We like to map out the whole 3,000 -6,000 km course of our typical bike tour. In the past we have relied heavily on known and signed routes, like the Eurovelos, or even the suggestions and maps of Adventure Cycling. But these do not cover all the places to go and ways to go, so like more or less everyone we will use a routing algorithm. Google Maps, cycle.travel, bikemap.net - there are scads of them, each with their own special features, and now, prices. The one most mentioned on Cycleblaze, other than Google Maps, is Ride With GPS (RWGPS). But I have struggled with the RWGPS features and interface, and Jacquie Gaudet even had to give me a telephone tutorial on it. 

Now as we plan to yet again criss cross Europe, to be able to reach more and new to us places, pre-specified routes are going to play a lesser role, making algorithms  more the order of the day. Still trying to get my head around it, I sent the following question to the folks at RWGPS.  I think I already know what they will answer: "Get over it!". Is that your take as well? We have ended by relying on Google Maps, and even a radical new one: paper maps. Is that what you would do?

My question to RWGPS:

"Having been "raised" on Google Maps, not to mention bikemap.net, I had come to expect a list of waypoint names in route planning, like to enter "Miami"  "Madison"  "Harlem"   for a 1500 mile jaunt from Florida to New York, stopping at my friend in Madison, New Jersey. And in doing this, I would be given the choice of Madison, New Jersey vs. Madison, Wisconsin, not to mention Harlem, Netherlands. I could then see a list of my three places, and if I decided to go to Madison only after Harlem, I could reorder the list to get a recalculation.

With RWGPS I have struggled to find this functionality, and that is why I have never gone "Premium"., though RWGPS has many good features. Am I missing something, or is this like Apple vs IBM and I just have to learn to use each system on its own terms?"

RWGPS has Search window where you can search for a name such as "Madison". It also gives you the option to start a route at the location you just searched for.

After that, you are correct that you can't create a route by just supplying a text list of place names. Instead, you have to click on a map to create Waypoints on the places you want to be on your route. That is done by clicking on the place on the map, not by entering a name in a text window.

The two route-creating techniques are very different, but both are easy to understand in my opinion.

I'm also old and set in my ways. I still use a 20+ year old photo editor program because I don't want to start from scratch learning a different photo editor.

Wayne, you’re not old enough yet to complain of being old and set in your ways, especially when you’re talking to someone really old, like Steve.

Wayne’s right, in that with RideWithGPS you just use the search function to pick your desired starting point, and then you build a route by adding waypoints along the roads or tracks you want to follow.  It does take some practice, but I don’t think it’s an unattainable skill, even for old guys.  Not like learning to adjust your own gears, for example.

I’m really a strong advocate for planning your entire tour in advance rather than winging it and figuring out your next leg on the fly.  Drop me an email if you’d like me to help you work out your route for your upcoming tour.

I've been a long time RWGPS user, as the local club (Potomac Pedalers) has a club account we can all use for free (well, after we pay club dues...) and club cue sheets are all mostly RWGPS links.

It took a while getting used to, but I was using Garmin GPS and their awful software for many years - by comparison, it was like going from a scythe to a sit on top lawn tractor...

I did try using Strava a few years ago to route a multi-day ride from Venice FL to Jacksonville. Strava's route planner has an interesting "heat map" feature - you can have it choose the routes between waypoints that are used the most by Strava users - crowdsourcing.

Near Mt. Dora FL I found the problem with that. On a perfectly level road with a nice smooth shoulder, it had me turn left, climb  a short but steep hill on a crumbling road, then turn right to make a left and get back on the original road. Turns out in Florida there aren't that many hills and Strava King of Mountain chasers try to take advantage of every one...

I am a little addle brained from a hard day into Marvao, but I want to disagree with your statement that you can't create a route by names only. I just went to route planner, and put Glenwood Springs, CO as a start position. then I put Aspen, CO in the right hand box, clicked GO, and it routed me to Aspen. I have to accept that location, but can keep moving.

Am I not understanding the question? I think what Steve wants can be done?

I’ve never thought to try this, but I see that it does work, sort of.  Let it draw one leg, then pick the next point, and so on.  It’s really just as easy or easier to point at the next spot you want though than to type the name into a search box.

In any case, it looked to me like Steve was wanting a function that would let him supply an ordered list of names and come up with a route for it rather than building it one segment at a time.

RWGPS replied to my question, and they confirm that even if you made your route as discussed by Scott and Kelly, entering place names sequentially, you can not get a list afterward,  of what those places were, let alone change their order. It really is an Apple and IBM type thing - you can probably do everything in one system (e.g. RWGPS vs Google Maps)  or the other, but the mindset needs a bit of tweaking. Despite Scott's success in routing long trips all over the place, RWGPS strikes me as most useful when you are doing a short route and have an idea of which way generally you will be going. And it remains a desperate shortcoming of RWGPS in my opinion, that if you do type in "Madison" it will not give you a list and choice of all the "Madisons" it may know, and it will not even indicate if it has no idea where you are talking about. 

I have now moved on from studying how different algorithms determine where you want to go, to their various other features - like do they offer Street View, gpx download, clear elevation graphs, good underlying maps, and choices of or reports on paved vs gravel paths, busy roads, etc. etc.  It turns out so far that no one app or site does it all. Also, each one has a different set of features that are hidden behind a pay wall, and the walls are of varying heights, with some also being subscription and some one time only charges.

It would be a long and for most people a boring story to go through all I have learned in several evenings of fooling with each site. But there is one topic maybe more interesting than the others: Do all the common algorithms give more or less the same routings between the same points and how good are they at identifying bikeway options when they exist? 

I will post those answers soon either here or in a forthcoming blog. We are hoping to launch a three stage, 12,000 km criss cross of Europe next month, but it has become  up in the air due to a family health issue at home. We will likely start the blog, and talk about routing, whether we end up leaving or not.

I’m the one of our pair who’s responsible for mapping the routes, and I guess I take it pretty seriously.  Unplanned detours up steep dirt roads and 30km surprise re-routings are not appreciated by my partner on the bike.

I think you can approach mapping one of two basic ways:  Either use “automatic” routing or build your route by hand.  Of course, there’s a third (middle) way, where you use the automatic routing and then hand-adjust it for your preferences.  That’s what I do.

I click at various points along my proposed route and let RWGPS do the routing.  Then I go back and review the grades, road surfaces, and traffic volume to make sure the route is going to be a reasonable route for our particular desires.

In my opinion, the reality of software development economics dictates that there will be minimal investment in a “perfect” mapping tool for cycle tourists.  There aren’t enough of us to make it worthwhile.  And many of us choose to use only the parts of the tool that are free, which makes investment in better tools even riskier for the developers.  

I have no special insight other than 30 years in startup software development, but I honestly don’t know how long RWGPS will be able to function as a business.  They can’t be making much money.  I think about this every time I embed one of their maps in a journal page.  In 5 years, will it still be there?

I haven’t looked at every tool, but RWGPS is about the best one I think we’re going to get given the current economic realities.  I’m a subscriber, and I feel like the routing tool gives me 90% of the information I need to make good decisions about routes.  I supplement with occasional checks of Google Maps street view.

Of the other tools I’ve used, Strava is the next-best (I subscribe there as well).   Komoot is susceptible to the same problem that John mentions above.  It generally will take you where other cyclists have gone.  For better or worse!

Google Maps routing for bicycles feels to me like an afterthought.  I’ve known and ridden with people who have used it, and I don’t trust it at all.  

To me, routing for cycle touring is like anything else in life.  The more effort you put into it, the better your results.  Expecting a piece of software to read your mind and develop the “perfect” route for you is most likely to lead to disappointment and frustration.   

Just my opinions - feel free to ignore me!

This all really seems like right thinking to me.  RideWithGPS feels like the best tool available for the approach I take in planning a route, which is pretty much the same as what you describe.  And I definitely agree with the point of view that the more time you put into it, the better your results.  It is time consuming to tease out what feels like your best option, but I’d so much rather be spending this time in the off-season, sitting around comfortably in the apartment or coffeehouse, than staring at the map looking for a bail-out when the route I’m on is unexpectedly horrible.