What do you Count/Not Count When Clinching?

[ethanhopkin14]

Hard question to answer since most people have a variety of definitions to clinching, but on average, do small pull-offs count when clinching.  I have an interstate shield on this thread but I am talking about all freeways. 

What I am asking about is you exit the freeway to get a bite to eat and then re-enter the freeway and continue your trip.  You didn't travel over that over/under pass so does it count?  In that case (say you are traveling west) do you get on the freeway going eastbound to the next exit, so you can turnaround and travel over the skipped over/under pass?

How about rest areas, parking areas, welcome centers and toll oasis?  Since its an on/off with no access to the opposite direction so no means of doubling back, do they count?

My opinion is exiting to go to a gas station or get a burger does not count as clinching.  A lot of times on a long road trip I will be heading back the same route and make sure not to stop at the same places or take the same exits so I can cover the main lanes of the exits I took on the way out. Rest Areas are technically a part of the freeway in my opinion, but I make it a point not to stop at the same rest area on the way back as well in case I flip flop on that one, which I do.   

Thoughts?

[Rothman]

I do little turnarounds over borders when it comes to county clinching -- if I am not in that new county, then where am I?  For interstates, I only need to count one direction, but if I get off, I do need to backtrack to get the over or underpass.

That said, for special cases like I-95 in NJ or I-670 in Columbus or I-480...I do clinch the legs or spurs.

[kphoger]

What I am asking about is you exit the freeway to get a bite to eat and then re-enter the freeway and continue your trip.  You didn't travel over that over/under pass so does it count?

I don't track my clinches.  But, in my opinion, the ramps are just as much a part of the freeway as the mainline roadways.  You may not have traveled the mainline across that side road, but you did travel the ramps across it.  Unless you're reeeeeeally nit-picky and refuse to count the portion shown in red below.



... in which case, I begin to question your sanity.  Heck, what if there were a wreck in front of you on an Interstate, and you had to drive around it off-pavement?  Would that disqualify a clinch?  At some point, you gotta be realistic.

Just my opinion.

[1995hoo]

I am sure we have had this discussion before because I recall a lot of discussion about the "same exit principle" whereby if you exit to use a gas station, then get back on at the same interchange. A lot of people considered that close enough and will count it. I don't recall the name of the thread, but I know it's been discussed.

Edited to add: https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=9287.msg216495#msg216495

[Max Rockatansky]

What I am asking about is you exit the freeway to get a bite to eat and then re-enter the freeway and continue your trip.  You didn't travel over that over/under pass so does it count?

I don't track my clinches.  But, in my opinion, the ramps are just as much a part of the freeway as the mainline roadways.  You may not have traveled the mainline across that side road, but you did travel the ramps across it.  Unless you're reeeeeeally nit-picky and refuse to count the portion shown in red below.



... in which case, I begin to question your sanity.  Heck, what if there were a wreck in front of you on an Interstate, and you had to drive around it off-pavement?  Would that disqualify a clinch?  At some point, you gotta be realistic.

Just my opinion.

I agree with this statement regarding ramps and more so what was said about sanity.  Long ago I was far more worried about clinching roads in State Highway systems than I was concerned about driving what I thought was fun.  Fun doesn't necessarily need to include a clinch of a Route nor the technicalities they come with it sometimes.  For example; for me to go back and finish what little I have left in Arizona's State Highway system would require me to go somewhere just to drive couple new freeway segments and a boring flat road near Willcox.  To me that's tedious and just not with the effort to do.  Also, it never bothered me not to count a border checkpoint beyond the turnaround even if it was technically part of a highway.

[SkyPesos]

My guidelines for clinching are pretty lenient atm:

- an exit counts regardless if it's on the mainline or one of the ramps. So that means gas/food/rest stops count, as well as my home exit, as I have little reason to use the overpass there.
- direction doesn't matter. So, for example, a drive on I-71 on southbound between exit X and its southern terminus and a separate trip northbound from that same exit to its northern terminus will count the route as clinched for me.
- since I only have my license for about a year at this point, I'm counting ones that I'm a passenger on as part of a clinch. If it's me driving only, literally the only interstates I've clinched would be I-471 and I-675.

[kphoger]

- since I only have my license for about a year at this point, I'm counting ones that I'm a passenger on as part of a clinch. If it's me driving only, literally the only interstate I've clinched would be I-471.

I would count it I were a passenger but old enough to drive, but not if I weren't.  That is to say, switching off at the wheel with my wife doesn't detract.  But being in a car when I was eight years old doesn't cut the mustard.

[NWI_Irish96]

I didn't start logging my traveled routes until I was in my 30s, so an awful lot of my route log is reconstructed from memory. I don't remember what exits I used. Also, I use travelmapping.net and they don't even have separate waypoints for exit and entrance ramps so taking all of that into consideration I count a road or road segment as clinched even if I've missed an overpass. Same goes for a surface highway where the entrance and exit to a gas station or restaurant might cause me to miss 20 feet or so of highway pavement.

As for being a passenger, I count it if I was awake.

[NWI_Irish96]

I would count it I were a passenger but old enough to drive, but not if I weren't.  That is to say, switching off at the wheel with my wife doesn't detract.  But being in a car when I was eight years old doesn't cut the mustard.

My parents were big into long car trips when I was a kid. We went to DC, Georgia, Florida, Colorado and California. There are a couple thousand miles from those trips that I haven't seen since and I still count them since I remember them.

[1995hoo]

I would count it I were a passenger but old enough to drive, but not if I weren't.  That is to say, switching off at the wheel with my wife doesn't detract.  But being in a car when I was eight years old doesn't cut the mustard.

My parents were big into long car trips when I was a kid. We went to DC, Georgia, Florida, Colorado and California. There are a couple thousand miles from those trips that I haven't seen since and I still count them since I remember them.

I do the same. We took several multiple-week family vacations in Eastern Canada (1982 trip to Nova Scotia, Newfoundland, and New Brunswick; 1984 trip to Ontario and Quebec; 1986 trip to Ontario that saw us get all the way up to Moosonee and Moose Factory; 1987 trip to Michigan that saw us return via Ontario), plus a 1989 Boy Scout trip to the Canadian Jamboree on PEI. I was well-aware of roads, where we were, and where we were going, so I count those trips. The parts that I don't recall where we went would mostly be things that I wouldn't be counting for "clinch" purposes anyway, like local driving on city streets or similar. I've been back to some of those places myself, but I'm completely certain there are a fair number I will never seen again (northern Ontario, including Cochrane and Timmins, is probably at the top of that list), so I don't see why I wouldn't count them.

Regarding some people saying "I must be the driver," in the previous thread I linked above, someone made the good point that as a passenger you are better able to look around and focus on things other than strictly driving. I remember when I was 15 and had my learner's permit and we took a family trip to New York, I drove most of the way and my father commented on how nice it was to get to look around and see what was along those roads. He had always been the driver prior to that trip.

[SkyPesos]

- since I only have my license for about a year at this point, I'm counting ones that I'm a passenger on as part of a clinch. If it's me driving only, literally the only interstate I've clinched would be I-471.

I would count it I were a passenger but old enough to drive, but not if I weren't.  That is to say, switching off at the wheel with my wife doesn't detract.  But being in a car when I was eight years old doesn't cut the mustard.

For roads that I've been on below the driving age, I count ones I'm 100% sure with, which is most likely almost everything from about the age of 9 for me, since that's when I started to pay attention to roads. That only adds in one 2di for me (I-71), but a decent amount of 3di (3/4 I-270, I-271, 2/4 I-275, 2/3 I-475, 2/3 I-675, 2/2 I-670, 1/3 I-470, I-170, I-865, + many more), and the QEW in Ontario. If I'm unsure about a road, I'm not counting it.

Though I'll specifically mention one road that has a combination of someone else driving and my own that's in my clinch list: I-275 around Cincinnati. Going clockwise, I've been on every part of I-275 between exit 11 (Creation Museum exit) and exit 4 (CVG Airport exit) as a passenger on various trips. Only got the missing 7 mile segment between exits 4 and 11 on a trip specifically to finish that part when I was completing my 50 hours for my learner's permit.

[hbelkins]

If I exit and enter at the same interchange, I count it.

[CoreySamson]

My opinion of a complete clinch is that you drive on the entire road from beginning to end (not necessarily in one sitting and in either direction). I regard if you exit then get back on the freeway, then that doesn't count for a complete clinch IMO. However, I think that if you came back in the other direction and drove over that exit, then that would be a clinch. Example:

Let's say I haven't clinched I-12 (even though I have), and I stopped at the Pilot truck stop here at exit 40 after driving the entire road from Baton Rouge to that point eastbound. If I get back on at that exit eastbound and stay on I-12 all the way to Slidell, then I haven't clinched the route because I haven't driven over the overpass at exit 40. But if on my way back home, I drive I-12 back west and stop somewhere closer to Baton Rouge, then the clinch would count because I drove over the overpass at exit 40 on the way back. TL;DR, direction doesn't matter.

Here's an overview of what I do and do not count when it comes to clinching (I guess I am a bit of a perfectionist):

Count:
Emergency Pull Offs
Border Checkpoints
Toll Plazas
Trips as Passenger (though I mark them with an asterisk)

Don't Count:
Exits
Ramps
Rest/Parking Areas
Parallel Routes in Concurrencies (think I-10/I-45 in Houston)

[1995hoo]

....
Parallel Routes in Concurrencies (think I-10/I-45 in Houston)

Curious what exactly you mean there. Let me use Atlanta as an example as somewhere I'm more familiar with than Houston. I've clinched I-85, the whole thing from Petersburg to Montgomery. I-85 has the well-known concurrency with I-75 in Atlanta. I have not clinched I-75.

Suppose I were coming from the south on I-75 and I exited to go west on I-20. Then on another trip, suppose I were coming from the north on I-75 and I exited at North Avenue to go to the Varsity and then did not return to the highway. In your view, does that mean that I have not travelled the part of I-75 between North Avenue and I-20 because I've only travelled it "as part of I-85" ?

Just trying to understand what you mean by that point. I don't count it the same way, if I'm understanding your meaning. In my view, driving that section of highway that bears both numbers is sufficient to count it towards both clinches.

[SEWIGuy]

If I exit and enter at the same interchange, I count it.

Agreed.

Although once on a two-lane road, I turned left to get a coffee at a Starbucks, but then re-entered the highway from the street so I could utilize the light.  So I missed maybe about 100 feet.  It bugged me so much, that I doubled back about a mile down the road.

And that my friends, is how I clinched US-34 in Illinois.

[CoreySamson]

....
Parallel Routes in Concurrencies (think I-10/I-45 in Houston)

Curious what exactly you mean there. Let me use Atlanta as an example as somewhere I'm more familiar with than Houston. I've clinched I-85, the whole thing from Petersburg to Montgomery. I-85 has the well-known concurrency with I-75 in Atlanta. I have not clinched I-75.

Suppose I were coming from the south on I-75 and I exited to go west on I-20. Then on another trip, suppose I were coming from the north on I-75 and I exited at North Avenue to go to the Varsity and then did not return to the highway. In your view, does that mean that I have not travelled the part of I-75 between North Avenue and I-20 because I've only travelled it "as part of I-85" ?

Just trying to understand what you mean by that point. I don't count it the same way, if I'm understanding your meaning. In my view, driving that section of highway that bears both numbers is sufficient to count it towards both clinches.

What I meant is if you're driving a concurrency where the two routes are on separate lanes (such as my I-10/I-45 example), then only the route you are on counts towards clinching it. Normal concurrencies where the two routes share the lanes totally count for both. This is why I didn't have TX-288 clinched for a while, even though I live right by it. The northernmost section of it is concurrent with I-69/US 59, but they are on different lanes. If I wanted to go up to north Houston, I would usually use I-69 in that area, not TX-288 which connects to I-45.

[SkyPesos]

What I meant is if you're driving a concurrency where the two routes are on separate lanes (such as my I-10/I-45 example), then only the route you are on counts towards clinching it. Normal concurrencies where the two routes share the lanes totally count for both. This is why I didn't have TX-288 clinched for a while, even though I live right by it. The northernmost section of it is concurrent with I-69/US 59, but they are on different lanes. If I wanted to go up to north Houston, I would usually use I-69 in that area, not TX-288 which connects to I-45.

If they're on separate lanes, is it even a concurrency anymore? Seems to be more like parallel routes rather than concurrent routes.

[TheHighwayMan3561]

I'm very liberal with my rules. I've counted two clinches based on full closures of the highways we were doing because the closure was only a couple blocks and I could see all of what I missed ("sight clinched"). If the closure is a lengthy one I don't count things like that, obviously.

[1995hoo]

....
Parallel Routes in Concurrencies (think I-10/I-45 in Houston)

Curious what exactly you mean there. Let me use Atlanta as an example as somewhere I'm more familiar with than Houston. I've clinched I-85, the whole thing from Petersburg to Montgomery. I-85 has the well-known concurrency with I-75 in Atlanta. I have not clinched I-75.

Suppose I were coming from the south on I-75 and I exited to go west on I-20. Then on another trip, suppose I were coming from the north on I-75 and I exited at North Avenue to go to the Varsity and then did not return to the highway. In your view, does that mean that I have not travelled the part of I-75 between North Avenue and I-20 because I've only travelled it "as part of I-85" ?

Just trying to understand what you mean by that point. I don't count it the same way, if I'm understanding your meaning. In my view, driving that section of highway that bears both numbers is sufficient to count it towards both clinches.

What I meant is if you're driving a concurrency where the two routes are on separate lanes (such as my I-10/I-45 example), then only the route you are on counts towards clinching it. Normal concurrencies where the two routes share the lanes totally count for both. This is why I didn't have TX-288 clinched for a while, even though I live right by it. The northernmost section of it is concurrent with I-69/US 59, but they are on different lanes. If I wanted to go up to north Houston, I would usually use I-69 in that area, not TX-288 which connects to I-45.

OK, thanks. I didn't follow the distinction because I haven't been to Houston. I suppose the part of I-85 that runs between the carriageways of I-285 southwest of Atlanta might be similar. It never even occurred to me to consider that towards I-285 because I always figured they're two completely separate roads due to the design.

[kphoger]

What I meant is if you're driving a concurrency where the two routes are on separate lanes (such as my I-10/I-45 example), then only the route you are on counts towards clinching it. Normal concurrencies where the two routes share the lanes totally count for both. This is why I didn't have TX-288 clinched for a while, even though I live right by it. The northernmost section of it is concurrent with I-69/US 59, but they are on different lanes. If I wanted to go up to north Houston, I would usually use I-69 in that area, not TX-288 which connects to I-45.

If they're on separate lanes, is it even a concurrency anymore? Seems to be more like parallel routes rather than concurrent routes.

Agreed.  In my estimation, I-10 and I-45 are not concurrent in Houston to begin with.  They just have a long, drawn-out interchange.

[CoreySamson]

What I meant is if you're driving a concurrency where the two routes are on separate lanes (such as my I-10/I-45 example), then only the route you are on counts towards clinching it. Normal concurrencies where the two routes share the lanes totally count for both. This is why I didn't have TX-288 clinched for a while, even though I live right by it. The northernmost section of it is concurrent with I-69/US 59, but they are on different lanes. If I wanted to go up to north Houston, I would usually use I-69 in that area, not TX-288 which connects to I-45.

If they're on separate lanes, is it even a concurrency anymore? Seems to be more like parallel routes rather than concurrent routes.

By that logic, then, wouldn't that mean toll lanes are not part of the same route as the free route? It's not a perfect comparison, but it's something interesting to think about.

I regard parallel freeways as roads beside each other (like the extreme east end of the Westpark Tollway and I-69 in Houston). I'd still call instances where one freeway is in the median of another a concurrency but that's just my opinion. Perhaps we should create a more defined term for that sort of thing?

[kphoger]

By that logic, then, wouldn't that mean toll lanes are not part of the same route as the free route? It's not a perfect comparison, but it's something interesting to think about.

I don't see toll/free or local/express lanes being any different than regular lanes.  There might be simple white lines between them, there might be paved hash marks, there might be a Jersey barrier, but it's all the same highway regardless.  It's all Route ###.

[SkyPesos]

By that logic, then, wouldn't that mean toll lanes are not part of the same route as the free route? It's not a perfect comparison, but it's something interesting to think about.

This is what I have in mind for that:
- Toll lanes/express lanes are part of the same route because they share the same route number with the local lanes, even if they're a jersey barrier or grass median away.
- Parallel routes are two routes that parallel each other with separate numbers on each physical roadway, like the I-10/I-45 Houston example and I-29/I-80 in Council Bluffs.
- Concurrencies are when two routes share the same roadway and the physical roadway is generally recognized to be part of both route numbers.

You may have something different, but this makes the most sense to me.

[1995hoo]

What I meant is if you're driving a concurrency where the two routes are on separate lanes (such as my I-10/I-45 example), then only the route you are on counts towards clinching it. Normal concurrencies where the two routes share the lanes totally count for both. This is why I didn't have TX-288 clinched for a while, even though I live right by it. The northernmost section of it is concurrent with I-69/US 59, but they are on different lanes. If I wanted to go up to north Houston, I would usually use I-69 in that area, not TX-288 which connects to I-45.

If they're on separate lanes, is it even a concurrency anymore? Seems to be more like parallel routes rather than concurrent routes.

Agreed.  In my estimation, I-10 and I-45 are not concurrent in Houston to begin with.  They just have a long, drawn-out interchange.

I just looked at Google Maps. It strikes me as being pretty much the same as I-85/I-285 southwest of Atlanta and I-85 and US-74 near Kings Mountain, North Carolina. I wouldn't view any of those as concurrencies.

[webny99]

I don't track my clinches.  But, in my opinion, the ramps are just as much a part of the freeway as the mainline roadways.  You may not have traveled the mainline across that side road, but you did travel the ramps across it.  Unless you're reeeeeeally nit-picky and refuse to count the portion shown in red below.

[img snipped]

... in which case, I begin to question your sanity.  Heck, what if there were a wreck in front of you on an Interstate, and you had to drive around it off-pavement?  Would that disqualify a clinch?  At some point, you gotta be realistic.

This is actually the #1 reason why I don't track my clinches either. Merely thinking about technicalities like this one starts to bring on a headache.