An unstructured mesh tidal model of the west coast of Britain, covering the Celtic Sea and Irish Sea is used to compare tidal distributions computed with finite element (F.E.) and finite volume (F.V.) models. Both models cover an identical region, use the same mesh, and have topography and tidal boundary forcing from a finite difference model that can reproduce the tides in the region. By this means solutions from both models can be compared without any bias towards one model or another. Two dimensional calculations show that for a given friction coefficient there is more damping in the F.V. model than the F.E. model. As bottom friction coefficient is reduced the two models show comparable changes in tidal distributions. In terms of mesh resolution, calculations show that for the M2 tide the mesh is sufficiently fine to yield an accurate solution over the whole domain. However in terms of higher harmonics of the tide, in particular the M6 component, its small scale variability in near shore regions which is comparable to the mesh of the model, suggests that the mesh resolution is insufficient in the near coastal regions. Even with a finer mesh in these areas, without detailed bottom topography and a spatial varying friction depending on bed types and bed forms, which is not available, model skill would probably not be improved. In addition in the near shore region, as shown in the literature, the solution is sensitive to the form of the wetting/drying algorithm used in the model. Calculations with a three dimensional version of the F.V. model show that for a given value of k, damping is reduced compared to the two dimensional version due to the differences in bed stress formulation, with the three dimensional model yielding an accurate tidal distribution over the region. (1) Description of models slightly enhanced. As a detailed description is given in published papers, these are cited, as we do not wish to repeat information. In addition since a functional form of the solution is given over each finite element or finite volume this can be used to interpolate solutions (e.g. water elevations) to any location. This point made in text. (2) It is made clear that the staircase representation of the coastline only relates to a certain class of finite difference model. (3) The k-0.003 calculations are mentioned "early on". (4) Possibility of lack of mesh resolution influencing solution of higher harmonics is discussed in context of the fact that this could also be influenced by "wetting and drying". Additional references added. (5) Abstract rephrased to suggest this, rather than claim that it has been shown. Similar in text. (6) Elaborated to show that in the near short region the amplitude of the higher harmonics changes very rapidly from one mesh element to another. A sure sign of a lack of spatial convergence. The confusion between temporal convergence, where iteration ensures that a converged solution does occur and spatial convergence is now clarified. (7) The realistic nature of these coefficients is c...