McNally nowadays.
Found the same situation as others in two area Barnes and Nobles. The 2013 is available only in the large print and medium editions, only 2012s for the standard atlas. Guess they have additional 2012 inventory, and want that cleared out before putting out the 2013s.
I did have some time to peruse the large print, and have some additional notes. (My last addition is 2010, I apologize if some of these updates are in the 2012). Besides I-69 showing up in Indiana, it also appears in KY and TX where it was signed in the past year. I-49 shows up along US 71 from Joplin to KS in the Missouri map. The ICC (MD 200) is shown complete to I-95 (look forward to driving it in about a month). Taking a close look at NC: Like 2012, the US 311 freeway is still shown under construction SE of High Point to US 220, none is marked as I-74. The Western Wake 'freeway' portion of the Triangle Expressway is shown in the Raleigh-Durham inset as complete, including a toll barrier. However, the Triangle Parkway extension of NC 147 is not shown, not even as under construction. The Fayetteville Loop is marked as I-295 (not quite). The western side of the Greensboro Loop is marked again as I-73/I-840, but now this is correct, the open parts of the Loop officially getting added to the interstate system last year.
I'll hold off on additional comments until I actually get my hands on a copy of the atlas.
Haven't bought an atlas since 2010.
Universal also makes an atlas, but they're hard to find and cost way much more than RMcN.
Quote from: Takumi on May 04, 2012, 06:09:36 PM
Quote from: Kacie Jane on May 03, 2012, 04:54:13 PM
To reply to the bold underlining in the OP, here's what I found for the city insets for those states:
- VA: Harrisonburg gets an inset.
Is VA 280 in it?
Nope. Where's it supposed to be?
EDIT: Found the relevant thread. Stone Spring Road is just depicted as a gray line, and no under construction lines anywhere in the area.
I-49 in Missouri signed from I-44 to I-435.
I-69 in Kentucky signed, including Rand's duplex signing of 24/69 in one shield.
I-69 in Texas signed on the open Corpus Christi segment.
LA 1 Tollway in Louisiana now signed on the only open segment.
I-520 in South Carolina complete.
Toll MD 200 now shown in green and complete.
NC 540 now signed a toll road on Western Wake Pkwy down to US 1.
I-49 shown on Joplin inset SOUTH of I-44, but not main Missouri page.
I-194 in ND on Bismarck inset. Apparently it doesn't exist anymore, but is now a Business Route of its former self.
I-74 in NC now signed on Rockingham/Hamlet bypass.
I-140 in NC now shown east of I-40 on expanded Wilmington inset.
TX Toll 161/Bush Turnpike now complete down to I-20 in Grand Prairie.
is interstate 49 really in missouri or is that xsomehing randmcnally made up?
Quote from: sr641 on May 06, 2012, 02:37:02 PM
is interstate 49 really in missouri or is that xsomehing randmcnally made up?
Jumping the gun
When it's 2013, the 2013 atlas will be correct. I-49 will be signed in Missouri this December.
I haven't had much of a chance to study it yet, but I picked up the 2013 Wal Mart (otherwise standard) edition less than 24 hours ago.
One place I did notice where they jumped the gun is on TN 840. They show it as completed. While it should be by the time 2013 rolls around, it is not finished yet.
Probably worth repeating the post directly above you then. It seems this year they realized that if they put 2013 in big numbers on the cover, then the atlas should represent roads in 2013. Love it or hate it, I think it is an improvement over their delay in properly labeling I-376.
thanks for clearing up the confusion i had
Or they could just release the 2013 atlas in or near 2013 like a normal map company would.
I wonder if they show A-30 as complete over the St. Lawrence. According to the construction signs, it will be done in December.
It sounds like Indiana 641 still isn't on the new atlas. :banghead:
trust me, your posts cause a lot more headbanging than rand mcnally, we don't need 100 animated faces
Post Merge: May 10, 2012, 03:57:31 AM
Does anyone know if interstate 22 is on the new atlas.
glad the bush turnpike is now completed on the map to I-30 in Grand Prairie, but I'm guessing the newest completed roadway isn't shown. From TX 78 to I-30 in Sachse/Rowlett on the East side.
My beef with things like TN 840 and others is that, IMHO, a map should reflect reality when it is issued.
If a highway is expected to be complete, they can add text "OPEN FALL 2012" or somesuch. Most mapmakers including Rand McNally did this at least through the 70s and possibly later when there was still large scale interstate construction going on.
Quote from: tdindy88 on May 04, 2012, 04:47:55 PM
After reading this thread I went out to check if the nearest bookstore to me had the 2013 edition, they did.
A few observations for my home state of Indiana:
-US 24 is a freeway from Fort Wayne east into Ohio, and I think it's considered a freeway most of the way to Toledo (I didn't really check the Ohio pages.) In either case, I believe this error has been stated before.
-US 31 construction between South Bend and Plymouth, which I think was in the 2012 version as well. Still no mention of construction on the Kokomo bypass. The SR 25 corridor that's under construction is also not shown.
-The new US 231 corridor around West Lafayette and it is mentioned as a freeway under construction. (I'm looking for the facepalm smiley but I am not seeing it.)
-City insets for the Hoosier State are unchanged, though I still wish more of the Indianapolis area would be shown on the previous page.
-I-69 in Southwest Indiana shows up as under construction from SR 68 to US 231 with the segment from I-64 to SR 68 signed as I-69. Of course, once the actual year 2013 comes around, that segment should be open. :banghead:
-New four-lane US 231 corridor in Spencer County is not shown, not really surprised.
I bought mine tonight. That is a good list for Indiana, but there are more including some inexcusable ones:
- US 24: shown as open from I-469 to SR 101, but really is UC; from I-469 one mile west is expressway, not freeway; in Ohio is expressway, not freeway
- SR 641 freeway is half open (opened in 2010) and half UC, but not shown at all
- SR 28 from I-65 east to Frankfort is expressway that was opened years ago
- US 27 from Decatur south to SR 124 is expressway that was opened years ago
- SR 331 divided highway in Mishawaka not shown (most opened years ago)
- SR 912 permanent bridge closure not shown
- I-65 interchange at 109th Avenue in Crown Point not shown
- I-74 interchange at Ronald Reagan Pkwy in Brownsburg not shown
- US 27 is marked with I-69 north of Fort Wayne (it ends in Fort Wayne)
- Decommissioned highways still shown: SR 131, SR 132 (!!!), SR 238, SR 334, SR 431
And a number of shorter divided highway sections are missing (SR 14, SR 22, SR 26, SR 32, US 33, US 52, US 421). The Kokomo section of US 31 freeway is not shown even though part of it opens up in 2012 while the South Bend part opening in 2014 is shown. US 231 in Spencer County is expressway, BTW.
So probably at least 25 or 30 errors in just one state. Back in 2009 when they had an email address to report errors, I reported many of these. Just sloppy.
I guess what amazes me is that some new things are shown - the new US 136/I-465 exit is shown and the new routing of US 40 in Terre Haute is shown. On the plus side, they actually added some new things this year.
Is the state of Chihuahua (México) still shown in Central Time Zone? They changed to Mountain Time Zone in 1998, and RMN has ignored my correction three times.
Yes, a whole freaking state has been shown in the wrong time zone for the last fifteen editions. :clap:
Yay! I found another error! It's in both the 2012 and 2013 editions, I don't have any of my others terribly handy at the moment.
In the Syracuse, NY inset, NY/I-690 is properly labeled, with two interstate shields on the south side of I-90, and a state route shield on the small segment visible west of the Thruway interchange.
On the main state map, the road only has one shield... an interstate shield very clearly on the state route portion.
In Michigan:
There is no interchange marker at US-127 and M-57, when the interchange there has been open for 10+ years.
The (cancelled??) US-31 project in Benton Harbor is still shown as under construction.
I found and bought one at my local Walmart this morning, and after looking through it off-and-on the only current theme I can come up with for Rand is "pick and choose". Some states (like Indiana, Kentucky, Missouri) seem to have updates (whether they be correct or incorrect at the current time) while others do not. Off the top of my head, Alabama now shows the rerouting of U.S. 80 onto I-85 east of Montgomery and future I-22 is now shown as complete to Exit 93. Florida, on the other hand, looks virtually unchanged since the three 2012 versions. I-295 is still not shown along the eastern portion of the Jacksonville beltway, three new interchanges along FL 417 in southeast Orlando are still not shown (and they have all been open for quite some time now). It would also seem that they did take Quebec into some consideration this year in their updates and now show A-25 as being complete, more portions of A-30 and A-50 as being complete, and the next sections of A-410 under construction near Sherbrooke.
I assume that like the other mapping company (that unfortunately still continues to exist, and I am not referring to AAA), they are only allowed a limited number of changes/updates per year so that is why we continue to see only some updates but not all. It is probably also why we continue to see the same errors/omissions (such as I-170 in the downtown Baltimore inset, BR I-194 in the Bismark inset, or the omission of SR 641 in Indiana) year after year, as they probably do not have enough employees to thoroughly cover the atlas. My guess is these errors/omissions/etc. will never be updated unless they were to be given lots of feedback from persons such as ourselves (which I know some have done in the past, myself included), and even then I bet we wouldn't see everything updated and/or corrected as we know it should be. :no:
I wonder if there'd be a market for a "roadgeek's atlas" of sorts... something with a reputation for being accurate and up-to-date as of the year printed on the front cover. Surely it can't be that hard to maintain a standard of quality in an atlas, especially if all the folks working on it had a passion for keeping this sort of thing straight...
Are there really a lot of issues with Google Maps? I've never really come across anything that I know of. In fact, I usually find they are up to speed almost immediately with new roads, new signings, etc.
Quote from: lamsalfl on May 12, 2012, 01:40:04 PM
Are there really a lot of issues with Google Maps? I've never really come across anything that I know of. In fact, I usually find they are up to speed almost immediately with new roads, new signings, etc.
ROFL! (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=2001)
Looking at the RMcN this region - still some uncorrected errors. There are still over 120,000 Coloradans without a place to put their home because when RMcN changed the format a few years ago they eliminated Colorado Metropolitan Districts. So, about 90,000 residents of Highlands Ranch on the south side of Denver and 30,000 residents of Pueblo West live in unrecognized territory. They do show the non-designated (i.e., not a census-designated place) community of Wild Horse between Pueblo and Pueblo West, which consists of a horse farm or two. Also, the unincorporated area immediately west of Pueblo near the Arkansas River is shown as Goodnight - the name of a street that runs through the city park nearby - but I have never heard this area called that. (There is a West Park Fire Department organized in the area).
In New Mexico, they do not recognize the route number changes around Albuquerque last year, such as eliminating NM-345 on Unser Blvd. and creating the new designation that will run on the Paseo del Volcan northwest quadrant highway, NM-347 (though I doubt it's posted on the completed divided road segment in Rio Rancho). I believe the change in designation of Coors Road from NM-448 to an extension of NM-45 was approved last year but was only posted this year. Also, a long-standing change still not reflected in far southeast New Mexico was the redesignation of NM-176 all the way to the Texas border, replacing the NM-234 used on the easternmost segment (east of Eunice) from 1988 to about 2006. Also not shown are the many miles of divided highway on U.S. 64-87 from Raton to Clayton, which is probably at least half the distance now. It's all shown as two-lane.
Sliding east to Kansas, they do now show the Dodge City south bypass that carries U.S. 400, and the elimination of state highway status of Wyatt Earp Blvd., old U.S. 50 Business-400 through downtown.
Quote from: Alex on March 21, 2012, 01:50:41 PM
Quote from: tdindy88 on March 21, 2012, 11:05:23 AM
I remember back in the day when we didn't have these QR or Microsoft box codes things in our atlases. I come for the maps.
Touché. And the atlases are no better with them than they were without them.
A scan from my 1991 RMcN for fun, two bases back (three if you count the GIS redo of everything in 2011 that brought back I-170 and added I-278E, I-95E/I-95W, etc.).
(//www.aaroads.com/forum_images/1991_tampa_bay_inset.jpg) (//www.aaroads.com/forum_images/1991_tampa_bay_inset.jpg)
What was the first year that this style was used? I've seen it on a 1982 atlas but I haven't seen any older ones that use it.
I'm curious to see if they show any more of US-60 across Missouri as four lanes now. I believe there are no two-lane sections left from Springfield to I-57. What's shown on the map?
Quote from: bugo on May 13, 2012, 03:56:32 AM
What was the first year that this style was used? I've seen it on a 1982 atlas but I haven't seen any older ones that use it.
Rand switched bases for the 1980 edition. The base before that ran from the 1960 edition to 1979. The tri-color Interstate shields appeared in 1993 when bases switched again.
Quote from: Alex on May 13, 2012, 08:57:57 AM
Quote from: bugo on May 13, 2012, 03:56:32 AM
What was the first year that this style was used? I've seen it on a 1982 atlas but I haven't seen any older ones that use it.
Rand switched bases for the 1980 edition. The base before that ran from the 1960 edition to 1979. The tri-color Interstate shields appeared in 1993 when bases switched again.
Thanks. I need to get a 1980 version, and eventually 81,82, and an 83 in better condition than mine. Anyone got one for sale?
Quote from: kphoger on May 13, 2012, 08:18:31 AM
I'm curious to see if they show any more of US-60 across Missouri as four lanes now. I believe there are no two-lane sections left from Springfield to I-57. What's shown on the map?
It's shown as four lanes in the 2013 edition. I drove it from the Illinois state line to US 71 in 2001, and most of it between US 67 and US 63 was two lanes then.
Found the 2013 midsie atlas in terre haute. I couldn't find the standard size atlas.
The atlas shows US 371 duplexed with AR 24 and US 63 duplexed with AR 15, both which have been gone for over 10 years.
Got mine in the Louisville area today.
I-69 Under Construction all the way to Crane.
US-31 Under Construction south of South Bend.
Still missing I-49 north in Louisiana.
Nice to see I-49 from KC to Joplin (cept the Watkins bleeping lights).
Quote from: Alex on May 13, 2012, 08:57:57 AM
Quote from: bugo on May 13, 2012, 03:56:32 AM
What was the first year that this style was used? I've seen it on a 1982 atlas but I haven't seen any older ones that use it.
Rand switched bases for the 1980 edition. The base before that ran from the 1960 edition to 1979. The tri-color Interstate shields appeared in 1993 when bases switched again.
Did the pre 1960 atlases use the same base as the '49 atlas that I have?
Quote from: flaroads on May 12, 2012, 12:04:31 AM
I found and bought one at my local Walmart this morning, and after looking through it off-and-on the only current theme I can come up with for Rand is "pick and choose". Some states (like Indiana, Kentucky, Missouri) seem to have updates (whether they be correct or incorrect at the current time) while others do not. Off the top of my head, Alabama now shows the rerouting of U.S. 80 onto I-85 east of Montgomery and future I-22 is now shown as complete to Exit 93. Florida, on the other hand, looks virtually unchanged since the three 2012 versions. I-295 is still not shown along the eastern portion of the Jacksonville beltway, three new interchanges along FL 417 in southeast Orlando are still not shown (and they have all been open for quite some time now). It would also seem that they did take Quebec into some consideration this year in their updates and now show A-25 as being complete, more portions of A-30 and A-50 as being complete, and the next sections of A-410 under construction near Sherbrooke.
I assume that like the other mapping company (that unfortunately still continues to exist, and I am not referring to AAA), they are only allowed a limited number of changes/updates per year so that is why we continue to see only some updates but not all. It is probably also why we continue to see the same errors/omissions (such as I-170 in the downtown Baltimore inset, BR I-194 in the Bismark inset, or the omission of SR 641 in Indiana) year after year, as they probably do not have enough employees to thoroughly cover the atlas. My guess is these errors/omissions/etc. will never be updated unless they were to be given lots of feedback from persons such as ourselves (which I know some have done in the past, myself included), and even then I bet we wouldn't see everything updated and/or corrected as we know it should be. :no:
Has anyone tried the "tellrand" feature for corrections? What kind of merchandise discount did you get?
I suspect that they wait for AASHTO approval for some updates. New US 219 south of Springville NY and US 287 around Boise City OK are not shown as completed, but are awaiting AASHTO approval.
Quote from: okc1 on May 17, 2012, 01:06:00 PM
Quote from: flaroads on May 12, 2012, 12:04:31 AM
I found and bought one at my local Walmart this morning, and after looking through it off-and-on the only current theme I can come up with for Rand is "pick and choose". Some states (like Indiana, Kentucky, Missouri) seem to have updates (whether they be correct or incorrect at the current time) while others do not. Off the top of my head, Alabama now shows the rerouting of U.S. 80 onto I-85 east of Montgomery and future I-22 is now shown as complete to Exit 93. Florida, on the other hand, looks virtually unchanged since the three 2012 versions. I-295 is still not shown along the eastern portion of the Jacksonville beltway, three new interchanges along FL 417 in southeast Orlando are still not shown (and they have all been open for quite some time now). It would also seem that they did take Quebec into some consideration this year in their updates and now show A-25 as being complete, more portions of A-30 and A-50 as being complete, and the next sections of A-410 under construction near Sherbrooke.
I assume that like the other mapping company (that unfortunately still continues to exist, and I am not referring to AAA), they are only allowed a limited number of changes/updates per year so that is why we continue to see only some updates but not all. It is probably also why we continue to see the same errors/omissions (such as I-170 in the downtown Baltimore inset, BR I-194 in the Bismark inset, or the omission of SR 641 in Indiana) year after year, as they probably do not have enough employees to thoroughly cover the atlas. My guess is these errors/omissions/etc. will never be updated unless they were to be given lots of feedback from persons such as ourselves (which I know some have done in the past, myself included), and even then I bet we wouldn't see everything updated and/or corrected as we know it should be. :no:
Has anyone tried the "tellrand" feature for corrections? What kind of merchandise discount did you get?
I suspect that they wait for AASHTO approval for some updates. New US 219 south of Springville NY and US 287 around Boise City OK are not shown as completed, but are awaiting AASHTO approval.
I've sent corrections for three items in years past. Only one has been corrected (US-65 is no longer shown as a full freeway all the way from Springfield to Branson, MO); the other two errors still stand. One of them (the state of Chihuahua being in the wrong time zone for more than a decade) I've sent two or three times with no correction.
Quote from: okc1 on May 17, 2012, 01:06:00 PM
Quote from: flaroads on May 12, 2012, 12:04:31 AM
I found and bought one at my local Walmart this morning, and after looking through it off-and-on the only current theme I can come up with for Rand is "pick and choose". Some states (like Indiana, Kentucky, Missouri) seem to have updates (whether they be correct or incorrect at the current time) while others do not. Off the top of my head, Alabama now shows the rerouting of U.S. 80 onto I-85 east of Montgomery and future I-22 is now shown as complete to Exit 93. Florida, on the other hand, looks virtually unchanged since the three 2012 versions. I-295 is still not shown along the eastern portion of the Jacksonville beltway, three new interchanges along FL 417 in southeast Orlando are still not shown (and they have all been open for quite some time now). It would also seem that they did take Quebec into some consideration this year in their updates and now show A-25 as being complete, more portions of A-30 and A-50 as being complete, and the next sections of A-410 under construction near Sherbrooke.
I assume that like the other mapping company (that unfortunately still continues to exist, and I am not referring to AAA), they are only allowed a limited number of changes/updates per year so that is why we continue to see only some updates but not all. It is probably also why we continue to see the same errors/omissions (such as I-170 in the downtown Baltimore inset, BR I-194 in the Bismark inset, or the omission of SR 641 in Indiana) year after year, as they probably do not have enough employees to thoroughly cover the atlas. My guess is these errors/omissions/etc. will never be updated unless they were to be given lots of feedback from persons such as ourselves (which I know some have done in the past, myself included), and even then I bet we wouldn't see everything updated and/or corrected as we know it should be. :no:
Has anyone tried the "tellrand" feature for corrections? What kind of merchandise discount did you get?
I suspect that they wait for AASHTO approval for some updates. New US 219 south of Springville NY and US 287 around Boise City OK are not shown as completed, but are awaiting AASHTO approval.
The Duncan bypass is shown even though it's not a marked state highway.
Did ODOT ever submit the Poteau Bypass to AASHTO?
And US 377 is marked on the RMN maps even though it was never approved by AASHTO.
The Duncan Bypass is a state highway, though, it simply has no numerical designation. There are green signs reading "Duncan Bypass" though.
Quote from: english si on May 12, 2012, 03:43:51 PM
Quote from: lamsalfl on May 12, 2012, 01:40:04 PM
Are there really a lot of issues with Google Maps? I've never really come across anything that I know of. In fact, I usually find they are up to speed almost immediately with new roads, new signings, etc.
ROFL! (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=2001)
Errors from 2.5 years ago. Cool!
The Duncan and Poteau bypasses are officially SH 00.
Quote from: bugo on May 19, 2012, 12:46:50 AM
The Duncan and Poteau bypasses are officially SH 00.
The pennyrile parkway in Kentucky is officially State Route 9004.
Quote from: bugo on May 19, 2012, 12:46:50 AM
The Duncan and Poteau bypasses are officially SH 00.
OMG lol you could say they have THREE bypasses lol
Quote from: Steve on May 21, 2012, 09:22:14 PM
Quote from: bugo on May 19, 2012, 12:46:50 AM
The Duncan and Poteau bypasses are officially SH 00.
OMG lol you could say they have THREE bypasses lol
Loisville has 3 bypasses. Just ask NE2.
QuoteI wonder if there'd be a market for a "roadgeek's atlas" of sorts... something with a reputation for being accurate and up-to-date as of the year printed on the front cover. Surely it can't be that hard to maintain a standard of quality in an atlas, especially if all the folks working on it had a passion for keeping this sort of thing straight...
I've had this idea for a while. Publish one version for public consumtion, showing only signed designations.
Publish a roadgeek edition, showing hidden designations and all historical former desigations.
I am currently working on hand-drawn "Highway History Maps" of my area.
Loisville is across the Ohio from Metropolis.
Quote from: NE2 on May 22, 2012, 05:11:23 PM
Loisville is across the Ohio from Metropolis.
:-D Dude, that's awesome! :-D
And Olivia is across the Mississippi from Chester!
Quote from: kphoger on May 22, 2012, 05:13:12 PM
And Olivia is across the Mississippi from Chester!
And Vincennes is across the river from Illinois.
Quote from: sr641 on May 22, 2012, 05:42:58 PM
Quote from: kphoger on May 22, 2012, 05:13:12 PM
And Olivia is across the Mississippi from Chester!
And Vincennes is across the river from Illinois.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fblogs.skype.com%2Fplay%2Ffacepalm_80.png&hash=ba82aaebe5fced800375743edaa84115e5a587af)
Quote from: kphoger on May 22, 2012, 05:50:02 PM
Quote from: sr641 on May 22, 2012, 05:42:58 PM
Quote from: kphoger on May 22, 2012, 05:13:12 PM
And Olivia is across the Mississippi from Chester!
And Vincennes is across the river from Illinois.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fblogs.skype.com%2Fplay%2Ffacepalm_80.png&hash=ba82aaebe5fced800375743edaa84115e5a587af)
Kinda makes you want to cry, doesn't it?
Quote from: adt1982 on May 22, 2012, 06:34:17 PM
Quote from: kphoger on May 22, 2012, 05:50:02 PM
Quote from: sr641 on May 22, 2012, 05:42:58 PM
Quote from: kphoger on May 22, 2012, 05:13:12 PM
And Olivia is across the Mississippi from Chester!
And Vincennes is across the river from Illinois.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fblogs.skype.com%2Fplay%2Ffacepalm_80.png&hash=ba82aaebe5fced800375743edaa84115e5a587af)
Kinda makes you want to cry, doesn't it?
It's okay, he's gone. For good.
Quote from: NE2 on May 22, 2012, 05:11:23 PM
Loisville is across the Ohio from Metropolis.
No, that's Paducah.
Puns, my friend. They're puns. Read carefully. Think. Ponder some more.
What I found (forgive me if already mentioned):
* AZ Loop 303 is in existence from I-17 to US 60 - but Rand doesn't think so.
* They still show the Marquette in its old twisted configuration.
Quote from: bugo on March 20, 2012, 06:13:53 PM
Quote from: xonhulu on March 20, 2012, 03:55:36 AM
Cool cover photo, though.
Where was that picture taken? It looks like it is the upper Great Plains. It could be Nebraska or the Dakotas.
Blue Ridge Parkway in NC near Grandfather Mountain. I forget the name of the viaduct, but it was the last part of that motor road to be opened when constructed as the viaduct was a compromise for its original alignment that was to blast away some of the mountain to put the road through.
Quote from: jczart on May 27, 2012, 07:54:25 PM
http://blog.bestoftheroad.com/2013-rand-mcnally-atlas-photos/
The cover photo is Palouse, Washington :P
If you click the next button on that link, you'll see that apparently each edition has a different cover photo. (I knew that the large scale had a different cover than the regular one, but I didn't know there were 8 different editions with 8 different photos.) Looks like roadman65 bought the Walmart edition.
Assuming we're talking about the regular edition and the photo posted in the first post on this thread, congrats to xonhulu for nailing it with his guess. :)
One thing they FINALLY get right. All of Hawaii's "cities" are marked unincorporated. The most local government is the county. Honolulu is the only city - and it is synonymous with the county and Oahu. The cities are actually considered "Census designated places".
Finally got my 2013 atlas today - found it at my local gas station and after numerous trips to Walmart with no atlases whatsoever, I jumped on the full price version. Here are some changes vs the 2012 for New England:
CT:
The Brookfield Bypass (US 7 north of Danbury) is shown as completed.
MA:
A new city insert for Lowell replaces the one for Fall River.
Much more detail shown in the Boston detail city insert. Rail lines are shown, and North & South Stations are labelled.
Boston & Vicinity map has been extended west to show I-495, additional toll barriers on the Mass Pike shown, 128 shields removed from the portion of 128 that is no longer signed as such (between I-95 Exit 12 and I-93 Exit 7, Tobin Bridge finally shown in green to denote a toll road.
VT:
For some reason, the "info center" icons are gone from the I-91 welcome center NB before Exit 1 in Brattleboro and on I-89 between Exits 1 & 2. Both areas are open, but the icons are gone. RMcN seems to have a problem with keeping rest area status up to date (many along the Northway in NY are closed but are still shown on this atlas).
ME:
A rest area icon has been added in Gardiner in between the Maine Turnpike and the north end of I-295. In reality, this should be a service area icon (then again, so should the ones on I-95 and CT 15 in CT, so should the ones on the JFK Highway in Maryland, the two on the Mass Pike between Exits 2 & 3, etc.. etc....).
NY:
No update to rest areas along the Adirondack Northway. Several are now closed, but are still shown on this map.
Tolls continue to be shown on the Niagara Section of the Thruway in Buffalo. These were closed and removed years ago.
"World Trade Center site" has been replaced with "National Sept 11 Memorial" on the Manhattan detail city insert
Those are the highlights I see in areas I know. Overall, not too bad.
Quote from: shadyjay on July 18, 2012, 03:48:30 PM
ME:
A rest area icon has been added in Gardiner in between the Maine Turnpike and the north end of I-295. In reality, this should be a service area icon (then again, so should the ones on I-95 and CT 15 in CT, so should the ones on the JFK Highway in Maryland, the two on the Mass Pike between Exits 2 & 3, etc.. etc....).
RMcN seems to be too scared of FHWA into thinking that service areas should not exist on non-tolled roads.
Quote from: shadyjay on July 18, 2012, 03:48:30 PM
NY:
No update to rest areas along the Adirondack Northway. Several are now closed, but are still shown on this map.
Tolls continue to be shown on the Niagara Section of the Thruway in Buffalo. These were closed and removed years ago.
"World Trade Center site" has been replaced with "National Sept 11 Memorial" on the Manhattan detail city insert
That explain the lack of "send help" signs? ;)
I wonder why they took the Fall River, MA inset map out of the 2013 Atlas? :hmmm:
Quote from: Master son on July 19, 2012, 07:05:31 AM
Quote from: shadyjay on July 18, 2012, 03:48:30 PM
ME:
A rest area icon has been added in Gardiner in between the Maine Turnpike and the north end of I-295. In reality, this should be a service area icon (then again, so should the ones on I-95 and CT 15 in CT, so should the ones on the JFK Highway in Maryland, the two on the Mass Pike between Exits 2 & 3, etc.. etc....).
RMcN seems to be too scared of FHWA into thinking that service areas should not exist on non-tolled roads.
But that one in Maine IS on a toll road! Well, technically, you have to get off the turnpike to get to it, but its a straight shot off the exit ramp. And it was built and is operated by the turnpike authority.
Then there is the pair of service areas on the Deegan (I-87) in NYC, which is not a toll road, which are still shown as service areas. There's also the pair on the Mass Pike that for years were incorrectly shown as "Rest Area-No Toilets" but are now shown as "Rest Area - with Toilets", even though both are full service areas on a toll road.
Another change I just noticed:
CT 2 around Foxwoods in SE Connecticut is now shown as a limited-access highway, if only for a small portion. About time, since that opened a few years ago.
Quote from: US 231 on July 19, 2012, 08:17:45 AM
I wonder why they took the Fall River, MA inset map out of the 2013 Atlas? :hmmm:
Probably just not a lot going on there. The roads are fairly straightforward, too.
Quote from: shadyjay on July 18, 2012, 03:48:30 PM
NY:
No update to rest areas along the Adirondack Northway. Several are now closed, but are still shown on this map.
Tolls continue to be shown on the Niagara Section of the Thruway in Buffalo. These were closed and removed years ago.
Quote
Thank you for pointing out that the I-190 toll barriers in the City of Buffalo has been removed. This is a good catch and we'll be sure to correct this in our next Road Atlas editions.
Thanks for contacting us & we appreciate the feedback.
Steve Wiertz
Senior GIS Specialist
Rand McNally
Got RMN to acknowledge the removed toll barriers using the "tellrand" feature on the inside front cover.
While in Walmart this afternoon doing a grocery run I poked into the book department and looked through the 2013 Rand, noticing it was a second edition (code 2 3 VE 13 12 located on the What's Inside page near the front of the atlas). There were a few noticeable updates including:
- A larger inset for Pittsburgh that now includes PA Toll 576 in its entirety and includes exit numbers
- The portion of Loop 303 on the north side of Phoenix now appears on the main Arizona page, but not in the Phoenix inset
- TX Toll 130 is now shown as complete from US 183 to I-10 on the main Texas page
Some things still have not been updated in this second edition though, such as the new section of I-69 in Indiana (which no doubtedly opened after the printing of this new edition), the new portion of the Triangle Parkway near Raleigh, any sign of I-580 now existing in NV (still shows a gap between freeway segments south of Reno), etc., etc.
Quote from: shadyjay on July 18, 2012, 03:48:30 PM
A new city insert for Lowell replaces the one for Fall River.
Lowell :D
I live in Dracut, under 9/10 mile from the Lowell city line and around 2000 feet from MA-110.
Anyways, I'm kinda glad to hear this news as people will probably need a good idea of the area as it's near NH and right off of U.S. 3 MA exit 36 is the tax-free Pheasant Lane Mall in Nashua, NH. (Why a MA exit? The mall was designed that way. In front of Sears and some of JC Penney you're in MA and you're not even off the sidewalk yet.
Quote from: flaroads on December 06, 2012, 07:43:37 PM
While in Walmart this afternoon doing a grocery run I poked into the book department and looked through the 2013 Rand, noticing it was a second edition (code 2 3 VE 13 12 located on the What's Inside page near the front of the atlas). There were a few noticeable updates including:
- A larger inset for Pittsburgh that now includes PA Toll 576 in its entirety and includes exit numbers
- The portion of Loop 303 on the north side of Phoenix now appears on the main Arizona page, but not in the Phoenix inset
- TX Toll 130 is now shown as complete from US 183 to I-10 on the main Texas page
Some things still have not been updated in this second edition though, such as the new section of I-69 in Indiana (which no doubtedly opened after the printing of this new edition), the new portion of the Triangle Parkway near Raleigh, any sign of I-580 now existing in NV (still shows a gap between freeway segments south of Reno), etc., etc.
The Rand McNally atlas comes out too early these days. Guess they expect most drivers to have GPS by now. That being said, I wish they would correct US 60 in their Central Phoenix inset, and reflect that US 60 stays on I-17 between 19th Ave and Thomas Rd.
PA
It's interesting that the map does not yet show the US 202 Parkway as under construction on the PA-East page. Had RMN waited a few months before publishing their 2013 edition, they could've shown it as complete or under construction w/a scheduled completion notice.
They also could've added the new Exit 320 (EZPass only) of the PA Turnpike (I-76) as well since this interchange will be opening in 4 days (Dec. 11).
I finally picked one up at a local Walmart*, the '2 3 VE 13 12' version.
IN Wisconsin, lots of stuff is not shown or shown incorrectly:
-US 10 Marshfield Spur not shown
-WI 26 four-lanes and freeway bypasses from Watertown to Fort Atkinson, also from I-39/90 in Janesville to Milton not shown
-WI 11/36 Burlington bypass not shown
-WI 54/57 duplex east of I-43 in Green Bay not shown as freeway
-WI 341 marked on Milwaukee insert
-Marquette interchange shown in 'old' configuration on Milwaukee downtown street inset
-US 45 not shown as full freeway between US 10 and US 41(I-xx)
-US 45 incorrectly shown as four lanes between US 10 and WI 96 (it's two lanes)
-US 41 Oconto and Peshtigo bypass freeways not shown
-US 12 freeway between I-90/94 and Baraboo not shown
-US 45 incorrectly shown as freeway between West Bend and Kewaskum (it's a surface four lane 'expressway')
-WI 42/57 Sturgeon Bay bypass incorrectly shown as four lanes (it's two lanes)
-WI 29 not shown as freeway around Angelica and Abbotsford
OTOH:
-US 10 is mostly correct between US 41(I-xx) and I-39 and US 151 nearly all correct in the state.
Mike
Quote from: swbrotha100 on December 06, 2012, 11:27:51 PM
Quote from: flaroads on December 06, 2012, 07:43:37 PM
While in Walmart this afternoon doing a grocery run I poked into the book department and looked through the 2013 Rand, noticing it was a second edition (code 2 3 VE 13 12 located on the What's Inside page near the front of the atlas). There were a few noticeable updates including:
- A larger inset for Pittsburgh that now includes PA Toll 576 in its entirety and includes exit numbers
- The portion of Loop 303 on the north side of Phoenix now appears on the main Arizona page, but not in the Phoenix inset
- TX Toll 130 is now shown as complete from US 183 to I-10 on the main Texas page
Some things still have not been updated in this second edition though, such as the new section of I-69 in Indiana (which no doubtedly opened after the printing of this new edition), the new portion of the Triangle Parkway near Raleigh, any sign of I-580 now existing in NV (still shows a gap between freeway segments south of Reno), etc., etc.
The Rand McNally atlas comes out too early these days. Guess they expect most drivers to have GPS by now. That being said, I wish they would correct US 60 in their Central Phoenix inset, and reflect that US 60 stays on I-17 between 19th Ave and Thomas Rd.
Guess we'll have to wait until "2014", or technically next spring or summer, if they correct those errors.
Quote from: PHLBOS on December 07, 2012, 08:56:24 AM
PA
It's interesting that the map does not yet show the US 202 Parkway as under construction on the PA-East page. Had RMN waited a few months before publishing their 2013 edition, they could've shown it as complete or under construction w/a scheduled completion notice.
They also could've added the new Exit 320 (EZPass only) of the PA Turnpike (I-76) as well since this interchange will be opening in 4 days (Dec. 11).
What makes you think a few months would've made a difference? The 202 Parkway has been under construction for 4 years now, and the completion time has always been estimated for this general time period.
Quote from: swbrotha100 on December 06, 2012, 11:27:51 PM
The Rand McNally atlas comes out too early these days. Guess they expect most drivers to have GPS by now.
I don't think the timing has anything to do with GPS. For as long as I can remember, they always published the next year's atlas in the late summer/fall of the year prior.
Edited to realize (and I hadn't even noticed) how much earlier the atlases came out this year. Having said that, most people with a GPS would find an Atlas useless anyway.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 07, 2012, 12:55:13 PM
What makes you think a few months would've made a difference? The 202 Parkway has been under construction for 4 years now, and the completion time has always been estimated for this general time period.
That's just it, RMN has
never shown this road as under construction (typically shown as a dashed line) in their previous editions despite the fact that it was indeed being built/constructed. This approach goes completely against their past practice of showing roads (usually highways) as under construction (dashed lines)
at least a year or two prior to completion.
It's worth noting, that other mapping companies (AAA, etc.) are just as guilty regarding not even the US 202 Parkway as under construction.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 07, 2012, 12:55:13 PM
Edited to realize (and I hadn't even noticed) how much earlier the atlases came out this year. Having said that, most people with a GPS would find an Atlas useless anyway.
I believe it was last year (2012 edition coming out in April 2011) that they started coming out earlier, prior to that it was typically October IIRC.
I think it's absolutely hilarious that to correct this error in judgement, they now put out a second edition that, while improved, is still not fully up to date (neither the release date nor the cover date), and is no better than had they just waited till the end of the year in the first place.
Quote from: mgk920 on December 07, 2012, 12:03:53 PM
I finally picked one up at a local Walmart*, the '2 3 VE 13 12' version.
IN Wisconsin, lots of stuff is not shown or shown incorrectly:
Some of those errors they've had for a long, long time.
I bet they still show US 2 as a freeway coming into Superior all the way to WI 35 with an interchange square (and they have it 3 times: WI, MN & Twin Ports inset)
They probably still have WI 17 south of Rhinelander shown as "other multi-lane highway". (Where they ever got this one, I have no idea. This has never even been a proposal, but it consistently shows up in RMN as long as I can remember.)
The Appleton inset still has that weird, eastward hitch in WI 441 by Calumet Street, I bet.
And in Oshkosh, they have WI 21 curving north in mirror image to what WI 21 actual does, just as always.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on December 10, 2012, 07:33:14 PM
Quote from: mgk920 on December 07, 2012, 12:03:53 PM
I finally picked one up at a local Walmart*, the '2 3 VE 13 12' version.
IN Wisconsin, lots of stuff is not shown or shown incorrectly:
Some of those errors they've had for a long, long time.
I bet they still show US 2 as a freeway coming into Superior all the way to WI 35 with an interchange square (and they have it 3 times: WI, MN & Twin Ports inset)
They probably still have WI 17 south of Rhinelander shown as "other multi-lane highway". (Where they ever got this one, I have no idea. This has never even been a proposal, but it consistently shows up in RMN as long as I can remember.)
The Appleton inset still has that weird, eastward hitch in WI 441 by Calumet Street, I bet.
And in Oshkosh, they have WI 21 curving north in mirror image to what WI 21 actual does, just as always.
Yea on most of those.
:meh:
As for WI 441, there is actually a slight eastward bump in WI 441 at Calumet St, only not as pronounced. OTOH, they've had the alignment of the US 10/WI 441 freeway wrong at Racine St in Menasha ever since it opened nearly 20 years ago - there is another 'S' curve in the freeway there and Racine St connects with US 10/WI 441 via a ticket-tollway style trumpet spur interchange west of Racine St. The freeway then crosses under Racine St between that interchange and Midway Rd.
Also, the four lanes on County 'CE' ends at Crooks Ave (WI 55) in Kaukauna and it is only two lanes from there on eastward.
The Oshkosh inset also does not correctly show US 45 northwest of US 41(I-xx) - it is a full freeway with a local street interchange at County 'T'/Ryf Rd.
Mike
Is the 2014 edition out yet?
Quote from: vtk on December 11, 2012, 04:37:48 AM
Is the 2014 edition out yet?
Not for another 4-6 months.
Quote from: vtk on December 11, 2012, 04:37:48 AM
Is the 2014 edition out yet?
Sounds like the 1988 Chevrolet Beretta, available at showrooms in December 1986. :-/
Quote from: formulanone on December 11, 2012, 04:14:57 PM
Quote from: vtk on December 11, 2012, 04:37:48 AM
Is the 2014 edition out yet?
Sounds like the 1988 Chevrolet Beretta, available at showrooms in December 1986. :-/
Really? They couldn't wait until either spring or summer of 1987 (at least) to put it in dealerships? Also, did the Corsica that shared the Beretta's chassis come out at the same time, or did they wait longer for that?
^ Don't remember...I do recall the automotive press having a little fun with that, though.
Frankly, it is rather annoying to always try to be a year ahead of things, but I guess it's just the world we live in.
Quote from: Henry on December 12, 2012, 01:34:45 PM
Quote from: formulanone on December 11, 2012, 04:14:57 PM
Quote from: vtk on December 11, 2012, 04:37:48 AM
Is the 2014 edition out yet?
Sounds like the 1988 Chevrolet Beretta, available at showrooms in December 1986. :-/
Really? They couldn't wait until either spring or summer of 1987 (at least) to put it in dealerships? Also, did the Corsica that shared the Beretta's chassis come out at the same time, or did they wait longer for that?
IIRC, both the Beretta & Corsica rolled out at the same time.
Quote from: PHLBOS on December 12, 2012, 04:18:51 PM
Quote from: Henry on December 12, 2012, 01:34:45 PM
Quote from: formulanone on December 11, 2012, 04:14:57 PM
Quote from: vtk on December 11, 2012, 04:37:48 AM
Is the 2014 edition out yet?
Sounds like the 1988 Chevrolet Beretta, available at showrooms in December 1986. :-/
Really? They couldn't wait until either spring or summer of 1987 (at least) to put it in dealerships? Also, did the Corsica that shared the Beretta's chassis come out at the same time, or did they wait longer for that?
IIRC, both the Beretta & Corsica rolled out at the same time.
My first car was an '88 Corsica, which survived through early 2008 after over 250k miles. Even more impressive now that I can "add" another 2 years on to the date!
If that's the case, you should have another 25,000 miles on it...
Quote from: formulanone on December 12, 2012, 01:38:47 PM
Frankly, it is rather annoying to always try to be a year ahead of things, but I guess it's just the world we live in.
a lot of things are like that. it's pretty simple economics - being able to beat your competitors in announcing something new gives you a leg up on the market. I also see this with Christmas sales. If I recall correctly, this year's Christmas season started around Labor Day, 1959.
it also happens with car shows I go to. Officially, Saturday and Sunday is the show, and Friday is a setup date. All the good stuff changes hands Thursday evening.
Quote from: The Great Zo on December 12, 2012, 04:40:56 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on December 12, 2012, 04:18:51 PM
Quote from: Henry on December 12, 2012, 01:34:45 PM
Quote from: formulanone on December 11, 2012, 04:14:57 PM
Quote from: vtk on December 11, 2012, 04:37:48 AM
Is the 2014 edition out yet?
Sounds like the 1988 Chevrolet Beretta, available at showrooms in December 1986. :-/
Really? They couldn't wait until either spring or summer of 1987 (at least) to put it in dealerships? Also, did the Corsica that shared the Beretta's chassis come out at the same time, or did they wait longer for that?
IIRC, both the Beretta & Corsica rolled out at the same time.
My first car was an '88 Corsica, which survived through early 2008 after over 250k miles. Even more impressive now that I can "add" another 2 years on to the date!
Just as I had suspected! I do remember reading about it as a 16-year old who just got his first license. Needless to say, I got neither when I graduated in 1988, settling for a Cutlass Calais, which I took west to L.A. shortly afterward.
Quote from: Henry on December 13, 2012, 01:43:20 PM
Quote from: The Great Zo on December 12, 2012, 04:40:56 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on December 12, 2012, 04:18:51 PM
Quote from: Henry on December 12, 2012, 01:34:45 PM
Quote from: formulanone on December 11, 2012, 04:14:57 PM
Quote from: vtk on December 11, 2012, 04:37:48 AM
Is the 2014 edition out yet?
Sounds like the 1988 Chevrolet Beretta, available at showrooms in December 1986. :-/
Really? They couldn't wait until either spring or summer of 1987 (at least) to put it in dealerships? Also, did the Corsica that shared the Beretta's chassis come out at the same time, or did they wait longer for that?
IIRC, both the Beretta & Corsica rolled out at the same time.
My first car was an '88 Corsica, which survived through early 2008 after over 250k miles. Even more impressive now that I can "add" another 2 years on to the date!
Just as I had suspected! I do remember reading about it as a 16-year old who just got his first license. Needless to say, I got neither when I graduated in 1988, settling for a Cutlass Calais, which I took west to L.A. shortly afterward.
How is getting a (I'm assuming new at the time) Cutlass Calais vs. a Chevy Beretta/Corsica considered
settling? They're built off of the same platform and the Olds' starting price is generally higher than its Chevy counterpart.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on December 13, 2012, 10:14:44 AM
Quote from: formulanone on December 12, 2012, 01:38:47 PM
Frankly, it is rather annoying to always try to be a year ahead of things, but I guess it's just the world we live in.
a lot of things are like that. it's pretty simple economics - being able to beat your competitors in announcing something new gives you a leg up on the market. I also see this with Christmas sales. If I recall correctly, this year's Christmas season started around Labor Day, 1959.
it also happens with car shows I go to. Officially, Saturday and Sunday is the show, and Friday is a setup date. All the good stuff changes hands Thursday evening.
Why don't they just not even bother making the models match up with the years then? They could release the Corvette 10, 11, and 12 in 2013 if they wanted to, instead of having to release a 2014 Corvette in January 2013 and then have to wait 11 months to release the next one.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on December 13, 2012, 10:14:44 AMIf I recall correctly, this year's Christmas season started around Labor Day, 1959.
I realize this is a joke, but you're not far off on the Labor Day comment. I worked at Target long ago, and once Back to School ends (right around Labor Day), their seasonal department switches over to Halloween, with Christmas decorations along the backwall.
New information about 2014 Rand McNally Road Atlas.
My question to Rand McNally facebook page was:
"What is the projection release date for 2014 (90th Edition) Rand McNally USA Road Atlas?"
Thier answer is:
"Hi C.J. This should be available sometime in May. Thanks for your interest!"
The result is about 5 (five) months to go!
Road Geek Story....
I found myself the perfect woman. And I knew this because we went out on a date and I asked her who her favorite author is. She said, "Rand McNally." I said, "Mine too."
Yeah. I hit the jackpot. Nothing sexier than a female road geek.
There are 2014 model year cars available on 1/2/13, so why can't a 2014 Rand McNally atlas be available around the same time? I wouldn't be surprised if Rand McNally did something like this in the future.
Quote from: swbrotha100 on January 02, 2013, 01:06:12 AM
There are 2014 model year cars available on 1/2/13, so why can't a 2014 Rand McNally atlas be available around the same time? I wouldn't be surprised if Rand McNally did something like this in the future.
I would prefer the atlases go back to the September-October time frame, so that they would reflect 2014 more accurately. It was 2008 when the atlases were pushed forward to an April release. Was working with a map company at the time, and the higher-ups were alarmed that the Rand was out so early.
It was 2008 that I stopped buying a yearly Rand, since the 2008 version I had was only six months old at the time...
I wonder if the 2014 edition will include the newly-completed US 202 Parkway in PA and the new Exit 320 (EZPass only) interchange indicator at I-76 (PA Turnpike) & PA 29? The former was under construction for about 4 years but the atlas never showed it as even a dotted line (indicating that it was under construction).
Found more new info for 2014 edition just today. It says May 3rd, 2013 release date!
Here is the link: http://www.barnesandnoble.com/s/rand-mcnally-2014?store=allproducts&keyword=rand+mcnally+2014 (http://www.barnesandnoble.com/s/rand-mcnally-2014?store=allproducts&keyword=rand+mcnally+2014)
People still care about the new Rand McNally?
Quote from: NE2 on January 03, 2013, 08:21:33 AM
People still care about the new Rand McNally?
As compared to everything else that mass produces errors?
Ehh, everything has some degree of error. It's an atlas, it can get you from A to B, it has familiar symbology that doesn't look like total crap... Even though I may criticize its errors and won't get out of bed early to buy it at Mal Wart, I still wouldn't say I don't care about it at all: it's still a nifty book.
Quote from: kphoger on January 05, 2013, 01:02:20 PM
It's an atlas, it can get you from A to B, it has familiar symbology that doesn't look like total crap...
Agreed. Some of the US atlases by other companies just look really bad, and aren't particularly better at accuracy.
So apparently the 2014 atlas is out. Anyone have it and have anything of interest to report about it?
Got two today at Walmart in Lexington -- the regular version and I also got the large-scale version with spiral binding. Haven't looked it over yet.
Got my 2014/90th Anniversary atlas at the local Barnes and Noble a couple weeks ago. For NC they have updated their maps to include a completed I-74 freeway from High Point to US 220, though its only labeled as I-74 on the Greensboro/Winston-Salem inset, and then only east of I-85. No new I-73 shields for the parts being currently updated to interstate status. They still have the Rockingham-Hamlet Bypass labeled as I-74. Only a couple old exit numbers appear along the paths of either I-73 or I-74, nor for I-795. They have the Triangle Expressway depicted as a toll road and as NC 540 all the way to to its current end at Holly Springs. Curiously, on the Wilmington inset they now have I-140 on both sides of I-40 with US 17, but not on the state map. The Sanford Bypass is shown extended to NC 42 with a stub north of US 1 not completed to US 421, as it is currently. None of the current bypass projects under construction are depicted, except for what remains to be completed for I-485 around Charlotte.
If anyone has any other NC items to check, or questions about other states, let me know.
So they have actually bothered to update the map data then. Good. I recall a complaint in the past couple years being a lack of that. Maybe I'll pick one up at some point then since my current edition is the 2011.
Now for a laugh: I was in a Rite Aid off in an odd corner of Brooklyn this past week that still had the 2009 edition sitting on the rack for sale. :-D
They finally restored the Colorado Metropolitan Districts, so i have a home again. No need to account for the 90,000 people in Highlands Ranch south of Denver, not to mention the 30,000 people who live by me, who have been missing since the format change. I chose not to buy because the major changes appear to be in the east, and I'm not really following the saga of I-73.
Had with me on my computer table is the 2013 RMcN atlas...I happen to like it, got it from Wal-mart. But these days more people use googlemaps or Mapquest to look at road maps, while some of us prefer the ink-and-paper maps, a lost art we can't afford to lose. I asked my wife who works at Target if the store has the 2014 atlas and she finds out this weekend (her B-day is tomorrow) :-D
Quote from: Duke87 on May 24, 2013, 05:44:23 PMNow for a laugh: I was in a Rite Aid off in an odd corner of Brooklyn this past week that still had the 2009 edition sitting on the rack for sale. :-D
Was the selling price reduced at all?
Well well well... OR 99W's still alive and well along N Interstate Ave according to 2014... but US 30 BYP is dead and non-existent.
Also, the cartography for the city insets is sloppy.
I-49 in Louisiana North of Shreveport shown as complete and labeled as I-49. Arkansas link to the Louisiana border shown as under construction.
I-69 in Indiana shown as complete from I-64 to US 231 and under construction from US 231 to Bloomington.
I will wait for the 2015 edition since I-2, I-69C and I-69E are not on the 2014 and neither are the I-69 sections in Houston.
Quote from: apjung on July 23, 2013, 03:05:14 AM
I will wait for the 2015 edition since I-2, I-69C and I-69E are not on the 2014 and neither are the I-69 sections in Houston.
Not a bad idea, if only because those designations caught a lot of people off-guard.
Quote from: Henry on July 23, 2013, 11:23:02 AM
Quote from: apjung on July 23, 2013, 03:05:14 AM
I will wait for the 2015 edition since I-2, I-69C and I-69E are not on the 2014 and neither are the I-69 sections in Houston.
Not a bad idea, if only because those designations caught a lot of people off-guard.
yes, I am absolutely astonished we went from "absolutely no mention of I-2 outside of the Fictional forums" to "signed in the field" in less than a month.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on July 23, 2013, 12:15:07 PM
Quote from: Henry on July 23, 2013, 11:23:02 AM
Quote from: apjung on July 23, 2013, 03:05:14 AM
I will wait for the 2015 edition since I-2, I-69C and I-69E are not on the 2014 and neither are the I-69 sections in Houston.
Not a bad idea, if only because those designations caught a lot of people off-guard.
yes, I am absolutely astonished we went from "absolutely no mention of I-2 outside of the Fictional forums" to "signed in the field" in less than a month.
Yeah, they did not screw around on that one, by any stretch.
Has anyone found the 2014 atlas in their local Walmarts recently? I've been to 3 in the past 5 days in 3 different states and NOTHING.... not even the 2013 version. I did see the full price version in a bookstore in Freeport, ME and just had time for a quick glance. I did notice that one of the tolls is no longer shown on the Niagara Thruway in Buffalo, NY and some rest area icons that were gone from VT in 2013 are now back. Also VT 279 is shown as completed around Bennington's east side. Hope to get my own copy soon. A few more Walmarts to check!
I was looking for one last month and went into several Walmarts and found nothing. I eventually bought a Kappa Map atlas from a gas station.
Quote from: shadyjay on August 22, 2013, 01:32:01 PM
Has anyone found the 2014 atlas in their local Walmarts recently? I've been to 3 in the past 5 days in 3 different states and NOTHING.... not even the 2013 version. I did see the full price version in a bookstore in Freeport, ME and just had time for a quick glance. I did notice that one of the tolls is no longer shown on the Niagara Thruway in Buffalo, NY and some rest area icons that were gone from VT in 2013 are now back. Also VT 279 is shown as completed around Bennington's east side. Hope to get my own copy soon. A few more Walmarts to check!
I'm pretty much seeing the 2014 at Walmart now, but I did see the 2013 version still prominently displayed at the Walmart in Mason, WV on Monday when I stopped there on my way home.
I've had my Walmart version for at least 2 months now.
I now own the 2014 version, finding it at a Walmart in CT. It took me going to 6 Walmarts in 4 states to track it down!
The last couple times I looked, I could only find the large print edition. Do not want.
This proves there's still demand for old fashioned printed atlases if they've sold out.
Quote from: vtk on August 28, 2013, 12:33:45 AM
The last couple times I looked, I could only find the large print edition. Do not want.
I always fool myself into believing that "large print" = more detail, when it rarely is.
Unless one likes to make their own corrections in ink.
I do like the large-print atlas, in that it is usually spiral bound, and is a little easier to read. But yeah, it's the same atlas.
Wait, so the large-print version has just as much detail as regular?
Crap. I want one that's as large as the large-print version overall, but mas more and smaller details.
Other relatively major flaw of the large-scale compared to the regular atlas is the absence of Canada and Mexico.
Quote from: Kacie Jane on August 28, 2013, 05:28:02 PM
Other relatively major flaw of the large-scale compared to the regular atlas is the absence of Canada and Mexico.
The Mexico map (and Puerto Rico map for that matter), IMHO, is always a flaw, even in the standard edition. Would it kill RMcN to place Puerto Rico after Pennsylvania with a real map, and provide Mexico with a better detailed map?
Apparently, as would continuing to publish the Thomas Guides, seeing as they've discontinued them.
I thumbed through one in a store recently and noticed that RandMac has finally corrected an error that I've been observing for decades. WI 17 south of Rhinelander, WI (US 8 east of US 51) has always been erroneously shown as four-lane divided south out of that city. It even carried over when they updated their linework on most of their maps a couple years ago. This little error has always annoyed me because that piece of WI 17 has never been 4 lanes or even been proposed as 4 lanes; yet there it was year after year in the ol' RMcN.
Now if they can get around to correctly showing US 2 in Superior (without a freeway going all the way to WI 35 ending at a non-existent interchange) I'll be ecstatic.
I broke down and bought the 14. I was able to compare the standard, large print, and easy reading versions. The large print has the same maps as standard, but on twice as many same-sized pages. The easy-reading version has reduced detail and a smaller overall size. I bought the standard.
Several errors persist which I've noted in previous versions. Some have been fixed. There are some new errors I hadn't noticed before.
The Nelsonville Bypass is shown as complete (it opens next month), though for some reason RMcN shows a short non-freeway section of US 33 between the Logan and Nelsonville sections.
There's a green highlight on I-71 north of Columbus, representing the widening project that started last year and is nearly complete. Two more projects have started this year south of that one. Considering this is ostensibly next year's atlas, the highlight should cover the extents of the more recent projects, not the one that's now wrapping up.
Every map has a Smart Tag, which is like a QR code except it only stores an index, and the destination page has to be looked up from a database run by Microsoft. I think I heard MS has given up promoting the scheme. Who knows how long it will continue to provide the Smart Tag lookup service...
Quote from: vtk on September 12, 2013, 12:02:21 AM
The Nelsonville Bypass is shown as complete (it opens next month), though for some reason RMcN shows a short non-freeway section of US 33 between the Logan and Nelsonville sections.
Well, since the atlas is for 2014, and the road will be open in 2014, that's not an error.
Quote from: hbelkins on September 12, 2013, 10:45:50 AM
Quote from: vtk on September 12, 2013, 12:02:21 AM
The Nelsonville Bypass is shown as complete (it opens next month), though for some reason RMcN shows a short non-freeway section of US 33 between the Logan and Nelsonville sections.
Well, since the atlas is for 2014, and the road will be open in 2014, that's not an error.
The full bypass being shown is indeed not an error, but a surprise, as it's not one of the high-profile new Interstates. The short non-freeway section is an error, though; US 33 will be full freeway through both Logan and Nelsonville with no gap. Furthermore, the section they show as non-freeway has in fact been up to freeway standards for a very long time.
Quote from: hbelkins on September 12, 2013, 10:45:50 AM
Well, since the atlas is for 2014, and the road will be open in 2014, that's not an error.
then it should be sold in 2013 with a brown wrapper that says "do not open 'til 2014".
Quote from: hbelkins on September 12, 2013, 10:45:50 AM
Quote from: vtk on September 12, 2013, 12:02:21 AM
The Nelsonville Bypass is shown as complete (it opens next month), though for some reason RMcN shows a short non-freeway section of US 33 between the Logan and Nelsonville sections.
Well, since the atlas is for 2014, and the road will be open in 2014, that's not an error.
In other words, it's not a bug, it's a feature.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on August 31, 2013, 11:38:30 PM
I thumbed through one in a store recently and noticed that RandMac has finally corrected an error that I've been observing for decades. WI 17 south of Rhinelander, WI (US 8 east of US 51) has always been erroneously shown as four-lane divided south out of that city. It even carried over when they updated their linework on most of their maps a couple years ago. This little error has always annoyed me because that piece of WI 17 has never been 4 lanes or even been proposed as 4 lanes; yet there it was year after year in the ol' RMcN.
Maybe that was one of the "gotchas" they deliberately put in so they can tell when somebody's copied their map?