News:

The AARoads Wiki is live! Come check it out!

Main Menu

I-93 Massachusets Mileage/Exit#'s

Started by ATLRedSoxFan, February 13, 2011, 06:07:08 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

ATLRedSoxFan

I was in Massachusetts this last week, drove I-93 several times and noticed the exit numbers an mileage signs didn't corespond, but off by 3 miles or so. What's up with that?


Duke87

The exit numbers are sequential. That they have any resemblance to the local mile markers is just coincidence.


If you always take the same road, you will never see anything new.

Michael in Philly

Quote from: ATLRedSoxFan on February 13, 2011, 06:07:08 PM
I was in Massachusetts this last week, drove I-93 several times and noticed the exit numbers an mileage signs didn't corespond, but off by 3 miles or so. What's up with that?

Are you by any chance a Red Sox fan from Atlanta?  'cause if so, you might be interested to know Georgia used sequential numbering until a decade or so ago too.

At this point, the sequential-numbering states are New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut and New York.  Delaware's got a mixture of systems (even kilometers on Del. 1)  When I started paying attention to this stuff 30 years ago, it was also true of Maine, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Georgia, Florida and Mississippi.  Also some major toll roads like the Ohio Turnpike.
RIP Dad 1924-2012.

froggie

New Jersey (Turnpike) and Virginia (I-264, I-664, and I-581) still use sequential-numbering in a limited fashion.

ATLRedSoxFan

Quote from: Michael in Philly on February 13, 2011, 11:59:29 PM
Quote from: ATLRedSoxFan on February 13, 2011, 06:07:08 PM
I was in Massachusetts this last week, drove I-93 several times and noticed the exit numbers an mileage signs didn't corespond, but off by 3 miles or so. What's up with that?

Are you by any chance a Red Sox fan from Atlanta?  'cause if so, you might be interested to know Georgia used sequential numbering until a decade or so ago too.

At this point, the sequential-numbering states are New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut and New York.  Delaware's got a mixture of systems (even kilometers on Del. 1)  When I started paying attention to this stuff 30 years ago, it was also true of Maine, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Georgia, Florida and Mississippi.  Also some major toll roads like the Ohio Turnpike.

As a matter of fact, Red Sox Fan from Atlanta moving to Boston in about six weeks.

Yeah, I remember the sequential numbering in Georgia, and GA 400 still uses it.

74/171FAN

#5
Quote from: froggie on February 14, 2011, 06:48:47 AM
New Jersey (Turnpike) and Virginia (I-264, I-664, and I-581) still use sequential-numbering in a limited fashion.
I-464 in VA still uses sequential numbering too last I remembered.
I am now a PennDOT employee.  My opinions/views do not necessarily reflect the opinions/views of PennDOT.

Henry

Quote from: 74/171FAN on February 14, 2011, 08:33:35 AM
Quote from: froggie on February 14, 2011, 06:48:47 AM
New Jersey (Turnpike) and Virginia (I-264, I-664, and I-581) still use sequential-numbering in a limited fashion.
I-464 in VA still uses sequential nubering too last I remembered.

The only other example I can think of is I-695 around Baltimore. I-495 around Washington once used them, too, but the exits are now mileage-based, since a few numbers were repeated in both states, confusing motorists who were unfamiliar with the area.
Go Cubs Go! Go Cubs Go! Hey Chicago, what do you say? The Cubs are gonna win today!

Michael in Philly

Quote from: Henry on February 14, 2011, 08:45:05 AM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on February 14, 2011, 08:33:35 AM
Quote from: froggie on February 14, 2011, 06:48:47 AM
New Jersey (Turnpike) and Virginia (I-264, I-664, and I-581) still use sequential-numbering in a limited fashion.
I-464 in VA still uses sequential nubering too last I remembered.

The only other example I can think of is I-695 around Baltimore. I-495 around Washington once used them, too, but the exits are now mileage-based, since a few numbers were repeated in both states, confusing motorists who were unfamiliar with the area.

The thing about the Baltimore Beltway, if you watch the mileposts, is the exits are so close together that if they did officially switch to mileage-based numbering, some numbers would be tweaked by 1 in either direction, some wouldn't change at all.... which would probably be more confusing than it's worth.

I believe I-83 in the Baltimore city limits is actually consecutively numbered, then it switches to miles in Baltimore County.  83 was supposed to run farther south (really east) than it does now - it would have started at about the north end of the two tunnels, then run through now-gentrified areas of East Baltimore to downtown, where it starts now.  That bit was killed by community opposition.  But if I'm not mistaken, the starting point for mileposts is that original terminus.  Last exit on the consecutively-numbered city section is 10, first in the mileage-based suburban section is 12, so no one notices.

The piece of I-295 in Maine that runs through Portland, as opposed to the part north of there that was designated as 95 until 2005 has also kept sequential numbering, but there again the exits are so close to a mile apart that changing would have been more confusing than significant and it flows smoothly into the mileage-based section farther north (which was designated as I-95 and got its exits renumbered in 2005, at the same time the state switched to mileage-based numbering on the rest of 95)....

[end of hopefully-not-too-incoherent stream of consciousness]
RIP Dad 1924-2012.

Bickendan

I-84 in Portland, believe it or not, is sequential going east between I-5 and the northern I-205 junction, and smoothly switches to mileage from there -- with a bonus. If you note the mile markers and the exit numbers, they're off by two miles.

rickmastfan67


ethanhopkin14

When reading Wikipedia for an update on I-93's progress of switching from sequential to mile based exits, I noticed (going south to north) the first 7 exits on I-93 are numbered exit 63-69, then the next 6 exits are un-numbered, then the numbers start back up at EXIT 13 (which will kinda stay the same once the renumber takes place).  It has been years since I drove I-93 in this area and don't remember this bizarre exiting scheme.  Is Wikipedia correct on this one?

jp the roadgeek

#11
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on February 15, 2021, 02:44:53 PM
When reading Wikipedia for an update on I-93's progress of switching from sequential to mile based exits, I noticed (going south to north) the first 7 exits on I-93 are numbered exit 63-69, then the next 6 exits are un-numbered, then the numbers start back up at EXIT 13 (which will kinda stay the same once the renumber takes place).  It has been years since I drove I-93 in this area and don't remember this bizarre exiting scheme.  Is Wikipedia correct on this one?

Exit 63-69?!? Are they starting the mileposts from the CT/RI state line on I-95?!?  Or they might be going by the old numbering scheme for 128 from its pre-95 days (I remember seeing a picture from the Blizzard of 78 showing an Exit 65 in the area). According to MassDOT plans, The first 12 exits on I-93 are staying the same.

Interstates I've clinched: 97, 290 (MA), 291 (CT), 291 (MA), 293, 295 (DE-NJ-PA), 295 (RI-MA), 384, 391, 395 (CT-MA), 395 (MD), 495 (DE), 610 (LA), 684, 691, 695 (MD), 695 (NY), 795 (MD)

deathtopumpkins

#12
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on February 15, 2021, 02:44:53 PM
When reading Wikipedia for an update on I-93's progress of switching from sequential to mile based exits, I noticed (going south to north) the first 7 exits on I-93 are numbered exit 63-69, then the next 6 exits are un-numbered, then the numbers start back up at EXIT 13 (which will kinda stay the same once the renumber takes place).  It has been years since I drove I-93 in this area and don't remember this bizarre exiting scheme.  Is Wikipedia correct on this one?

It sounds like you're looking at the "old exit" column instead of the "new exit" one.

On the I-93 Wikipedia article the numbers in the "old" column are the old Route 128 exit numbers, continuing that road's sequence that began in Gloucester, and then north of there the old pre-Big Dig exit numbers. The six exits with no "old" number still have their pre-Big Dig exit numbers. The numbers in the "new" column are the current sequential numbers, since I-93 has not been converted to mileage-based yet.


Disregard, I misread!  :crazy:
Disclaimer: All posts represent my personal opinions and not those of my employer.

Clinched Highways | Counties Visited

hotdogPi

Quote from: deathtopumpkins on February 15, 2021, 03:20:59 PM
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on February 15, 2021, 02:44:53 PM
When reading Wikipedia for an update on I-93's progress of switching from sequential to mile based exits, I noticed (going south to north) the first 7 exits on I-93 are numbered exit 63-69, then the next 6 exits are un-numbered, then the numbers start back up at EXIT 13 (which will kinda stay the same once the renumber takes place).  It has been years since I drove I-93 in this area and don't remember this bizarre exiting scheme.  Is Wikipedia correct on this one?

It sounds like you're looking at the "old exit" column instead of the "new exit" one.

On the I-93 Wikipedia article the numbers in the "old" column are the old Route 128 exit numbers, continuing that road's sequence that began in Gloucester, and then north of there the old pre-Big Dig exit numbers. The six exits with no "old" number still have their pre-Big Dig exit numbers. The numbers in the "new" column are the current sequential numbers, since I-93 has not been converted to mileage-based yet.

No, south of Exit 12, the new numbers are the current ones, while north of Exit 12, the old ones are the current ones.
Clinched, minus I-93 (I'm missing a few miles and my file is incorrect)

Traveled, plus US 13, 44, and 50, and several state routes

I will be in Burlington VT for the eclipse.

ethanhopkin14

#14
Quote from: 1 on February 15, 2021, 03:25:56 PM
Quote from: deathtopumpkins on February 15, 2021, 03:20:59 PM
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on February 15, 2021, 02:44:53 PM
When reading Wikipedia for an update on I-93's progress of switching from sequential to mile based exits, I noticed (going south to north) the first 7 exits on I-93 are numbered exit 63-69, then the next 6 exits are un-numbered, then the numbers start back up at EXIT 13 (which will kinda stay the same once the renumber takes place).  It has been years since I drove I-93 in this area and don't remember this bizarre exiting scheme.  Is Wikipedia correct on this one?

It sounds like you're looking at the "old exit" column instead of the "new exit" one.

On the I-93 Wikipedia article the numbers in the "old" column are the old Route 128 exit numbers, continuing that road's sequence that began in Gloucester, and then north of there the old pre-Big Dig exit numbers. The six exits with no "old" number still have their pre-Big Dig exit numbers. The numbers in the "new" column are the current sequential numbers, since I-93 has not been converted to mileage-based yet.

No, south of Exit 12, the new numbers are the current ones, while north of Exit 12, the old ones are the current ones.

This is why I was confused.  From exit 13 north the OLD column is the sequential exit and the NEW column is the mile based exits. So I guess it threw in every version of "OLD " numbers??

With that being said, I was thinking all "OLD" exits are technically the current ones where "NEW" are the ones set to be installed. 

shadyjay

Personally I would've omitted the "old exit #s" 63-69 for present Exits 1-7, since 63-69 represented one of about 4 different exit numbering sequences on I-93, none of which has been used since the 80s:

Exits 63-69 was for the east/west portion that was originally Route 128.
Once past Braintree, exits counted down from 25, as you went north.  (There was a time when all roads intersecting 128 except the Mass Pike had the 128 exit as #25).
Then in Charlestown, the exits again counted up until reaching Exit 25 at Route 128 in Woburn/Redding.
I've also seen a RMcN atlas that had I-93 Exit 1 in Charlestown, with normal sequential system up to the NH state line.

In fact, maybe someone can remove those 63-69 numbers and replace them with just a "-".  Every time I go to change a table in wiki, the cells go all wonky.


abqtraveler

Quote from: Michael in Philly on February 13, 2011, 11:59:29 PM
Quote from: ATLRedSoxFan on February 13, 2011, 06:07:08 PM
I was in Massachusetts this last week, drove I-93 several times and noticed the exit numbers an mileage signs didn't corespond, but off by 3 miles or so. What's up with that?

Are you by any chance a Red Sox fan from Atlanta?  'cause if so, you might be interested to know Georgia used sequential numbering until a decade or so ago too.


I remember Georgia's sequential numbers. And Georgia went cold-turkey when they switched to mileage-based exit numbers, with no placards displaying the former exit numbers following the conversion.
2-d Interstates traveled:  4, 5, 8, 10, 15, 20, 24, 25, 27, 29, 35, 39, 40, 41, 43, 45, 49, 55, 57, 64, 65, 66, 69, 70, 71, 72, 74, 75, 76(E), 77, 78, 81, 83, 84(W), 85, 87(N), 89, 90, 91, 93, 94, 95

2-d Interstates Clinched:  12, 22, 30, 37, 44, 59, 80, 84(E), 86(E), 238, H1, H2, H3, H201

ethanhopkin14

Quote from: abqtraveler on February 15, 2021, 08:53:28 PM
Quote from: Michael in Philly on February 13, 2011, 11:59:29 PM
Quote from: ATLRedSoxFan on February 13, 2011, 06:07:08 PM
I was in Massachusetts this last week, drove I-93 several times and noticed the exit numbers an mileage signs didn't corespond, but off by 3 miles or so. What's up with that?

Are you by any chance a Red Sox fan from Atlanta?  'cause if so, you might be interested to know Georgia used sequential numbering until a decade or so ago too.


I remember Georgia's sequential numbers. And Georgia went cold-turkey when they switched to mileage-based exit numbers, with no placards displaying the former exit numbers following the conversion.

Really?  Like one day you woke up and the exit number was way different?  That's a tad shocking.

deathtopumpkins

Quote from: 1 on February 15, 2021, 03:25:56 PM
No, south of Exit 12, the new numbers are the current ones, while north of Exit 12, the old ones are the current ones.

Shoot, you're right. Guess I needed a bit more caffeine before reading that yesterday!

Doesn't help that the change is so minor. And I think whoever changed them jumped the gun a bit.




Since yesterday the old exit numbers in the 60s have been removed.
Disclaimer: All posts represent my personal opinions and not those of my employer.

Clinched Highways | Counties Visited

abqtraveler

Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on February 16, 2021, 08:59:56 AM
Quote from: abqtraveler on February 15, 2021, 08:53:28 PM
Quote from: Michael in Philly on February 13, 2011, 11:59:29 PM
Quote from: ATLRedSoxFan on February 13, 2011, 06:07:08 PM
I was in Massachusetts this last week, drove I-93 several times and noticed the exit numbers an mileage signs didn't corespond, but off by 3 miles or so. What's up with that?

Are you by any chance a Red Sox fan from Atlanta?  'cause if so, you might be interested to know Georgia used sequential numbering until a decade or so ago too.


I remember Georgia's sequential numbers. And Georgia went cold-turkey when they switched to mileage-based exit numbers, with no placards displaying the former exit numbers following the conversion.

Really?  Like one day you woke up and the exit number was way different?  That's a tad shocking.
Georgia sure did, and so did Virginia when they converted from sequential to mile-based. No "former exit" placards in either state to help smooth the transition. It was like jumping head first into the deep end of an ice-cold swimming pool. Other states that posted the former exit numbers for a few years following the transition is more like stepping down the stairs at the shallow end of said swimming pool, and eventually making your way to the deep end. In the case of Pennsylvania, it's been nearly 20 years since they converted from sequential to mileage-based exits, but a lot of interchange signage still have placards displaying the former sequential exit numbers.
2-d Interstates traveled:  4, 5, 8, 10, 15, 20, 24, 25, 27, 29, 35, 39, 40, 41, 43, 45, 49, 55, 57, 64, 65, 66, 69, 70, 71, 72, 74, 75, 76(E), 77, 78, 81, 83, 84(W), 85, 87(N), 89, 90, 91, 93, 94, 95

2-d Interstates Clinched:  12, 22, 30, 37, 44, 59, 80, 84(E), 86(E), 238, H1, H2, H3, H201

ethanhopkin14

Quote from: abqtraveler on February 16, 2021, 11:46:13 AM
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on February 16, 2021, 08:59:56 AM
Quote from: abqtraveler on February 15, 2021, 08:53:28 PM
Quote from: Michael in Philly on February 13, 2011, 11:59:29 PM
Quote from: ATLRedSoxFan on February 13, 2011, 06:07:08 PM
I was in Massachusetts this last week, drove I-93 several times and noticed the exit numbers an mileage signs didn't corespond, but off by 3 miles or so. What's up with that?

Are you by any chance a Red Sox fan from Atlanta?  'cause if so, you might be interested to know Georgia used sequential numbering until a decade or so ago too.


I remember Georgia's sequential numbers. And Georgia went cold-turkey when they switched to mileage-based exit numbers, with no placards displaying the former exit numbers following the conversion.

Really?  Like one day you woke up and the exit number was way different?  That's a tad shocking.
Georgia sure did, and so did Virginia when they converted from sequential to mile-based. No "former exit" placards in either state to help smooth the transition. It was like jumping head first into the deep end of an ice-cold swimming pool. Other states that posted the former exit numbers for a few years following the transition is more like stepping down the stairs at the shallow end of said swimming pool, and eventually making your way to the deep end. In the case of Pennsylvania, it's been nearly 20 years since they converted from sequential to mileage-based exits, but a lot of interchange signage still have placards displaying the former sequential exit numbers.

Yes, I was in Erie, PA in 2015 and saw the "OLD" placards still up on I-90.

ethanhopkin14

Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on February 16, 2021, 12:45:49 PM
Quote from: abqtraveler on February 16, 2021, 11:46:13 AM
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on February 16, 2021, 08:59:56 AM
Quote from: abqtraveler on February 15, 2021, 08:53:28 PM
Quote from: Michael in Philly on February 13, 2011, 11:59:29 PM
Quote from: ATLRedSoxFan on February 13, 2011, 06:07:08 PM
I was in Massachusetts this last week, drove I-93 several times and noticed the exit numbers an mileage signs didn't corespond, but off by 3 miles or so. What's up with that?

Are you by any chance a Red Sox fan from Atlanta?  'cause if so, you might be interested to know Georgia used sequential numbering until a decade or so ago too.


I remember Georgia's sequential numbers. And Georgia went cold-turkey when they switched to mileage-based exit numbers, with no placards displaying the former exit numbers following the conversion.

Really?  Like one day you woke up and the exit number was way different?  That's a tad shocking.
Georgia sure did, and so did Virginia when they converted from sequential to mile-based. No "former exit" placards in either state to help smooth the transition. It was like jumping head first into the deep end of an ice-cold swimming pool. Other states that posted the former exit numbers for a few years following the transition is more like stepping down the stairs at the shallow end of said swimming pool, and eventually making your way to the deep end. In the case of Pennsylvania, it's been nearly 20 years since they converted from sequential to mileage-based exits, but a lot of interchange signage still have placards displaying the former sequential exit numbers.

Yes, I was in Erie, PA in 2015 and saw the "OLD" placards still up on I-90.

Or you can be like Florida and have "OLD" placards and have one highway (I-110) where you just said screw it and kept the sequential numbering.  Although if I remember correctly, if I-110 were officially converted it would effect maybe 2 exits since the sequential and mile based exits are pretty close to being the same albeit some A-B situations. 

kramie13

What I find amusing is that with sequential exit numbering, there are more exits than miles on I-93 in Massachusetts!  Okay, *were* more exits.  Many were eliminated when the Big Dig tunnels were completed.  And I believe exit 19 was eliminated well before the Big Dig.

Thankfully mile-based exits will fix this.

PHLBOS

The upcoming mile-marker-based exit numbering along I-93 actually will have some of its northernmost interchanges decreasing from itheir old sequential numbers.  The current Exit 48 will eventually become the new Exit 46.
GPS does NOT equal GOD

Alps

I'm excited for a Boston that doesn't jump from exit 14 to 27 in about 3 miles.



Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.