Nicholsons vs Pearsons, what difference?

[mahunt]

Is there any significant difference between these two Guides?

 

Regards

 

Matthew

[Stephen Sugg]

I find the Pearsons to be more “fun” and also more accurate than the Nicholson. The Nicholsons have more detailed maps of the area surrounding the waterways but I find them a little impersonal.

 

I also prefer the presentation of the Pearsons and it’s obvious that they are written by a canal fan, for this reason, they are my guide of choice!

 

 

Regards

 

Steve

[John Orentas]

I always preferred the Nicholson's guides, but I find the new format not as good as the old, they are also edited badly and the paper quality is not as good, on some simple trips you find yourself flipping from the front to the back of the book every few miles, it can be very irritating.

 

They are also very expensive.

 

I think I will start to get used to the Pearson's.

[Oliver]

Pearsons seems more accurate to me and is more informative about the canal history.

 

Two weeks ago, based on our Nicholsons, we planned a short day cruise in a new area. 70ft winding hole marked which would give us just the sort of time we wanted. Unfortunately there was no winding hole, nor was the next winding hole marked in any evidence. Finally managed to turn the boat at the third marked winding hole.

 

Luckily the marked winding holes were all fairly close together but we still ended up travelling in the dark to get back to base.

 

Have also found that some Nicholsons don't have all the locks marked.

 

Having said that, Nicholsons does give you a better idea of the wider area surrounding the canal.

 

We now travel with both.

[Jon]

In my experience, Pearsons normally contain more 'interesting' information, and personally I find them easier to follow.

 

However, other boaters have sworn by Pearsons. It just a case of finding your preference..

[dor]

Perhaps it is because I am familiar with OS maps that I prefer the Nicholsons, and generally there is more information about what is about. Pearsons however has a more informal approach and gives you the feel that it is inside information. It can be very subjective though!

 

As far as locks & winding holes are concerned, I have found them much the same. In fact the same errors occur in both - so who copied who?

[Webchem]

I prefer Nicholson's from a mapping point of view, as they keep North always pointing to the top of the page. I struggle to orientate myself with Pearsons as the points of the compass can be completely off.

 

There is no doubt that Pearsons is more accurate, but why not travel with both. I tend to take OS maps also.

 

Interestingly when taking kids last summer (16 - 17 yo), the girls preferred Pearsons and the boys Nicholsons.

 

Jools

 

[Sam]

Nicholsons are the better in my opinion for detailed map side of things where as we always have a pearsons with us anyway for the information - (also depends on what issue you have)

[maffi mushkila]

Is there any significant difference between these two Guides?

 

Regards

 

Matthew

 

Never seen a Pearson, Matthew, but I did buy a Nicholson (No 7) when home at Christmas and a GEO of the K&A. Now I know the GEO is not a Nicholson neither is it meant to be, however, I can read the GEO quite easily, not so with the Nicholson.

 

The Nicholson has a lot of information (I don't know about the accuracy) but who writes so small these days. Yes I know my eyesight isn't what it should be, even with corrected vision but I should think most people would comment about the print size. If this was a technical manual supplied by my employer I would have an educated guess that the HASAW guys would have something to say about being fit for its intended purpose.

 

Do people read this guide at night when the boat is moored and make notes for the next days cruising or is the book ready to hand for the tiller man? I would say that it is certainly not a quick reference guide if you haven't got good eyesight (corrected or otherwise). I have never seen the point of producing a book that some people would struggle to read (quite a large percentage of people in the UK have a low standard of vision).

 

Anybody know if the print size in a Pearson is any larger?

 

I know the GEO is really only a map of the canal, and the info paragraphs, such as they are, are in small print, but at least its a map I can follow and in all honesty that is the main reason I would buy either.

Edited January 29, 2005 by maffi mushkila

[DHutch]

We Have used three generations of nicholsons since ive been on the boat, i think the latest ones where they've used an OS map in the back ground, keeping north always north, rather then just having tha canal running up the pages is nice, the old style was fine when you where on the canal, but it was annoying if you wanted to know where you where in the outside world!! - where as the "map of GB" has gone the other way, it used to be overlayed over a full spec OS map, and not its just got major roads marked, which is shame becuase the old one was great for useing to get to and from the canal!!

 

- Never seen a Pearson's tho, so i can compair like for like

 

daniel

[Alan Saunders]

. . . I know the GEO is really only a map of the canal, and the info paragraphs, such as they are, are in small print, but at least its a map I can follow and in all honesty that is the main reason I would buy either.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I vote for the Geo Maps too. They show all the information I need and a lot more of the adjacent facilities and roads including major town centres. They are possibly more up to date than other guides. The current K&A one is 4th edition. However, they are a bit flimsy; I am considering laminating the next new one I buy.

 

Maffi: They also do maps and street maps of the 'Arab World'.

 

Geo Projects Cartography

 

Alan

[maffi mushkila]

I vote for the Geo Maps too.  They show all the information I need and a lot more of the adjacent facilities and roads including major town centres.  They are possibly more up to date than other guides.  The current K&A one is 4th edition. However, they are a bit flimsy; I am considering laminating the next new one I buy.

 

Maffi: They also do maps and street maps of the 'Arab World'.

 

Geo Projects Cartography

 

Alan

My thoughts exactly

 

Geo doesn't do Riyadh mores the pity.

[James York]

I like Nicholsons guides. They give good information and have not so far found any errors.

[nigel carton]

I prefere the Geo maps when I'm delivering. Laminating sounds like a good idea, or scan then laminate!

[Oliver]

Print in Pearsons is bigger than in Nicholsons.

[mahunt]

Thank you all. There is quite a diversity of opinion.

 

I think I'll buy both Nocholsons and Pearsons. One for me and one for Keri and we'll see which we like best.

 

Matthew

[John Orentas]

Matthew

 

Don't forget the Waterways World guides. I haven't bought one for a long time but they used to be a lot cheaper and they are quite good.

[Jon]

Thank you all.  There is quite a diversity of opinion.

 

I think I'll buy both Nocholsons and Pearsons.  One for me and one for Keri and we'll see which we like best.

 

Matthew

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Let us know what you think! Actually, if you want to do a road test, and write up your findings, I'll publish it in the content section

 

Have fun!

 

Jon

[maffi mushkila]

Print in Pearsons is bigger than in Nicholsons.

 

 

That'll do me dude 'O-O'

[Paul@CW]

Sitting here surrounded by more versions of Nicholson's, Pearson, Geoprojects and Imray, I'd say they all have good and bad points.

 

I like the writing style of Pearson's. Seems written in a friendlier tone whereas Nicholson's is quite matter of fact, I like the way Pearson's give you the time it will take to travel each page. From my experience its pretty acurate. Also With Nicholson's I seem to be sometimes following the map up a page, sometimes down, flipping back a page then forward, its not always logical. With Pearson's its either right to left or left to right depending which way you are going.

 

Having said all that I prefer the actual look of the maps in Nicholsons as they look clearer.

 

I always take both anyway... so... erm... not really sure what my point is. Right then... back to packing maps.

[nine9feet]

Sitting here surrounded by more versions of Nicholson's, Pearson, Geoprojects and Imray, I'd say they all have good and bad points.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

May I suggest that, regardless of which guide you take with you, visit Greg Chapman's Waterways Guides and check out any updates for the navigations you will be visiting.

 

john

nine9feet

[Richard Bustens]

Just a bit concerned as i have just bought some of both and they both say that the locks are 70' on shropshire union and leeds and liverpool.

I just had the boat built 70' 6''

[Bernie]

I think you may find that the locks on the L&L canal are not even 70ft long, though they are double width, so you may fit in catty cornered.

Edited February 10, 2005 by Bernie

[John Orentas]

Hi Richard.

 

I don't think you will be sampling the delights of Yorkshire somehow. the longest boat which will enable you to go anywhere is nominally 57ft.

 

The good news, it is usually accepted that 71.5 ft. will go anywhere on the narrow canals.

 

Many guides specify a maximum length of 70 ft. but you should not take that too literally.

[bottle]

I believe, depending on where you read, that it is possible to get a 60ft boat through the Leeds and Liverpool if you place it diagonally across the lock. Only one at a time though could be construed as a waste of water.

 

Has any one done it or know someone who has. (not a friend of a friend)