Which 2dis get roasted the most/least?

[bing101]

I-80 most roasted interstate in Northern California due to traffic on the Bay Bridge toll plaza.

[dvferyance]

I would love to know how no one ever complains about the fact that the segment of I-43 between Beloit and Milwaukee  gets an odd number even though it is an east-west route. Granted it's more NE-SW, but it bears no real relationship to the N-S segment. I highly doubt that someone from Beloit takes I-43 the whole way to Green Bay, largely because the stadium is off of 41. I would call the Beloit-Milwaukee section of I-43 I-92.

That's the one thing I don't like about I-43. I honestly wish the designation got changed, too.

There were actually two proposed routes that could've been called I-92 as well:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East%E2%80%93West_Highway_(New_England)

as the only 3dis in Wisconsin are short routes that go through Milwaukee.

And the 12 feet of I-535 in superior. It's one of the reasons why I make the case for I-441.

[kkt]

I-80 most roasted interstate in Northern California due to traffic on the Bay Bridge toll plaza.

If only it was just the toll plaza!  I-80 is a generally miserable experience from San Francisco at least past Vacaville.

[ethanhopkin14]

As a Texan, I take pride in having the shortest I-x0 and I-x5 (the latter intrastate) in our state.  TO me it kinda shows how important and large the state is.  I am not one of the group that demands I-45 go to Tulsa.  If they decided to extend it tomorrow, I will be right there taking pictures of the first shields at the ceremony because I love new interstates, but it doesn't make any difference to me because I like the fact we have an I-x5 completely inside our state boundaries.  Besides, I-30 gets a little bit of a pass because it is part of the link from NC and TN I-40 to western I-10 so it is a major route despite it's length, and just like it does, I-45 defaults onto I-35 for long range traffic.

What really drives me crazy is unceremonious ends to interstates

Interstates terminate for one of 3 reasons always

1. They terminate into other interstates, either in T fashion or they default onto a similarly routed even or odd interstate.

2. They end because of a natural or political boundary (an ocean or national border)

3. Arbitrary. This one, excluding 3dis, should be eliminated. 

The system is faulty if there are "dead ends" to interstates.  I-27, I-44, and I-72 are violators.  The should be connected to another interstate at it's end.  I-64 used to be like this, but right minds decided it needed to default onto I-70 and all was right in the world.

[sprjus4]

^

Both I-27 and I-44 end at cities with over 100,000 population, so to some extent they are logical termini, it's not like they end at some small town.

I-44 originally ended in Oklahoma City, it was extended southwest along the existing H.E. Bailey Turnpike towards Lawton and Wichita Falls in 1982.

I agree ultimately they should be extended, but they aren't necessarily useless interstates even now.

[Henry]

I-80 most roasted interstate in Northern California due to traffic on the Bay Bridge toll plaza.

I disagree with that assessment. That honor would go to I-238, because where the hell is I-38?

[ethanhopkin14]

^

Both I-27 and I-44 end at cities with over 100,000 population, so to some extent they are logical termini, it's not like they end at some small town.

I-44 originally ended in Oklahoma City, it was extended southwest along the existing H.E. Bailey Turnpike towards Lawton and Wichita Falls in 1982.

I agree ultimately they should be extended, but they aren't necessarily useless interstates even now.

Lubbock is a small town, sorry to break it to ya.

[sprjus4]

^

Both I-27 and I-44 end at cities with over 100,000 population, so to some extent they are logical termini, it's not like they end at some small town.

I-44 originally ended in Oklahoma City, it was extended southwest along the existing H.E. Bailey Turnpike towards Lawton and Wichita Falls in 1982.

I agree ultimately they should be extended, but they aren't necessarily useless interstates even now.

Lubbock is a small town, sorry to break it to ya.

Lubbock city population is around 260,000.
Metropolitan population is over 320,000.

11th most populous city in Texas, 84th largest in the United States.

That's not a small town.

Here's a question - is Midland-Odessa a "small town" ?

[ethanhopkin14]

^

Both I-27 and I-44 end at cities with over 100,000 population, so to some extent they are logical termini, it's not like they end at some small town.

I-44 originally ended in Oklahoma City, it was extended southwest along the existing H.E. Bailey Turnpike towards Lawton and Wichita Falls in 1982.

I agree ultimately they should be extended, but they aren't necessarily useless interstates even now.

Lubbock is a small town, sorry to break it to ya.

Metropolitan population is over 300,000.

That's not a small town.

By Texas standards, it's small.  Corpus Christi has that many people in it's city limits and it's considered a small town.  Austin, in the 1970s had that many people in it's city limits and was always called a sleepy little college town.  When you have a state with 5 of the most populous cities in the country in it, you do tend to say towns with 300,000 in the metro are small.  Besides, it still shouldn't end there even if Lubbock had a million people in it, when 98 miles gets you a connection to I-20.  By that logic I-10 and I-45 should stop in downtown Houston.  No need to extend, the city has over 2 million people in it.  End it like I-27 and be done with it. 

[CtrlAltDel]

The system is faulty if there are "dead ends" to interstates.  I-27, I-44, and I-72 are violators.  The should be connected to another interstate at it's end.  I-64 used to be like this, but right minds decided it needed to default onto I-70 and all was right in the world.

What about the northern terminus of I-35?

[ethanhopkin14]

The system is faulty if there are "dead ends" to interstates.  I-27, I-44, and I-72 are violators.  The should be connected to another interstate at it's end.  I-64 used to be like this, but right minds decided it needed to default onto I-70 and all was right in the world.

What about the northern terminus of I-35?

What about it.  I have said since I was a kid it needs to go to the Canadian Border. 

[CtrlAltDel]

What about it.

I was wondering if you'd consider it an "arbitrary" terminus to an interstate or not. I didn't think there'd be any confusion on that. I apologize for the ambiguity.

[ethanhopkin14]

The system is faulty if there are "dead ends" to interstates.  I-27, I-44, and I-72 are violators.  The should be connected to another interstate at it's end.  I-64 used to be like this, but right minds decided it needed to default onto I-70 and all was right in the world.

What about the northern terminus of I-35?

What about it.  I have said since I was a kid it needs to go to the Canadian Border.

I was wondering if you'd consider it an "arbitrary" terminus to an interstate or not.

Yes, that is very arbitrary. 

[sprjus4]

By Texas standards, it's small.  Corpus Christi has that many people in it's city limits and it's considered a small town.  Austin, in the 1970s had that many people in it's city limits and was always called a sleepy little college town.  When you have a state with 5 of the most populous cities in the country in it, you do tend to say towns with 300,000 in the metro are small.  Besides, it still shouldn't end there even if Lubbock had a million people in it, when 98 miles gets you a connection to I-20.  By that logic I-10 and I-45 should stop in downtown Houston.  No need to extend, the city has over 2 million people in it.  End it like I-27 and be done with it.

300,000 may not be "large" by Texas standards, but it's still sizable and not a "small town" by any technical standards.

I agree the interstates should ultimately extend further, but in current form, they still serve a purpose.

And for the record, I-45 terminates in the Houston and Dallas metropolitan areas. It doesn't extend beyond either. Yes, it goes south to Galveston, but that's still apart of the whole metro.

Should I-64 extend beyond Hampton Roads, VA? Should the future I-87 corridor between Raleigh / Durham and Hampton Roads extend beyond both cities? Should I-37 extend beyond Corpus Christi? Should I-26 extend beyond Kingsport? Should I-20 extend beyond Florence?

[ethanhopkin14]

By Texas standards, it's small.  Corpus Christi has that many people in it's city limits and it's considered a small town.  Austin, in the 1970s had that many people in it's city limits and was always called a sleepy little college town.  When you have a state with 5 of the most populous cities in the country in it, you do tend to say towns with 300,000 in the metro are small.  Besides, it still shouldn't end there even if Lubbock had a million people in it, when 98 miles gets you a connection to I-20.  By that logic I-10 and I-45 should stop in downtown Houston.  No need to extend, the city has over 2 million people in it.  End it like I-27 and be done with it.

300,000 may not be "large" by Texas standards, but it's still sizable and not a "small town" by any technical standards.

I agree the interstates should ultimately extend further, but in current form, they still serve a purpose.

And for the record, I-45 terminates in the Houston and Dallas metropolitan areas. It doesn't extend beyond either. Yes, it goes south to Galveston, but that's still apart of the whole metro.

Should I-64 extend beyond Hampton Roads, VA? Should the future I-87 corridor between Raleigh / Durham and Hampton Roads extend beyond both cities?

I-45 terminates in Galveston because there is an ocean.  I-45 terminates at I-30 defaulting to I-35E for northern traffic, so it serves it's purpose that way.  Now, if I-45 went through the downtown Dallas area made it to the north side of town and ended in Plano on Central Expressway I would say that's not right either. 

[kphoger]

By Texas standards, it's small.  Corpus Christi has that many people in it's city limits and it's considered a small town.  Austin, in the 1970s had that many people in it's city limits and was always called a sleepy little college town.  When you have a state with 5 of the most populous cities in the country in it, you do tend to say towns with 300,000 in the metro are small.  Besides, it still shouldn't end there even if Lubbock had a million people in it, when 98 miles gets you a connection to I-20.  By that logic I-10 and I-45 should stop in downtown Houston.  No need to extend, the city has over 2 million people in it.  End it like I-27 and be done with it.

300,000 may not be "large" by Texas standards, but it's still sizable and not a "small town" by any technical standards.

It's also telling that Lubbock is the largest metropolitan area in the entire pink area below.

Regional importance, anyone?

[US 89]

I’ve been through Lubbock once, and my opinion is that it feels smaller than it is. It felt very dead the one time I drove through. Granted that was on a Saturday morning in summer, but if you had asked me to guess the population right after that, I would probably have guessed something around 200k - about 33% too small.

[webny99]

It's also telling that Lubbock is the largest metropolitan area in the entire pink area below.

Regional importance, anyone?
[img snipped]

That's a bit misleading, because much of the pink area is closer to El Paso, DFW, Austin, and/or San Antonio.

[kphoger]

It's also telling that Lubbock is the largest metropolitan area in the entire pink area below.

Regional importance, anyone?
[img snipped]

That's a bit misleading, because much of the pink area is closer to El Paso, DFW, Austin, and/or San Antonio.

I excluded all counties covered by other MSAs, and I could actually have made the pink area bigger, especially at the southeastern end.  If I have more time at some point and remember to do so, I'd like to extend the map to include other states, showing just how large a region has Lubbock as its most populous MSA.

[kkt]

I-80 most roasted interstate in Northern California due to traffic on the Bay Bridge toll plaza.

I disagree with that assessment. That honor would go to I-238, because where the hell is I-38?

I thought the thread was about two digit interstates.

[STLmapboy]

I didn't even realize 41 followed 94 all the way to the IL line. I don't like how the designation ends abruptly at IL and continues on a freeway. If you're gonna make an interstate, truncate it to I-894 (which 41 entirely overlaps anyway, so just end 41 at the 94 interchange by MKE).

[sprjus4]

^

It was supposedly extended along I-94 to the border in order to indicate North-South since I-94's directional markers are East-West on the due north-south interstate.

Also probably to not have to re-number the exits since I-41 and US-41 would share mileage from MM 0.

[Henry]

I-80 most roasted interstate in Northern California due to traffic on the Bay Bridge toll plaza.

I disagree with that assessment. That honor would go to I-238, because where the hell is I-38?

I thought the thread was about two digit interstates.

In that case, I take it back. I-80 may be the most roasted 2di in Northern CA, but in the state as a whole, I'd say either I-5 or I-10 in L.A. is the most roasted one in the entire state.

[texaskdog]

8 should be 10, easy one, come on now

[texaskdog]

For US-2 in Michigan I would say that there isn't enough population in the U.P. to justify an east-west Interstate. Duluth is a bigger city but quite aways from the U.P. and there isn't much in between. The largest city in the U.P. is Marquette with about 21,000 people and only two other cities with a population of over 10,000 (Sault Ste. Marie and Escanaba). Sault Ste. Marie already has I-75 and Escanaba really has no need to be connected to the Interstate. For east-west travel US-2 and M-28 do fine for the U.P.

I would like M-28 to become US 2 and US 2 to become US 8 east of Norway but they definitely don't need to be freeways