States Ranked by Signage Quality

[webny99]

Do you think it is possible to actually measure signage quality to an extent that we can actually rank all the states from 1 to 50?
Some criteria would be error volume, message clarity, ability to identify location, and so forth.

For starters, some states that would be in the top ten, IMO:
Ohio/Minnesota/North Dakota

And the bottom ten (from what's been said on the forum, not personal experience):
Oklahoma/New Mexico

[hotdogPi]

Vermont ranks near top.

[wriddle082]

Here is a ranking of states I have sufficient knowledge of, off the top of my head, which could be a good baseline for further discussion:

Vermont
New York
Ohio
West Virginia
Texas
Maryland
Illinois
Virginia
Pennsylvania
Massachusetts
New Hampshire
Indiana
Wisconsin
Florida
North Carolina
South Carolina
Kansas
Missouri
Michigan
Colorado
Arkansas
Kentucky
Alabama
Louisiana
Nevada
Tennessee
Georgia
Mississippi
District of Columbia

[mrcmc888]

From the states I've been to, here are my rankings.

Vermont
South Dakota
Ohio
Maryland
North Carolina
New York
Florida
Kentucky
Delaware
Alabama
Virginia
Tennessee
Georgia
Oklahoma

Obviously not all, but roughly where each one compares to the others.

[Max Rockatansky]

New Mexico is probably the grand champion of bad, but really it is the whole highway system as a whole.  California is bad due to inconsistent signing among each district, it gets even worse on the Signed County Route level.  There a ton of Signs in California from decades ago given the huge amount of button copy still around.  Florida, Michigan, Arizona, and Minnesota has the best signage levels I've seen.  Wisconsin is probably the strangest with all the wooden single piece signs. 

[TheArkansasRoadgeek]

Do you think it is possible to actually measure signage quality to an extent that we can actually rank all the states from 1 to 50?
Some criteria would be error volume, message clarity, ability to identify location, and so forth.

For starters, some states that would be in the top ten, IMO:
Ohio/Minnesota/North Dakota

And the bottom ten (from what's been said on the forum, not personal experience):
Oklahoma/New Mexico

I would agree in regards to OK. There are some signs that are completely faded white.

[mrcmc888]

Do you think it is possible to actually measure signage quality to an extent that we can actually rank all the states from 1 to 50?
Some criteria would be error volume, message clarity, ability to identify location, and so forth.

For starters, some states that would be in the top ten, IMO:
Ohio/Minnesota/North Dakota

And the bottom ten (from what's been said on the forum, not personal experience):
Oklahoma/New Mexico

I would agree in regards to OK. There are some signs that are completely faded white.

Oklahoma's sign fails are enough to fill an entire thread and keep it going for years.

[MNHighwayMan]

Just going to add my opinion of the two states with which I'm most familiar.

I'd rank Minnesota #1, but I'm probably a bit biased. Definitely at/near the top, though. For Iowa, probably slightly above average. Its highways are typically signed well, but I hate wooden sign posts and there are some areas with old and faded signage that should probably be replaced.

[webny99]

It might prove beneficial to first identify a solid top ten and bottom ten.

Then we can hash out the order of those, and fill in the remaining thirty states based on above- or below-average.

[Scott5114]

Kansas, Tennessee, and Wisconsin belong up top.

[webny99]

Kansas, Tennessee, and Wisconsin belong up top.

Tennessee definitely does, but I don't recall anything outstanding above average in Wisconsin. Maybe that's just me not being attentive enough though.

[wriddle082]

Kansas, Tennessee, and Wisconsin belong up top.

Tennessee definitely does, but I don't recall anything outstanding above average in Wisconsin. Maybe that's just me not being attentive enough though.

I have a lot of nitpicks about Tennessee signage having lived there most of my life.  Very rarely do they post Bridge Icing or equivalent signage, many instances of sign rot (though mostly in the Middle TN region), spotty acknowledgment of route multiplexes, and the list goes on.  They generally spend more money on maintaining acceptable pavement quality than they do on signage.

[webny99]

Very rarely do they post Bridge Icing or equivalent signage.

Very rarely do bridges ice in Tennessee. I find "Bridge Ices Before Road" signs to be excessive, especially in PA. After the 18th bridge, we get the message.

[wriddle082]

Very rarely do they post Bridge Icing or equivalent signage.

Very rarely do bridges ice in Tennessee. I find "Bridge Ices Before Road" signs to be excessive, especially in PA. After the 18th bridge, we get the message.

Bridges do ice over frequently in TN during the winter months.  I should know as I've slid on them several times but fortunately done no damage.  It's generally a good warning that a bridge is coming up and to be cautious if the rest of the road is clear while the bridge may not be.  Pretty much every state touching TN with the exceptions being I think MO and VA regularly place those signs before every bridge.

[TBKS1]

Arkansas is not very good at marking concurrent highways. Just saying.

[hbelkins]

In terms of consistency statewide, West Virginia is good. There are lots of individual places where signs are missing, but in general the way signage is placed is the same in Welch as it is in Wheeling.

Kentucky's consistency varies across the 12 districts, since each has its own sign shop.

I second the comments about Tennessee's poor signage of concurrencies.

[freebrickproductions]

Kansas, Tennessee, and Wisconsin belong up top.

Tennessee definitely does, but I don't recall anything outstanding above average in Wisconsin. Maybe that's just me not being attentive enough though.

I have a lot of nitpicks about Tennessee signage having lived there most of my life.  Very rarely do they post Bridge Icing or equivalent signage, many instances of sign rot (though mostly in the Middle TN region), spotty acknowledgment of route multiplexes, and the list goes on.  They generally spend more money on maintaining acceptable pavement quality than they do on signage.

Yea, when I've driven on I-65 early in the morning prior to sunrise, it was kinda hard to read many of the signs due to the reflective sheeting peeling, though the sign looked fine during the day.

SM-G900V

[cjk374]

Louisiana is sinking toward the bottom of the list. Their new black & white state shields (and other signs using black digits/letters) are peeling worse than sun blistered skin. Also, the black is fading quickly to white...making the signs unreadable.

[webny99]

I don't think I've ever driven on a concurrency in Tennessee, so that could be influencing my perception.

The signage on I-75 is great as far as I'm concerned.

[mrcmc888]

I don't think I've ever driven on a concurrency in Tennessee, so that could be influencing my perception.

The signage on I-75 is great as far as I'm concerned.

US-25W has a 10 or so mile concurrency with I-75, then I-640, then I-40, in Knoxville and you would never know it.  It's a major arterial that's about the only way to get to Powell/Clinton/Lake City, so why it wouldn't be signed is baffling.  Especially since its concurrencies with I-75 near LaFollette are indeed signed.

Generally, signs throughout Tennessee are inconsistent.  The signage in West and Middle TN is good, along with the Tri-Cities area, but Knoxville and Chattanooga have some pretty major failsigns (that awful one on the Cherry Street exit of I-40 being one I can remember haunting me for my entire childhood).

Delaware's signage is perfectly fine...for 10 years ago.  DelDOT is more interested in trying to build yet another toll freeway in Kent County than actually bothering to update the signs in the Wilmington area.  DE-2 signs still remain on Main Street in Newark despite the fact that it hasn't run on there in 6 years, and recently a new set even got put in!

Virginia would get a higher spot if not for those butt-ugly font choices.  When there's a route sign, you've basically got a 50/50 chance at whether the font will be correct and legible, or those wide spaced, thin stick numbers you can't read until you're right up on them.

West Virginia is also a pretty high rank for me as the signage is probably some of the most uniform in the nation.

[Rothman]

Always liked the Super-sized BGSes on the Mountain Parkway in Kentucky.

[Brandon]

Illinois varies depending on DOT district.  D1 is pretty good and mostly consistent.  Downstate, it's a different story.  D8 and D9 are pretty bad at times.

[hbelkins]

Always liked the Super-sized BGSes on the Mountain Parkway in Kentucky.

Those were installed in the mid-1970s. A few of them have been replaced, but a few still survive.

[csw]

I don't have a ton of experience with signage in states outside of Indiana and Illinois, but I think Michigan and Missouri are above average.

[Max Rockatansky]

I don't have a ton of experience with signage in states outside of Indiana and Illinois, but I think Michigan and Missouri are above average.

Michigan might be the grand champion of over-signing routes.  I swear some state trunklines have reassurance shields at every single cross-street.