How do you vagabonders feel about travelbooks? I understand the need of those books more if you dont have a lengthy time to travel, and want to see "the big 10" or something like that, but when you're not limited to time do you guys still prefer to read these "bibles", or do you find it completely unnecessary once you're out there? The "hardcore-guys"(and girls ) never refer to guidebooks?

When I'm heading out for my first lengthy trip to africa next spring I'm now pondering how much I should rely on myself to find stuff out at the location, and if I should carry guidebooks and such. Certain countries, like Sudan for example, seem to have very little info available on the web apart from a couple of blogs I've found.

Perhaps guidebooks are more necessary when you travel in a place where you may have a language barrier, places where you can more easily get in trouble, or places where mistakes may cost you money?

I know some people prefer to discover everything on their own, but I see no problems with guide books as long as you're willing to deviate from their suggestions and go your own way, and to take the information within them with a grain of salt. They usually include some background history about the people, places, and things of where you're traveling.

Browsing a couple of guide books recently, I've started to notice that they frequently carry the faint odor of bullshit in certain chapters. Just for kicks, I've started reading through travel guides for New Orleans, and the ratio of truth to bullshit in a local city guide isn't very different. To be fair, the most glaring inaccuracies have to do with local customs and neighborhoods, and their truly biggest flaw is that you can really only cover so much within 300-500 pages. If I could extrapolate the usefulness of travel guides from the local ones I'm browsing to more comprehensive guides of entire countries or continents, I'd say the histories are the most useful part, mostly likely because these are the subjects that are easiest to research and that require a less "immersive" approach (they can scour the internet from the comfort of their living rooms) than actually living in the area you're writing about. But even these are skewed, since the creation of any historical record is inherently biased.

Plus, keeping them up to date has to be difficult, but in an "updated" New Orleans guide, published shortly after Katrina, there was an entire section on streetcar service, even though the streetcars were damaged in the storm and did not resume function until last year. So I imagine similar inaccuracies will exist with restaurants, hotels, prices, schedules, and anything that's time-sensitive. Especially in areas affected by natural disasters or political turmoil.

I guess that despite my lack of "worldliness", on the trips I have taken I didn't bring a travel guide and never lacked for things to do, see, or experience. Other travelers, people on the subway, people in your hostel, all can steer you in the right direction. Hell, at one point in Paris I would just set out during the day get off at random subway stops wherever a throng of people seemed to be going. But there were definitely points where I felt like I might be able to appreciate the places I was in if I had more of a sense of context, and at times the language barrier prevented me from just asking. So if I did those trips again, I think I would definitely browse through any information that happened to be available beforehand.

So despite my lack of true vagabonding experience, I really am only replying since travel guides have been on my mind lately due to my investigating the quality of the ones written for my own city. Even among the poorest quality guide, major sites are usually pretty accurately covered, and as long as you're willing to re-evaluate anything you may have learned from their pages, I don't see the harm in doing some "homework" (although being lectured about my own neighborhood by someone gripping a Lonely Planet is a surreal, aggravating, yet humorous experience.)

I had a guidebook for Thailand before I went because I was stir-crazy to go and picked up one there cheap for Laos because the Internet was too slow/expensive in a few areas for research. Other than that I relied mainly on WikiTravel.org, other travelers, and the hostels which were always quick to give you a map of the area and tell you what was up. For places to stay I'd just check out reviews on Hostelworld.com and copy the directions on how to go there. After a point I think the purpose of guidebooks is to find out what you missed.

Oh and I guess it's also worth noting that no one should ever buy a guidebook if heading to South Africa, as the wonderful Coast to Coast guidebook is available for free at virtually all hostels. So beyond awesome you can't imagine.

I've travelled with and without guidebooks, and when it comes to lodging in places where the internet just doesn't serve, guidebooks can be essential.

I find the right guidebook very useful, and bad ones barely useful. Of the sections most useless is the restaurant section, since cooks often quit just after the last issue is submitted, and owners change.
Every area has an ideal guidebook, I've found.

As a default, I use lonely planet. In the americas, I use Footprints. In asia, I'm told Lonely planet is good.
I don't know about Africa or China.

In general, I've found that the Let's go books translate to "Lets go buy another guidebook". That being said, if its the only one available in a used book store, and you're going to that area, its better than nothing.

It is an interesting adventure to travel only on recommendations, but where they don't exist, or you don't speak the language, guidebooks save you a lot of trouble. In Georgia and Romania, I don't know what I'd do without them.

I usually travel with one for my whole region - one of those big, bare-bones, "Every country in a ridiculously large region" guide books. It's nice for the maps, the major sights, a rough outline of accommodation options and prices... and usually a few hints about nice day trips or insider stuff like that. It's not really conducive to any sort of rigid planning, which I like, but I also don't feel completely clueless when I arrive, which is also nice. Right now I'm using Rough Guide's "Europe on a budget" and it covers everything from Iceland to Greece to Portugal to Estonia. Pretty happy so far.

Hello,

I've never been RTW, but I've been to a small chunk of the world at different times. Which part of Africa are you traveling to? For me I've spent some time in Ghana, Togo & Benin and can say I was very happy I brought along a guidebook. I've used Bradt. For Benin it's great, for Ghana not so much. But they are definitely helpful in finding towns that have accommodation, and finding the names of the hotels. Sometimes when our 4 hour busrides turned into 8 hours, and we arrived at dark at the bus stop, it was good to have at least a name of a hotel and a fair sense of the pricerange. Now, if you're doing Eastern Africa, a guidebook might not be as essential, but I would argue that they do come in handy, anywhere in Africa. I've also traveled through New Zealand, Fiji, Vanuatu & Central America. I've used guidebooks for all countries except Central America (went with tour company GAP). However, NZ was kind of pointless, and Fiji as well. Basically the more touristy a place the less likely you'll be wishing you had a guidebook as information is readily available and travellers are always around and ready to give advice/suggestions as well. Vanuatu, on the other hand, even though there wasn't really a strong language barrier, information outside the capital is hard to find! So, as a rule of thumb, I'd say the more touristy a place is (Europe, Central America, some of South America, OZ, NZ, South-East Asia, etc.) no guide book necessary.

Where are you going and what will you be doing?
Thanks
Ben

Thanks for all the answers so far!

I will be travelling along the coast, so that will be Egypt, Sudan, Ehtiopia, Kenya, Tanzania, Mozambique, South Africa, Madagascar. I'll possibly squeeze in Rwanda, Uganda or Namibia and spend a little less time in some of those countries if they prove mighty touristy or something. It's still months away so I have not planned it so much, except for Sudan which I started looking into. I think I'll buy the new Bradt guidebook for Sudan which comes out in December. I really seems like a good option with country being what it is(landmines, civil war in some zones, deadly heat etc.)

As for what I'll do I've just planned diving in Sudan and Kilimanjaro, I'll figure the rest out later..
And timeframe: I'll try to get it unlimited.

I pretty much always take a guidebook, no matter how long I'm going somewhere, no matter where it is - even a trip next door to BC merrits the purchase of a guidebook. I like them...they give a quick overview of history, some good suggestions on good things to see, and are extremely useful to figure out the logistics of getting around.

The downside to guidebooks is the way in which some people use them. We've all encountered the odd person who will be so heavily influenced by their guidebook that they won't see something that got a bad review, even after a local or another traveler suggests it as a good place. I've even encountered people who will only eat at restaurants listed in the guidebook. That takes away from a trip. But as a place to start in planning your holiday, a reference for where to catch the bus and how much things should cost, and a crutch when you're arriving at 11pm and need a place to sleep...I'm not likely to ever be the kind of traveler who goes without one.

One thing I have learned, though, is to always get a reasonably "zoomed in" guidebook, and read the whole thing, not just the highlights. There's gems buried in the text that get no mention aside from 2 or 3 lines in the middle. Region guides, and guides to unusually large countries are effectively useless, as they've cut all the gold out, focusing only on the most famous highlights.

I backpacked around europe without a guide book when I was 21. While I'm sure I saw all the major sites, I did not encounter many similarly aged travelers. I'd just pop off the train station and look for a hotel to split with my 2 other friends.

Looking back, it was a very poor idea as it would have been fun to meet other backpackers to see what they're doing and get more tips.

On my last big trip across the americas, I brought a central american LP and a south america LP. What is nice is when you have one... you don't have to use it! That is how I started because I'm kinda lazy and just didn't feel like looking places up while I was cruising around on the motorcycle. Eventually, I started using them and again.. met more travelers and really started having more fun. So for the rest of CA/SA, I used a guide book quite often.

When on a big RTW trip, it is impossible to do all the research ahead of time, so it is best to just bring a regional guide book to do your planning when you actually know where you're going.