AARoads Forum

I'm definitely the cheap guy in this poll. The only way I take toll roads is if there is a tunnel or neat bridge. Besides that you will see me on the old 2 lane highways. In Oklahoma I took Old 66 all the way from the state line to OK City just to save $8. Hey, that $8 bought me dinner that night! A 65 MPH speed limit on 66 wasn't too bad either.

I don't believe in paying to use a road that tax $$ initially built.  Man...$8 is expensive!  How many miles does that toll cover?

Depends on how high is the toll, the quality of the toll and free roads, whether I've already traveled one or the other, and how much of a hurry I'm in.  I often prefer to shunpike, but not always. 

This topic does not lend itself to a poll, even if you add more choices.  So I'm not voting.

I'm generally in the same boat as Oscar.  And as he noted, the topic isn't as simple as an "either or" like the poll suggests.

Quote from: cjk374 on December 21, 2014, 04:15:46 PM
I don't believe in paying to use a road that tax $$ initially built.  Man...$8 is expensive!  How many miles does that toll cover?

About 200 miles.

If the non-toll route is shorter, even if it takes longer, I'll take the shorter route.

Example: Haverhill MA (or any other place passing through Haverhill) to White Mountains.

Option 1, toll: I-495 to I-95 to NH 16. $3.50 toll (I think).

Option 2, non-toll: MA/NH 125 to where it reaches the same route as Option 1 (free section of NH 16). 10 miles shorter, 10 minutes longer. I would definitely take this option.

Quote from: oscar on December 21, 2014, 04:26:13 PM
Depends on how high is the toll, the quality of the toll and free roads, whether I've already traveled one or the other, and how much of a hurry I'm in.  I often prefer to shunpike, but not always. 

This topic does not lend itself to a poll, even if you add more choices.  So I'm not voting.

This.

Do I shunpike in Oklahoma? Yeah, but more because Oklahoma is a scenic state and I'd rather not be on limited access highways. I'll absolutely get on the turnpikes if I need to though- the price is negligible to drive on them.

Do I shunpike E-470 in Denver because it's a ripoff? Yes.

Do I shunpike in, say, Chicago? No.

Quote from: cjk374 on December 21, 2014, 04:15:46 PM
I don't believe in paying to use a road that tax $$ initially built.  Man...$8 is expensive!  How many miles does that toll cover?

Taxes did  not build that toll road.

The turnpikes in Oklahoma are usually worth the cost because the fares are pretty low per-mile, and the turnpikes have a 75 mph speed limit. And, as Brandon alluded to, all toll roads in Oklahoma were built with bonds, not taxes.

I deal with this on a daily basis, between 295 & the NJ Turnpike.

Usually, I'll take 295.  If there's an accident, unusual congestion, etc, I'll take the Turnpike.

But due to delays getting off the Turnpike, it may not always be the fastest route overall.  I can drive at highway speeds to avoid the clogged 295, but then it can take 20 miles to get thru the toll plaza and thru the local roads.

If I'm on a long-distance drive, on vacation, etc, I may take the toll road if I've never been on it before, but otherwise I'll probably stick with the non-tolled highways.

I'll take the faster route unless the time difference is close to non-existent. The Turnpike and I-295 are a special case as (assuming no traffic), there is no time difference between the southern terminus and Exit 5 on the Turnpike / Exit 47 on 295. I won't inconvenience myself. I take the Atlantic City Expressway daily and will not switch to US-30 or US-40 to avoid tolls.

The toll roads in Texas are too expensive and the money goes to Spain.   I can drive across Kansas for $6 yet it costs me that much round trip to drive to Leander :P  They can keep their expensive toll roads.

I usually take the faster road, which generally means the toll road. 

In some cases, there is no practical alternative to a toll road or toll crossing, such as the Chesapeake Bay Bridge or (even more so), the Chesapeake Bay Bridge Tunnel. 

The "free" alternatives to Va. 267 (Dulles Toll Road) are not especially attractive, and can be severely congested at any time of the day, so I would rather part with $3.25 (current one-way toll, much of which is diverted to a train construction project) rather than use the "free" alternatives.

I tend to shunpike in general.

I generally take the fastest route, which often means I'll take a toll road.

However....if there are locations where a short detour will significantly eat into the cost of the tolls, I'll take the detour. For example, detouring around the Newark tolls on I-95 makes sense...about 5 minutes invested to save $4. Detouring around the Tydings Bridge in Maryland, about 8 minutes of additional travel time to save $8 (requires purchase of Hatem unlimited plan on a Maryland-issued E-ZPass). Or Tappan Zee versus GWB, when you account for delays in the Bronx, timewise the Tappan Zee is definitely a worthwhile detour when heading to New England. I will also go to rather great lengths to make sure I'm paying the cheapest possible toll, through the use of commuter plan discounts and "local spot" discounts for those who pay with a locally issued E-ZPass transponder, which means I have more than 1 transponder.

I like non-toll roads, but despite my always making sure I get the cheapest toll rate available, I'm not going to go all the way up to Albany to avoid paying a toll to cross the Hudson.

I agree with Oscar and I didn't vote either. If the toll road is substantially faster or more reliable, I'll usually use that. But if I want to go for a clinch on the other road, or use an exit I can't easily get to from the toll road, I'll use the other. Or I may just want to go a different way due to boredom in either scenario.

It depends, for me, on the purpose of the trip, how much time I need to make, etc. For instance, there is really no good way to shunpike the toll booths on the West Virginia Turnpike between Charleston and Beckley that don't involve narrow little West Virginia county routes. Best just to pay the tolls at the two barriers and be done with it.

The WV Turnpike can really only be effectively shunpiked from my perspective (an east-west traveler on I-64) if your destination is the DC area and you opt for 79-68-70-270 out of Charleston instead of 64-81-66. And even then, some don't like it. I knew someone from Kentucky who lived in the DC area who said they'd rather take the southern route because they hated 270 heading toward Frederick.

From where I live, once US 121 is finished, it would be an effective shunpike if I want to go east on I-64 beyond Beckley.

In Chicago, I don't mind paying to use the Tollways that lead there. The only way I shunpike is if there's an accident, in which case I use the parallel surface roads as a backup.

I cannot vote, for there could be so many different situations. One is that the toll road could have hardly any traffic while the free road could have traffic galore morning and evening, and in that case I'd take the toll road.

Quote from: mtantillo on December 22, 2014, 05:19:24 PM
Detouring around the Tydings Bridge in Maryland, about 8 minutes of additional travel time to save $8 (requires purchase of Hatem unlimited plan on a Maryland-issued E-ZPass).

Oh yes. I have saved so much money over the years by using the Hatem bridge northbound instead of the Tydings bridge. On average, it takes me 10-12 minutes to do the full shunpike northbound on MD 155 - US 40 - MD 222 and 4 to drive it free southbound on I-95.

I also take the (on average) 8-10 minute shunpike from MD 279 - DE 4 - DE 896 (and vice versa) to skip the $4 toll at the DE line. It takes 4 minutes to take the toll way.

So yeah. I'm willing to drive up to 20 extra minutes on a round trip from MD to DE to save $16.

Quote from: adventurernumber1 on December 23, 2014, 01:12:44 PM
I cannot vote, for there could be so many different situations. One is that the toll road could have hardly any traffic while the free road could have traffic galore morning and evening, and in that case I'd take the toll road.

This is why I will not shy away from paying for the ICC to get around DC during rush hour. The $4 is entirely worth the time savings.

I try to avoid toll roads if I can. My taxes already paid for these roads, so I don't see why I have to pay for them again. Plus, when driving on an unfamiliar toll road out of state, you might be stuck with paying a $1.75 toll with a $20 bill much to the chagrin of the tool booth attendant.

There's a tolled interstate in SC (I-185) in the Greenville area. It is totally worthless because you could just take I-385 to I-85 and add a few more minutes to your driving time for free. There's actually talk of tolling I-95 through SC. I fear for what that may do to the traffic situation on an already stressed road.

Quote from: Zzonkmiles on December 23, 2014, 02:53:55 PM
I try to avoid toll roads if I can. My taxes already paid for these roads, so I don't see why I have to pay for them again.

AGAIN, FOR THE STUPID OUT THERE!  NO TAXES WERE USED ON TOLL ROADS THAT SOLD BONDS TO PAY FOR CONSTRUCTION AND USE TOLLS TO PAY FOR MAINTENANCE AND EXPANSION!  :banghead:

What Brandon said is not true for every toll road.  But people allergic to toll roads shouldn't casually whip out the "we already paid for this" excuse where it doesn't apply.  There are plenty of other excuses available, use them instead.

Quote from: oscar on December 23, 2014, 04:56:36 PM
What Brandon said is not true for every toll road.  But people allergic to toll roads shouldn't casually whip out the "we already paid for this" excuse where it doesn't apply.  There are plenty of other excuses available, use them instead.

That, and the other excuse of "we were promised it would be free after all the bonds were paid off, or after x number of years."  Other than a few states such as Kentucky, I'd love these folks to show me where, in writing, this was promised.  If it was verbally by a politician, it's no more than hot air.

Quote from: mtantillo on December 22, 2014, 05:19:24 PM
I generally take the fastest route, which often means I'll take a toll road.

However....if there are locations where a short detour will significantly eat into the cost of the tolls, I'll take the detour. For example, detouring around the Newark tolls on I-95 makes sense...about 5 minutes invested to save $4. Detouring around the Tydings Bridge in Maryland, about 8 minutes of additional travel time to save $8 (requires purchase of Hatem unlimited plan on a Maryland-issued E-ZPass). Or Tappan Zee versus GWB, when you account for delays in the Bronx, timewise the Tappan Zee is definitely a worthwhile detour when heading to New England. I will also go to rather great lengths to make sure I'm paying the cheapest possible toll, through the use of commuter plan discounts and "local spot" discounts for those who pay with a locally issued E-ZPass transponder, which means I have more than 1 transponder.

I like non-toll roads, but despite my always making sure I get the cheapest toll rate available, I'm not going to go all the way up to Albany to avoid paying a toll to cross the Hudson.

Is it in fact cheaper to buy the Hatem unlimited plan and pay a monthly maintenance fee to MD, then to pay the toll on I-95?  I guess it depends on how often you go.

When I had a more fuel-efficient vehicle, I used to shunpike the Causeway, down near New Orleans.

Now, for those who aren't familiar with the area, while the Causeway is a straight shot from the middle of the Northshore to Metairie, which is practically right next door to the city. Using I-12 and I-10 from a similar point adds about 25 miles or so to the trip, depending on where you need to go in the city. Taking I-12 to I-55 is even longer. Toll's only $3 for a 24 mile bridge, which is a bargain compared to places like NYC or most other places with toll roads or bridges.

So, going 25-30 miles out of the way to shunpike a $3 toll. Yeah. If I'd shunpike that, then I'd definitely shunpike the Kansas Turnpike or a potentially-tolled I-70 in MO. I've probably already spent my entire fuel budget for the month putting gas in the tank, and the Explorer I drive now is thirsty. I don't have the extra money to pay tolls. Simple as that.

Quote from: Zzonkmiles on December 23, 2014, 02:53:55 PM
Plus, when driving on an unfamiliar toll road out of state, you might be stuck with paying a $1.75 toll with a $20 bill much to the chagrin of the tool booth attendant.

The only time I cared about a $20 for a small toll amount is when the person pulls up to the toll lane, wastes time trying to find the $1.75, and whips out a $20 instead.  If the person pulled out the $20 approaching the toll plaza, it would've saved them, me, and everyone sitting in line behind them time.  Otherwise, a $20 isn't a big deal.

Now, pull out a $100 for a $1.75 toll, and you're probably going to have enough $1's to feed vending machines for the next month.

Quote from: oscar on December 23, 2014, 04:56:36 PM
What Brandon said is not true for every toll road.  But people allergic to toll roads shouldn't casually whip out the "we already paid for this" excuse where it doesn't apply.  There are plenty of other excuses available, use them instead.

Another good one is when the motorist is pissed because they had to sit in congestion on the roadway.  In that case, the motorist should pay more, because they spent more time on the road.  For some reason, that reasoning never went over well with the motorists.

Quote from: Darkchylde on December 24, 2014, 08:19:33 AM
So, going 25-30 miles out of the way to shunpike a $3 toll. Yeah. If I'd shunpike that, then I'd definitely shunpike the Kansas Turnpike or a potentially-tolled I-70 in MO. I don't have the extra money to pay tolls. Simple as that.

How fuel efficient was your vehicle?  If gas is $3 a gallon, and you get about 50 mpg on your vehicle, you're still spending at least $1.50 to avoid a $3 toll.  If your mpg is less, you're spending more in gas.

At some point, the economics of the situation would say just pay the damn toll.

Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 24, 2014, 08:25:45 AM

Quote from: Darkchylde on December 24, 2014, 08:19:33 AM
So, going 25-30 miles out of the way to shunpike a $3 toll. Yeah. If I'd shunpike that, then I'd definitely shunpike the Kansas Turnpike or a potentially-tolled I-70 in MO. I don't have the extra money to pay tolls. Simple as that.

How fuel efficient was your vehicle?  If gas is $3 a gallon, and you get about 50 mpg on your vehicle, you're still spending at least $1.50 to avoid a $3 toll.  If your mpg is less, you're spending more in gas.

At some point, the economics of the situation would say just pay the damn toll.

The Sentra got about 32mpg. I'd already have spent all I had filling the tank.

Don't misunderstand. I don't shunpike because I hate toll roads. I do it because I HAVE NO MONEY.

For me, it really depends on how much time I have and what the options are:

On a trip from DC to Pittsburgh, I had once done a nice drive along US 22 instead of the Penn Turnpike.  I saved tolls and it was a beautiful drive during fall with a lot of color in the leaves.  But most of the time that I go there, I take the Turnpike.

I live close to the ICC, but never used it except during the free trial periods when it first opened.  For the times that I drive, the side streets and/or Beltway are not that bad.

I've used VA-7 instead of the Dulles Toll Road to get to Sterling, VA on a Sunday.  Slower, but traffic moved pretty well.

Most of my trips to NYC, I now go the long way through York and Allentown (sometimes passing through Harrisburg, sometimes Lancaster and Reading), primarily to avoid tolls.  I usually set up plenty of time for this trip and find that going the long way is quicker than using I-95 with shunpikes.  I definitelly pay the Hudson River tolls.  Before the I-95 bridge was raised so high, I usually only shunpiked the DE crossing and used I-295 instead of the southern turnpike.

I don't go often enough to consider the Hatem Bridge plans, I don't think.

So as a general rule to avoid a short toll section, I'd use surface streets.  To avoid a long toll section, I'd only consider it if the toll were expensive and/or there is a reasonable freeway alternative (like NJ I-295).

Quote from: mrsman on December 24, 2014, 07:55:19 AM

Quote from: mtantillo on December 22, 2014, 05:19:24 PM
However....if there are locations where a short detour will significantly eat into the cost of the tolls, I'll take the detour. For example, detouring around the Newark tolls on I-95 makes sense...about 5 minutes invested to save $4. Detouring around the Tydings Bridge in Maryland, about 8 minutes of additional travel time to save $8 (requires purchase of Hatem unlimited plan on a Maryland-issued E-ZPass).

Is it in fact cheaper to buy the Hatem unlimited plan and pay a monthly maintenance fee to MD, then to pay the toll on I-95?  I guess it depends on how often you go.

If you can go with a no-monthly fee E-ZPass like Virginia's, that shifts the balance against using switching to Maryland E-ZPass to access the Hatem plan.  Unless you're a frequent user of Maryland toll roads and bridges (at least three toll charges per month), the monthly fee for Maryland E-ZPass is $1.50.  You'd have to save three additional Tydings bridge tolls a year to offset that cost, in addition to the saved bridge tolls needed to pay for the Hatem plan.

I just stick with the Virginia E-ZPass to simplify my life, even if that means passing up discounts on some out-of-state toll facilities.  My only other accounts (SunPass for my car, TxTag for my truck) are to deal with states that don't (yet) accept E-ZPass at all. 

Quote from: Darkchylde on December 24, 2014, 08:28:06 AM

Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 24, 2014, 08:25:45 AM

Quote from: Darkchylde on December 24, 2014, 08:19:33 AM
So, going 25-30 miles out of the way to shunpike a $3 toll. Yeah. If I'd shunpike that, then I'd definitely shunpike the Kansas Turnpike or a potentially-tolled I-70 in MO. I don't have the extra money to pay tolls. Simple as that.

How fuel efficient was your vehicle?  If gas is $3 a gallon, and you get about 50 mpg on your vehicle, you're still spending at least $1.50 to avoid a $3 toll.  If your mpg is less, you're spending more in gas.

At some point, the economics of the situation would say just pay the damn toll.

The Sentra got about 32mpg. I'd already have spent all I had filling the tank.

Don't misunderstand. I don't shunpike because I hate toll roads. I do it because I HAVE NO MONEY.

So if the toll is $3, and gas is $3, and you drove 30 miles to avoid a $3 toll, you just paid for it anyway with a gallon of gas.

If gas was closer to $4 a gallon, you paid *more* to avoid the toll.

I mean, ok, if you don't have $3 on you right then and there to pay the toll, you may not have a choice.  But to spend more in gas than it would be to pay the toll only costs you more in the long run!

I'd generally take the toll way if it would save me a noticeable amount of time.
But here there aren't that many tolled roads where there's a reasonable free option.  For the 520 bridge, there's I-90 but it's too far to really consider as a shunpike.  The Valley Freeway has HOT lanes but you can see when the main lines are busy, which is generally commute hours not weekend drives to Mt. Rainier like I do.

Quote from: oscar on December 23, 2014, 04:56:36 PM
What Brandon said is not true for every toll road.  But people allergic to toll roads shouldn't casually whip out the "we already paid for this" excuse where it doesn't apply.  There are plenty of other excuses available, use them instead.

I agree.  Many toll roads did use tax dollars (in some cases, such as the original part of the Pennsylvania Turnpike, the federal government loaned the money for construction, and were paid back by the toll revenues).

But in other cases, tax dollars were (and are) used to get a road built (all of the planning and preliminary work, along with the preparation of the EIS documents, were taxpayer-funded).

As for changing a "free" road to a toll road, I do not have a problem with that, if the politicians do not wish to increase the motor fuel tax rates to fund very large-scale reconstruction work. 

IMO, the classic example on the East Coast is probably I-95 across North Carolina (we can talk about the Cross-Bronx Expressway later).  Much of that road needs to be reconstructed from the ground up and widened, along with many substandard and dangerous interchanges that need to be torn-out and rebuilt, along with several bridges that are too low. Tolling could easily fund all that, though some of the nice people living near the corridor (along with the elected officials that represent them) absolutely do not want tolls, nor do they want increased motor fuel taxes under any circumstances.  Go figure.

The only thing that was "paid for" with taxes that is still relevant is the real estate on which the road was built.  Much of the rest of what was paid for with federal and state taxes is at the end of its usable life, which means a new road is needed.

I too am on the "it depends" side.  Most of the time it is a time-value decision, but if there is a more interesting route that plays a factor as well.  I actually will reverse-shunpike I-83 through Harrisburg and often am willing to pay the $1.04 toll to use I-76 and I-283 around it.  (Last AADTs I recall are 125K for the I-83 bridge and 19K for the I-76 bridge)  But, I find between Breezewood and Donegal that US 30 and PA 31 are more interesting* (at the cost of only 20 minutes or so) than the Turnpike and as a bonus I save $6 on tolls. 

If traveling through Ohio and Indiana, I might use Ohio 2, US 24, and US 30 as alternates because again, the time difference isn't much in the grand scheme of things, Ohio 2 is more interesting to me, and I save a bunch on tolls.  Plus, for some weird reason, I really like US 24 between Toledo and Fort Wayne.  That said, I will pay for the Ohio Turnpike and Indiana Toll Road over taking I-70 to Indianapolis and I-65 up to Gary any day.  Holy cow is that a boring drive.

*US 30 is definitely interesting east of Breezewood as well, but since it starts going south it is no longer a practical alternative to the Turnpike there.  I'd have to pick it up in Gettysburg or Chambersburg at which point I've added significant time and distance to the trip.

One advantage of toll roads are the rest areas (usually), especially the recently renovated ones in Pennsylvania and Ohio.  I appreciate not having to exit and re-enter just to find a bathroom.

Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 24, 2014, 08:21:13 AM
Now, pull out a $100 for a $1.75 toll, and you're probably going to have enough $1's to feed vending machines for the next month.

At least one toll road here (VA 76) has signage noting that bills larger than $20 are not accepted at all.

I tend to avoid them as much as possible.  When going to Boston, I'll use the Pike, but I might take US 20 if I'm going to Worcester or MA 49 to MA 9.  If I'm going to Albany, I shunpike it as much as I can by going through Litchfield County and either getting on the Pike at Exit 2 or on the Berkshire Thruway at B3 and getting off at B1.  I'll go up to the Tappan Zee or even the Newburgh-Beacon to cross the Hudson, plus I've gone to the Scudders Falls to cross the Delaware to get to Philly.  I'll use the GSP down to Iselin, then take NJ 27 to CR 529, then US 1, and either stay on 1 to 95 or take US 130 to US 206 then back around the Bordentown truck stops to I-295.  I take the DE 896/4/279 bypass, and I've even gone up to the Conowingo Bridge on US 1 then took MD/DE 273 back to Newark.

I haven't used a toll in a long time because there are hardly in in Southern California. Though I have in Mexico and I can say they're worth it there. Does anyone know how much it would cost to use the FL Turnpike from SR 60 and 70 all the way to I-75?

   Even though I try to avoid toll roads here in the US, I do plan on using toll roads most of the way across Mexico, when I find time to go. The thing about Mexican toll roads though is the benefits you receive from using them. If you break down you can get towed for free to a mechanic, they will pay for damages to your car if the road caused them, most have gas stations on them (like here), and the Green Angels speak English. Here in the US you don't really get those added benefits from driving on the toll roads. You just sort of pay money and your on your own. BTW to drive from Nvo. Laredo - Mazatlan is going to cost $106 in tolls ($212 total).

Quote from: KG909 on December 24, 2014, 12:51:45 PM
I haven't used a toll in a long time because there are hardly in in Southern California. Though I have in Mexico and I can say they're worth it there. Does anyone know how much it would cost to use the FL Turnpike from SR 60 and 70 all the way to I-75?

$12 according to the toll calculator on the Florida Turnpike's website.

Quote from: US 41 on December 24, 2014, 12:59:22 PM
   Even though I try to avoid toll roads here in the US, I do plan on using toll roads most of the way across Mexico, when I find time to go. The thing about Mexican toll roads though is the benefits you receive from using them. If you break down you can get towed for free to a mechanic, they will pay for damages to your car if the road caused them, most have gas stations on them (like here), and the Green Angels speak English. Here in the US you don't really get those added benefits from driving on the toll roads. You just sort of pay money and your on your own. BTW to drive from Nvo. Laredo - Mazatlan is going to cost $106 in tolls ($212 total).

Toll roads are in better condition and the one I used , MX1, was scenic, so it was a win win. Oh yes I used the calculator and got $12 too, so I'm thinking it's glitched and was hoping someone would know.

Quote from: KG909 on December 24, 2014, 01:16:31 PM
Oh yes I used the calculator and got $12 too, so I'm thinking it's glitched and was hoping someone would know.

Why do you think it's glitched? Expecting a higher toll? The whole 300+ mile road is only $25 (which is about half the toll per mile of Laredo-Mazatlan).

Quote from: NE2 on December 24, 2014, 02:11:44 PM

Quote from: KG909 on December 24, 2014, 01:16:31 PM
Oh yes I used the calculator and got $12 too, so I'm thinking it's glitched and was hoping someone would know.

Why do you think it's glitched? Expecting a higher toll? The whole 300+ mile road is only $25 (which is about half the toll per mile of Laredo-Mazatlan).

I'll agree with NE2. $12 should be about right. If Mexican Toll Roads are the only toll roads you have used in a while you might be used to the higher toll prices, since their toll roads are a lot more expensive to drive on than most of ours.

Quote from: NE2 on December 24, 2014, 02:11:44 PM

Quote from: KG909 on December 24, 2014, 01:16:31 PM
Oh yes I used the calculator and got $12 too, so I'm thinking it's glitched and was hoping someone would know.

Why do you think it's glitched? Expecting a higher toll? The whole 300+ mile road is only $25 (which is about half the toll per mile of Laredo-Mazatlan).

Really? I expected it to be like $95-110. Never used an American toll so I had no idea of the prices.

Quote from: KG909 on December 24, 2014, 02:24:23 PM

Quote from: NE2 on December 24, 2014, 02:11:44 PM

Quote from: KG909 on December 24, 2014, 01:16:31 PM
Oh yes I used the calculator and got $12 too, so I'm thinking it's glitched and was hoping someone would know.

Why do you think it's glitched? Expecting a higher toll? The whole 300+ mile road is only $25 (which is about half the toll per mile of Laredo-Mazatlan).

Really? I expected it to be like $95-110. Never used an American toll so I had no idea of the prices.

There is no way it is even close to being that expensive. I think to drive from Chicago to Philadelphia it is only about $35 total in tolls.

Quote from: US 41 on December 24, 2014, 02:27:11 PM

Quote from: KG909 on December 24, 2014, 02:24:23 PM

Quote from: NE2 on December 24, 2014, 02:11:44 PM

Quote from: KG909 on December 24, 2014, 01:16:31 PM
Oh yes I used the calculator and got $12 too, so I'm thinking it's glitched and was hoping someone would know.

Why do you think it's glitched? Expecting a higher toll? The whole 300+ mile road is only $25 (which is about half the toll per mile of Laredo-Mazatlan).

Really? I expected it to be like $95-110. Never used an American toll so I had no idea of the prices.

There is no way it is that expensive. I think to drive from Chicago to Philadelphia it is somewhere between $30-$40 total in tolls.

Now I feel dumb lol. Mexican tolls are definitely way more expensive then. I think we spent like $15-30 on a trip thats an hour or two. Though I'm not sure if it reopened but if it did it'll probably be more expensive due to repairs.

Quote from: KG909 on December 24, 2014, 02:30:58 PM

Quote from: US 41 on December 24, 2014, 02:27:11 PM

Quote from: KG909 on December 24, 2014, 02:24:23 PM

Quote from: NE2 on December 24, 2014, 02:11:44 PM

Quote from: KG909 on December 24, 2014, 01:16:31 PM
Oh yes I used the calculator and got $12 too, so I'm thinking it's glitched and was hoping someone would know.

Why do you think it's glitched? Expecting a higher toll? The whole 300+ mile road is only $25 (which is about half the toll per mile of Laredo-Mazatlan).

Really? I expected it to be like $95-110. Never used an American toll so I had no idea of the prices.

There is no way it is that expensive. I think to drive from Chicago to Philadelphia it is somewhere between $30-$40 total in tolls.

Now I feel dumb lol. Mexican tolls are definitely way more expensive then. I think we spent like $15-30 on a trip thats an hour or two. Though I'm not sure if it reopened but if it did it'll probably be more expensive due to repairs.

Mexico's SCT has a website that calculates tolls. Here's the link for it.

http://aplicaciones4.sct.gob.mx/sibuac_internet/ControllerUI?action=cmdEscogeRuta

Quote from: US 41 on December 24, 2014, 02:34:42 PM

Quote from: KG909 on December 24, 2014, 02:30:58 PM

Quote from: US 41 on December 24, 2014, 02:27:11 PM

Quote from: KG909 on December 24, 2014, 02:24:23 PM

Quote from: NE2 on December 24, 2014, 02:11:44 PM

Quote from: KG909 on December 24, 2014, 01:16:31 PM
Oh yes I used the calculator and got $12 too, so I'm thinking it's glitched and was hoping someone would know.

Why do you think it's glitched? Expecting a higher toll? The whole 300+ mile road is only $25 (which is about half the toll per mile of Laredo-Mazatlan).

Really? I expected it to be like $95-110. Never used an American toll so I had no idea of the prices.

There is no way it is that expensive. I think to drive from Chicago to Philadelphia it is somewhere between $30-$40 total in tolls.

Now I feel dumb lol. Mexican tolls are definitely way more expensive then. I think we spent like $15-30 on a trip thats an hour or two. Though I'm not sure if it reopened but if it did it'll probably be more expensive due to repairs.

Mexico's SCT has a website that calculates tolls. Here's the link for it.

http://aplicaciones4.sct.gob.mx/sibuac_internet/ControllerUI?action=cmdEscogeRuta

Hmm it said the trip was $6 but I'm remembering like $5 at every booth. It was when I was 10, so a lot is forgotten.

$1 US = $14 Mexico

You all seem to be forgetting that.

Quote from: 1 on December 24, 2014, 03:52:09 PM
$1 US = $14 Mexico

You all seem to be forgetting that.

We both converted ours into USD from MXN Pesos.

Quote from: US 41 on December 24, 2014, 02:27:11 PM

Quote from: KG909 on December 24, 2014, 02:24:23 PM

Quote from: NE2 on December 24, 2014, 02:11:44 PM

Quote from: KG909 on December 24, 2014, 01:16:31 PM
Oh yes I used the calculator and got $12 too, so I'm thinking it's glitched and was hoping someone would know.

Why do you think it's glitched? Expecting a higher toll? The whole 300+ mile road is only $25 (which is about half the toll per mile of Laredo-Mazatlan).

Really? I expected it to be like $95-110. Never used an American toll so I had no idea of the prices.

There is no way it is even close to being that expensive. I think to drive from Chicago to Philadelphia it is only about $35 total in tolls.

It's a bit more than that, but that's due to the very high tolls on the Pennsylvania Turnpike.

The Pennsylvania Turnpike is a toll road I always take. I don't try to find other alternatives to it. I could take I-80, but IMO it is pretty boring. Plus I-76 has 3 (maybe 4?) tunnels on it, and by taking the PA Turnpike I get to go through the tunnel in Wheeling, WV too. I-476 is another toll road I like, because of the Lehigh Tunnel.

Quote from: cpzilliacus on December 24, 2014, 11:40:36 AM
IMO, the classic example on the East Coast is probably I-95 across North Carolina (we can talk about the Cross-Bronx Expressway later).  Much of that road needs to be reconstructed from the ground up and widened, along with many substandard and dangerous interchanges that need to be torn-out and rebuilt, along with several bridges that are too low. Tolling could easily fund all that, though some of the nice people living near the corridor (along with the elected officials that represent them) absolutely do not want tolls, nor do they want increased motor fuel taxes under any circumstances.  Go figure.

Locals are probably satisfied with the road as-is, as they probably don't care about the too-low bridges or other items you mention.

Quote from: hbelkins on December 24, 2014, 07:15:50 PM

Quote from: cpzilliacus on December 24, 2014, 11:40:36 AM
IMO, the classic example on the East Coast is probably I-95 across North Carolina (we can talk about the Cross-Bronx Expressway later).  Much of that road needs to be reconstructed from the ground up and widened, along with many substandard and dangerous interchanges that need to be torn-out and rebuilt, along with several bridges that are too low. Tolling could easily fund all that, though some of the nice people living near the corridor (along with the elected officials that represent them) absolutely do not want tolls, nor do they want increased motor fuel taxes under any circumstances.  Go figure.

Locals are probably satisfied with the road as-is, as they probably don't care about the too-low bridges or other items you mention.

I suppose I do not care all that much about what the locals think, though they do derive significant economic benefit from having I-95 nearby.

It is (above all) an interstate highway (lower-case "i" in that it serves an interstate travel market), and probably received 90% federal money to design, engineer and construct (though IIRC some sections in North Carolina were "recycled" from U.S. 301, as they were in Southside Virginia).  I have driven that section of I-95 quite a lot, and much of the truck traffic appears to be interstate, as is the four-wheeled traffic, which means that non-North Carolina drivers will pay a lot of the cost if tolls are imposed.

Quote from: cpzilliacus on December 25, 2014, 02:02:34 AM

Quote from: hbelkins on December 24, 2014, 07:15:50 PM

Quote from: cpzilliacus on December 24, 2014, 11:40:36 AM
IMO, the classic example on the East Coast is probably I-95 across North Carolina (we can talk about the Cross-Bronx Expressway later).  Much of that road needs to be reconstructed from the ground up and widened, along with many substandard and dangerous interchanges that need to be torn-out and rebuilt, along with several bridges that are too low. Tolling could easily fund all that, though some of the nice people living near the corridor (along with the elected officials that represent them) absolutely do not want tolls, nor do they want increased motor fuel taxes under any circumstances.  Go figure.

Locals are probably satisfied with the road as-is, as they probably don't care about the too-low bridges or other items you mention.

I suppose I do not care all that much about what the locals think, though they do derive significant economic benefit from having I-95 nearby.

It is (above all) an interstate highway (lower-case "i" in that it serves an interstate travel market), and probably received 90% federal money to design, engineer and construct (though IIRC some sections in North Carolina were "recycled" from U.S. 301, as they were in Southside Virginia).  I have driven that section of I-95 quite a lot, and much of the truck traffic appears to be interstate, as is the four-wheeled traffic, which means that non-North Carolina drivers will pay a lot of the cost if tolls are imposed.

I-95 in NC would be the North Carolina Turnpike right now if it actually served a major city in the state. Voters in the state don't care that a 2-lane I-95 makes getting goods from NY to Miami a bit more difficult but they WOULD care if the current configuration disrupted commerce in NC.

One other major barrier is that I-95 passes through some of the poorest areas in the state. You're right that the traffic is largely interstate, but it does get heavy intrastate use as well. If you tolled I-95, you'd be asking people in Rocky Mount, Benson and Lumberton to pay tolls to travel within the state. Those are some of the poorest areas in the state. The largest NC city along I-95 is Fayetteville, hardly a major economic center.

If I had to route I-95 through NC, I would've had it go through Raleigh and then southeast through Fayetteville. You might see more of a push for improvements if it connected Raleigh to points north and south. 

Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 24, 2014, 09:57:27 AM

Quote from: Darkchylde on December 24, 2014, 08:28:06 AM

Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 24, 2014, 08:25:45 AM

Quote from: Darkchylde on December 24, 2014, 08:19:33 AM
So, going 25-30 miles out of the way to shunpike a $3 toll. Yeah. If I'd shunpike that, then I'd definitely shunpike the Kansas Turnpike or a potentially-tolled I-70 in MO. I don't have the extra money to pay tolls. Simple as that.

How fuel efficient was your vehicle?  If gas is $3 a gallon, and you get about 50 mpg on your vehicle, you're still spending at least $1.50 to avoid a $3 toll.  If your mpg is less, you're spending more in gas.

At some point, the economics of the situation would say just pay the damn toll.

The Sentra got about 32mpg. I'd already have spent all I had filling the tank.

Don't misunderstand. I don't shunpike because I hate toll roads. I do it because I HAVE NO MONEY.

So if the toll is $3, and gas is $3, and you drove 30 miles to avoid a $3 toll, you just paid for it anyway with a gallon of gas.

If gas was closer to $4 a gallon, you paid *more* to avoid the toll.

I mean, ok, if you don't have $3 on you right then and there to pay the toll, you may not have a choice.  But to spend more in gas than it would be to pay the toll only costs you more in the long run!

That's typically the case. I fill the tank on the 1st of the month. That's also the only time I put gas in the car. I have to typically go a whole month on that tank. It's already spent. Now, if I'm driving a little later in the month than that, I'm broke, but still on most of a full tank. How much extra fuel I burn is completely irrelevant, because I have no liquid cash left.

Your next fillup is not already spent. Drive less this month and set aside the money saved.

Or don't fill the tank all the way at the beginning of the month, keeping some of the money for tolls.

I will go free when traffic is free. I will pay the toll if its near rush hour. But with Houston, if I am going to out of town, I rather pay the beltway or soon to be grand parkway tolls then to drive 30 extra miles to do it for free.

Quote from: NE2 on December 25, 2014, 03:39:08 AM
Your next fillup is not already spent. Drive less this month and set aside the money saved.

Or don't fill the tank all the way at the beginning of the month, keeping some of the money for tolls.

Not always possible.  Some people work, and work rather far from where they live.

If she can go a full month on a tank, I'm guessing that she's not living rather far away from where she works (or has some other means of getting there).

Quote from: The Nature Boy on December 25, 2014, 02:19:14 AM
I-95 in NC would be the North Carolina Turnpike right now if it actually served a major city in the state. Voters in the state don't care that a 2-lane I-95 makes getting goods from NY to Miami a bit more difficult but they WOULD care if the current configuration disrupted commerce in NC.

I actually believe the opposite.  If it served those centers of North Carolina, there would be even more opposition to tolling I-95.   

Quote from: The Nature Boy on December 25, 2014, 02:19:14 AM
One other major barrier is that I-95 passes through some of the poorest areas in the state. You're right that the traffic is largely interstate, but it does get heavy intrastate use as well. If you tolled I-95, you'd be asking people in Rocky Mount, Benson and Lumberton to pay tolls to travel within the state. Those are some of the poorest areas in the state. The largest NC city along I-95 is Fayetteville, hardly a major economic center.

I assume that you are correct about the relative prosperity of the places along I-95, though they would be even poorer if they did not have I-95 there.

Quote from: The Nature Boy on December 25, 2014, 02:19:14 AM
If I had to route I-95 through NC, I would've had it go through Raleigh and then southeast through Fayetteville. You might see more of a push for improvements if it connected Raleigh to points north and south.

I have always found it curious that I-95 did not follow a course closer to U.S. 1 from Jacksonville, Florida through Raleigh, N.C. to Petersburg, Va.  Presumably for sound reasons (shorter distance being the one that comes to my mind), a routing much closer to U.S. 17; U.S. 15 and then U.S. 301 was chosen from Jacksonville to Petersburg. 

Quote from: cpzilliacus on December 25, 2014, 01:54:54 PM

Quote from: The Nature Boy on December 25, 2014, 02:19:14 AM
I-95 in NC would be the North Carolina Turnpike right now if it actually served a major city in the state. Voters in the state don't care that a 2-lane I-95 makes getting goods from NY to Miami a bit more difficult but they WOULD care if the current configuration disrupted commerce in NC.

I actually believe the opposite.  If it served those centers of North Carolina, there would be even more opposition to tolling I-95.   

Quote from: The Nature Boy on December 25, 2014, 02:19:14 AM
One other major barrier is that I-95 passes through some of the poorest areas in the state. You're right that the traffic is largely interstate, but it does get heavy intrastate use as well. If you tolled I-95, you'd be asking people in Rocky Mount, Benson and Lumberton to pay tolls to travel within the state. Those are some of the poorest areas in the state. The largest NC city along I-95 is Fayetteville, hardly a major economic center.

I assume that you are correct about the relative prosperity of the places along I-95, though they would be even poorer if they did not have I-95 there.

Quote from: The Nature Boy on December 25, 2014, 02:19:14 AM
If I had to route I-95 through NC, I would've had it go through Raleigh and then southeast through Fayetteville. You might see more of a push for improvements if it connected Raleigh to points north and south.

I have always found it curious that I-95 did not follow a course closer to U.S. 1 from Jacksonville, Florida through Raleigh, N.C. to Petersburg, Va.  Presumably for sound reasons (shorter distance being the one that comes to my mind), a routing much closer to U.S. 17; U.S. 15 and then U.S. 301 was chosen from Jacksonville to Petersburg.

I-95 has been kind of a double-edged sword for the poor rural places in North Carolina that it serves. Yes, it does bring increased traffic but that doesn't seem to be paying dividends in terms of higher paying jobs. It may have helped with manufacturing a while back, but that's a thing of the past. It DID however facilitate the drug trade and drugs are literally eating Lumberton and Rocky Mount alive. Lumberton in particular is a crime ridden cesspool that regularly shows up among the list of most dangerous places in NC. I-95 helped bring a widespread drug trade into these areas and that's been a net negative from a quality of life standpoint.

And if I-95 served the bigger cities, you'd see more of an outcry to widen it so traffic can flow more efficiently. It might be EASIER to sell tolls as an idea to fix that. At one point, NC and CT were the only states on the I-95 corridor without a toll road so there is a long standing opposition to the idea.

As for my feelings on toll roads, I'll take whatever is fastest or whatever I'm in the mood for. Sometimes when traveling from the Midwest to the Northeast, I'll shun the NY Thruway and take the Southern Tier Expressway because it's a more scenic drive.

Quote from: The Nature Boy on December 25, 2014, 02:19:11 PM
I-95 has been kind of a double-edged sword for the poor rural places in North Carolina that it serves. Yes, it does bring increased traffic but that doesn't seem to be paying dividends in terms of higher paying jobs. It may have helped with manufacturing a while back, but that's a thing of the past.

Loss of manufacturing jobs are symptoms of failure at the highest levels of the government at the national level.   

Quote from: The Nature Boy on December 25, 2014, 02:19:11 PM
It DID however facilitate the drug trade and drugs are literally eating Lumberton and Rocky Mount alive. Lumberton in particular is a crime ridden cesspool that regularly shows up among the list of most dangerous places in NC. I-95 helped bring a widespread drug trade into these areas and that's been a net negative from a quality of life standpoint.

Not just in North Carolina.  Ever heard of Baltimore, Maryland?  Prince George's County, Maryland (suburb of Washington, D.C.)?  Richmond, Virginia?

Drug-related crime can be traced to one root cause - efforts at social engineering that date back to the "Reefer Madness" movie (1936) (and earlier).  A particularly infamous politician that helped to set the stage for Nixon's War on Drugs starting in the 1970's hailed from North Carolina - Rep. Robert Lee "Muley Bob" Doughton (D), of Laurel Springs who helped to push the Marihuana Tax Act of 1937 through Congress, effectively outlawing weed at the federal level.  And to make things clear, I hate marihuana (and the stoner "culture" that goes along with same) with a passion, but still believe it should be legal and taxable. 

Doughton was not all bad - he also helped to get construction of the Blue Ridge Parkway under way in the 1930's.

Quote from: The Nature Boy on December 25, 2014, 02:19:11 PM
And if I-95 served the bigger cities, you'd see more of an outcry to widen it so traffic can flow more efficiently. It might be EASIER to sell tolls as an idea to fix that. At one point, NC and CT were the only states on the I-95 corridor without a toll road so there is a long standing opposition to the idea.

Though N.C. 540 (Tri-Ex) is not exactly a long toll road (and I do not know how it is doing in terms of toll-paying customers). I presume that the vast majority of North Carolina drivers have never been on it. 

Quote from: The Nature Boy on December 25, 2014, 02:19:11 PM
As for my feelings on toll roads, I'll take whatever is fastest or whatever I'm in the mood for. Sometimes when traveling from the Midwest to the Northeast, I'll shun the NY Thruway and take the Southern Tier Expressway because it's a more scenic drive.

Not driven all that much of N.Y. 17, and none of the E-W (I-90) running section of the NYS Thruway (but most of the I-87 section).

I'm well aware of the crime in Baltimore, DC and Richmond. I never said that I-95 was completely bad, I just said that it introduced a new element of crime to these areas. When you have crime and no jobs, you have what is now rural eastern NC.  The no jobs part is the cause of the poverty that makes making I-95 a toll road politically unfeasible. You're right about one thing though, I-95's tolls would be largely paid by outsiders. To make it politically feasible, you'd have to give a HUGE discount to NC EZPass users and have high toll rates for outsiders to compensate for the hit you'd take by discounting it for in-state drivers.

The big reason NC wants to toll I-95 is because it mostly serves out of state traffic.  If it was more major for intrastate traffic, they'd be looking at other funding means or talking about tolling something else.

Quote from: vdeane on December 25, 2014, 09:18:48 PM
The big reason NC wants to toll I-95 is because it mostly serves out of state traffic.  If it was more major for intrastate traffic, they'd be looking at other funding means or talking about tolling something else.

Maybe only put tolls on the parts between cities, so that you can travel within the cities without having to pay.

Quote from: vdeane on December 25, 2014, 09:18:48 PM
The big reason NC wants to toll I-95 is because it mostly serves out of state traffic.  If it was more major for intrastate traffic, they'd be looking at other funding means or talking about tolling something else.

Of course, but the intrastate traffic that it serves just so happens to be the poorest in the state so the political will isn't there. I remember most of the media at the time that the proposal was active centered how unfair it'd be for the locals and how it would just clog the surface highways with traffic.

I'm in favor of tolling I-95, but it's a hard sell because of the demographics of the I-95 corridor in NC and the historic opposition to tolls.

Quote from: 1 on December 25, 2014, 09:20:21 PM
Maybe only put tolls on the parts between cities, so that you can travel within the cities without having to pay.

Or put a toll on the I-95 bypass of Fayetteville (the Cape Fear River bridge looks like a good place). Most residents probably use the partly-freeway I-95 Biz through Fayetteville. Interstate drivers who choose to shunpike get to help the commercial area that I-95 Biz passes through.

Quote from: The Nature Boy on December 25, 2014, 06:41:04 PM
I'm well aware of the crime in Baltimore, DC and Richmond. I never said that I-95 was completely bad, I just said that it introduced a new element of crime to these areas. When you have crime and no jobs, you have what is now rural eastern NC.

Though Smithfield does have a pig slaughtering operation in Tar Heel, N.C. [roughly south of Fayetteville and northeast of Lumberton], though I suppose the jobs killing and disassembling pigs do not pay especially well.

Quote from: The Nature Boy on December 25, 2014, 06:41:04 PM
The no jobs part is the cause of the poverty that makes making I-95 a toll road politically unfeasible. You're right about one thing though, I-95's tolls would be largely paid by outsiders. To make it politically feasible, you'd have to give a HUGE discount to NC EZPass users and have high toll rates for outsiders to compensate for the hit you'd take by discounting it for in-state rivers.

As much as I agreed with the decision by USDOT and the Federal Highway Administration to (twice) reject Pennsylvania's proposal to toll all of I-80 across that state, the proposal did have one good idea - allowing four-wheel traffic with an E-ZPass transponder to pass through one of the transponder gantries without being charged a toll, effectively allowing (relatively) short trips to be made without paying any toll charges.  It seems to me that this would be a good idea for a tolled I-95.

Quote from: NE2 on December 25, 2014, 09:31:09 PM

Quote from: 1 on December 25, 2014, 09:20:21 PM
Maybe only put tolls on the parts between cities, so that you can travel within the cities without having to pay.

Or put a toll on the I-95 bypass of Fayetteville (the Cape Fear River bridge looks like a good place). Most residents probably use the partly-freeway I-95 Biz through Fayetteville. Interstate drivers who choose to shunpike get to help the commercial area that I-95 Biz passes through.

I disagree.  Single-point tolling is in most cases easy enough to shunpike, which means a loss of revenue.  Since all-electronic tolling is relatively inexpensive to operate, better to toll the entire road, while perhaps giving  a break to short and relatively short trips.  Wonder what the trip length distribution is on I-95 in North Carolina?

Quote from: The Nature Boy on December 25, 2014, 09:24:32 PM

Quote from: vdeane on December 25, 2014, 09:18:48 PM
The big reason NC wants to toll I-95 is because it mostly serves out of state traffic.  If it was more major for intrastate traffic, they'd be looking at other funding means or talking about tolling something else.

Of course, but the intrastate traffic that it serves just so happens to be the poorest in the state so the political will isn't there. I remember most of the media at the time that the proposal was active centered how unfair it'd be for the locals and how it would just clog the surface highways with traffic.

Should not be a big issue, IMO.

Quote from: The Nature Boy on December 25, 2014, 09:24:32 PM
I'm in favor of tolling I-95, but it's a hard sell because of the demographics of the I-95 corridor in NC and the historic opposition to tolls.

I am in favor of tolling I-95 because it badly needs to be widened, and many of its interchanges need to be reconstructed. 

This is not the only freeway in the U.S. that needs same (I-70 across most of Missouri qualifies as does I-70 in southwestern Pennsylvania), and I am confident that members of this forum can easily identify others in need of total reconstruction.

Quote from: cpzilliacus on December 25, 2014, 09:56:31 PM

Quote from: The Nature Boy on December 25, 2014, 09:24:32 PM

Quote from: vdeane on December 25, 2014, 09:18:48 PM
The big reason NC wants to toll I-95 is because it mostly serves out of state traffic.  If it was more major for intrastate traffic, they'd be looking at other funding means or talking about tolling something else.

Of course, but the intrastate traffic that it serves just so happens to be the poorest in the state so the political will isn't there. I remember most of the media at the time that the proposal was active centered how unfair it'd be for the locals and how it would just clog the surface highways with traffic.

Should not be a big issue, IMO.

Quote from: The Nature Boy on December 25, 2014, 09:24:32 PM
I'm in favor of tolling I-95, but it's a hard sell because of the demographics of the I-95 corridor in NC and the historic opposition to tolls.

I am in favor of tolling I-95 because it badly needs to be widened, and many of its interchanges need to be reconstructed. 

This is not the only freeway in the U.S. that needs same (I-70 across most of Missouri qualifies as does I-70 in southwestern Pennsylvania), and I am confident that members of this forum can easily identify others in need of total reconstruction.

The NC DOT is reconstructing the Exit 22 interchange in Lumberton. That one was a death trap before they addressed it so there's that at least. I'm not denying that I-95 in NC is a disaster zone. I'm just addressing the political reality of putting a toll on it.

Quote from: The Nature Boy on December 25, 2014, 10:02:53 PM
The NC DOT is reconstructing the Exit 22 interchange in Lumberton. That one was a death trap before they addressed it so there's that at least.

I know that interchange quite well.  Have exited there many times for fuel (the Sam's Club nearby off of Dawn Drive in the southwest quadrant of the interchange sells Diesel fuel at reasonably low prices by North Carolina standards).

Quote from: The Nature Boy on December 25, 2014, 10:02:53 PM
IMO, the biggest problem there is one that I-95 in North Carolina is notorious for - a low overpass.

I'm not denying that I-95 in NC is a disaster zone. I'm just addressing the political reality of putting a toll on it.

Barring large increases in motor fuel taxes at the state and federal levels, it will take NCDOT years to correct all of the problems with I-95 across their state.

The worst section of I-95 runs from Lumberton in the south (Exit 22 is as good of a place as any to mark the southern end of the bad section) to Kenly (Exit 107) in the north.  My least-favorite subset of that bad section is passing Smithfield, Selma and Micro, because of  the substandard interchanges and bridges.  Curiously, as Spui implied upthread, within that worst section, the Fayetteville Bypass section has a nice modern design (and could probably have a posted limit speed limit of 75 MPH).

Quote from: vdeane on December 25, 2014, 01:33:09 PM
If she can go a full month on a tank, I'm guessing that she's not living rather far away from where she works (or has some other means of getting there).

Actually, I don't work. Disability only covers so much, especially since the prices of things are still sky-high aside from gas (at the moment.) Most of my commuting lately is to grocery stores to buy food or to doctors, thankfully, not involving a tolled route in any shape or form yet. Sometimes, though, I have to travel a little bit beyond that. Taking a toll road to get there would screw me badly.

Edit: Quoted wrong post

Quote from: cpzilliacus on December 26, 2014, 06:41:12 PM

Quote from: The Nature Boy on December 25, 2014, 10:02:53 PM
The NC DOT is reconstructing the Exit 22 interchange in Lumberton. That one was a death trap before they addressed it so there's that at least.

I know that interchange quite well.  Have exited there many times for fuel (the Sam's Club nearby off of Dawn Drive in the southwest quadrant of the interchange sells Diesel fuel at reasonably low prices by North Carolina standards).

Quote from: The Nature Boy on December 25, 2014, 10:02:53 PM
IMO, the biggest problem there is one that I-95 in North Carolina is notorious for - a low overpass.

I'm not denying that I-95 in NC is a disaster zone. I'm just addressing the political reality of putting a toll on it.

Barring large increases in motor fuel taxes at the state and federal levels, it will take NCDOT years to correct all of the problems with I-95 across their state.

The worst section of I-95 runs from Lumberton in the south (Exit 22 is as good of a place as any to mark the southern end of the bad section) to Kenly (Exit 107) in the north.  My least-favorite subset of that bad section is passing Smithfield, Selma and Micro, because of  the substandard interchanges and bridges.  Curiously, as Spui implied upthread, within that worst section, the Fayetteville Bypass section has a nice modern design (and could probably have a posted limit speed limit of 75 MPH).

I agree that the NCDOT has a ton of work to do on I-95. The Fayetteville Bypass is probably the best stretch of it actually.

And I just saw the post about Smithfield in Tar Heel, I am Facebook friends with a high school classmate who worked there. She posted about getting food stamps so I'm assuming that the pay is abysmal. I have a friend who worked for a chicken slaughtering outfit in North Carolina and made minimum wage. The poverty rate in eastern NC is unreal.

Quote from: The Nature Boy on December 27, 2014, 11:13:48 AM
I agree that the NCDOT has a ton of work to do on I-95. The Fayetteville Bypass is probably the best stretch of it actually.

All in agreement.  I-95 around Wilson is not bad, though the Fayetteville Bypass section is better.

Quote from: The Nature Boy on December 27, 2014, 11:13:48 AM
And I just saw the post about Smithfield in Tar Heel, I am Facebook friends with a high school classmate who worked there. She posted about getting food stamps so I'm assuming that the pay is abysmal. I have a friend who worked for a chicken slaughtering outfit in North Carolina and made minimum wage. The poverty rate in eastern NC is unreal.

Paying wages so low as to qualify people for public assistance is really bad public policy, and probably does not increase the number of people riding public transportation either (there's not much transit service in eastern North Carolina anyway).

Quote from: cpzilliacus on December 28, 2014, 03:59:14 PM

Quote from: The Nature Boy on December 27, 2014, 11:13:48 AM
I agree that the NCDOT has a ton of work to do on I-95. The Fayetteville Bypass is probably the best stretch of it actually.

All in agreement.  I-95 around Wilson is not bad, though the Fayetteville Bypass section is better.

Quote from: The Nature Boy on December 27, 2014, 11:13:48 AM
And I just saw the post about Smithfield in Tar Heel, I am Facebook friends with a high school classmate who worked there. She posted about getting food stamps so I'm assuming that the pay is abysmal. I have a friend who worked for a chicken slaughtering outfit in North Carolina and made minimum wage. The poverty rate in eastern NC is unreal.

Paying wages so low as to qualify people for public assistance is really bad public policy, and probably does not increase the number of people riding public transportation either (there's not much transit service in eastern North Carolina anyway).

I definitely agree and it's one of the many reasons that I will not raise a family or live in eastern NC in the long term. Eastern NC is a good 20-25 years behind the rest of the state (much less the country) and it shows in a lot of ways. But I-95 was routed through it so outsiders have to deal with decades of bad policy when they travel on the roads.

Quote from: The Nature Boy on December 28, 2014, 04:11:00 PM
I definitely agree and it's one of the many reasons that I will not raise a family or live in eastern NC in the long term. Eastern NC is a good 20-25 years behind the rest of the state (much less the country) and it shows in a lot of ways. But I-95 was routed through it so outsiders have to deal with decades of bad policy when they travel on the roads.

I have heard anecdotally that eastern North Carolina is where at least some retired people from Virginia, Maryland and D.C. (and perhaps points north) head for the (usually) milder climate and the lower cost of living.  After selling a home in large areas of one of those states for a lot of money, they can afford something nice at North Carolina prices and especially eastern North Carolina prices.

Quote from: Darkchylde on December 24, 2014, 08:19:33 AM
When I had a more fuel-efficient vehicle, I used to shunpike the Causeway, down near New Orleans.

Now, for those who aren't familiar with the area, while the Causeway is a straight shot from the middle of the Northshore to Metairie, which is practically right next door to the city. Using I-12 and I-10 from a similar point adds about 25 miles or so to the trip, depending on where you need to go in the city. Taking I-12 to I-55 is even longer. Toll's only $3 for a 24 mile bridge, which is a bargain compared to places like NYC or most other places with toll roads or bridges.

So, going 25-30 miles out of the way to shunpike a $3 toll. Yeah. If I'd shunpike that, then I'd definitely shunpike the Kansas Turnpike or a potentially-tolled I-70 in MO. I've probably already spent my entire fuel budget for the month putting gas in the tank, and the Explorer I drive now is thirsty. I don't have the extra money to pay tolls. Simple as that.

30 miles eats up at least $3 of gas for most, and your time is gone for good. 

Often the equation is complicated, but what you laid out does not seem to be.

Re: Toll versus free: It depends. I usually suck it up and pay the toll, but if there is a route that I haven't been on before that would be interesting to drive, I would take the alternative if it doesn't take to much time.

RE: I-95 in NC: Why couldn't people who register their transponder with a local address (maybe someone that lives in one of the counties that I-95 passes through) not be able to use the road for free, since most of the traffic is out of state?

Quote from: codyg1985 on December 30, 2014, 06:56:14 PM
Re: Toll versus free: It depends. I usually suck it up and pay the toll, but if there is a route that I haven't been on before that would be interesting to drive, I would take the alternative if it doesn't take to much time.

RE: I-95 in NC: Why couldn't people who register their transponder with a local address (maybe someone that lives in one of the counties that I-95 passes through) not be able to use the road for free, since most of the traffic is out of state?

That would be my suggestion. If you live in a county (or an adjacent county) that I-95 runs through and you register your transponder with the corresponding address, you get free usage of the road.

How would that be equitable?  Are my groceries free if I live within two blocks of the grocery store?

Quote from: kkt on December 30, 2014, 07:14:03 PM
How would that be equitable?  Are my groceries free if I live within two blocks of the grocery store?

One word - politics.  MassDOT (and Massport and Mass. Turnpike Authority before them) have given in to similar local extortion demands and offer "resident rate" EZ-Pass transponders so people in Chelsea and East Boston can use the Tobin Bridge and Boston Harbor tunnels for next to nothing.  Of course, if those same people decide to use public transportation instead to cross the harbor, they have to pay the full transit fare.

Local politicians have also basically said "we're not having a toll road because it would put an undue burden on the impoverished people who live along I-95." Instead of it being an all or nothing proposition, you give in a bit so you can get the tolls so you can afford to modernize the road.

Quote from: kkt on December 30, 2014, 07:14:03 PM
How would that be equitable?  Are my groceries free if I live within two blocks of the grocery store?

No, but if you were told that you absolutely had to shop at that grocery store, with no other viable options, you might want some kind of protection from the potential for that store to abuse its monopoly over you.

Or you could move.  But politicians and bureaucrats are loathe to tell the masses "if you don't like it, you can move".

And I-95 runs through the parts of NC where there are already other indicators that the citizens WOULD in fact be better off moving.

But yeah, the grocery analogy also falls flat because there is never a "free" grocery store option that I could utilize. If I-95 is tolled through that region, the locals will just use US 301 and any other road that parallels I-95 along its route. There is no analogous situation when it comes to buying grocery.

I don't think roads that are already free should be converted into toll roads. If they want to build new interstates and toll those, whatever. But leave the free interstates alone.

Actually I have a proposal. The Federal Government should take care of Interstates and US highways, while the state departments take care of state highways. Makes sense to me.

Quote from: Darkchylde on December 26, 2014, 10:59:06 PM

Quote from: vdeane on December 25, 2014, 01:33:09 PM
If she can go a full month on a tank, I'm guessing that she's not living rather far away from where she works (or has some other means of getting there).

Actually, I don't work. Disability only covers so much, especially since the prices of things are still sky-high aside from gas (at the moment.) Most of my commuting lately is to grocery stores to buy food or to doctors, thankfully, not involving a tolled route in any shape or form yet. Sometimes, though, I have to travel a little bit beyond that. Taking a toll road to get there would screw me badly.

Edit: Quoted wrong post

Yep. What pretty much everyone is missing is that it's MUCH easier to budget for the one tank of gas on the first of the month than it is to budget for an approximate number of toll crossings.

Also, time does not always equal money. Taking the long way has different benefits. It gives you more time to enjoy the scenery, think, and listen to media (music, news, audiobooks, podcasts, etc.).

Quote from: US 41 on December 30, 2014, 08:09:25 PM
I don't think roads that are already free should be converted into toll roads. If they want to build new interstates and toll those, whatever. But leave the free interstates alone.

Actually I have a proposal. The Federal Government should take care of Interstates and US highways, while the state departments take care of state highways. Makes sense to me.

That would require Congress to do something to keep the Highway Trust Fund solvent........

lol at that happening

QuoteThat would require Congress to do something to keep the Highway Trust Fund solvent........

If Congress eliminated the Surface Transportation Program (basically Federal-aid for most non-Interstates), the fund would probably remain solvent.

I wonder what the domino effect of just providing federal funding for interstate maintenance would be. I could see a state saying, "fine, we'll lower our drinking age" since federal highway funds are now a lot less important. Since interstate highways are primarily an instrument of interstate commerce, the feds have more of a stake in their upkeep. This is especially true in rural areas like eastern NC where the traffic IS primarily out of state.

I doubt it.  Every state has a lot of mileage of Interstate that is mostly local in nature, especially in their urban areas.  They won't jeopardize that unless they REALLY want to go it completely on their own....and unless Congress changes things, FHWA would still have oversight on the Interstates.

Quote from: codyg1985 on December 30, 2014, 06:56:14 PM
Re: Toll versus free: It depends. I usually suck it up and pay the toll, but if there is a route that I haven't been on before that would be interesting to drive, I would take the alternative if it doesn't take to much time.

That's pretty much where I am when it comes to out of state trips.

Though I did vote for the "cheap" option in the poll since the only toll road that's an option to me on a regular basis is the Ohio Turnpike and I avoid it as much as possible. Though it does help that I have decent alternatives. If I'm going somewhere in the Cleveland metro I can either take OH 2/I-90 or US 20/OH 10/I-480, and if I'm going to Toledo I can take US 20 to either OH 420/I-280 or I-75. I pretty much only use the turnpike if I'm running late, am using it to head out of state, or just want a change of pace. 

Quote from: cpzilliacus on December 25, 2014, 09:49:36 PMAs much as I agreed with the decision by USDOT and the Federal Highway Administration to (twice) reject Pennsylvania's proposal to toll all of I-80 across that state, the proposal did have one good idea - allowing four-wheel traffic with an E-ZPass transponder to pass through one of the transponder gantries without being charged a toll, effectively allowing (relatively) short trips to be made without paying any toll charges.

Recent efforts to toll I-80 in PA were rejected three times.

QuoteOn December 12, 2007, the FHWA rejected the plan, and returned Pennsylvania's application for tolling I-80 with questions asking why the state should place tolls on the highway.

On September 11, 2008, the Federal Highway Administration rejected Pennsylvania's application to toll Interstate 80 for the second time.

On April 6, 2010, the Federal Highway Administration rejected this application for the third time.

Source (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_80_in_Pennsylvania)

Back to the topic at hand:

As others have mentioned, I'm not going to vote in this poll either because such is not a one-size-fits-all.

In general, if the toll road is the most direct, fastest (posted speed limit as well as traffic flow) and there's no practical non-tolled freeway alternative; then I will use it.

Since most of my driving experiences are in the northeast, the following is a list of shunpike routes I've either done or will continue to do:

1.  I-95 toll plaza in Newark, DE: since the extortion toll of $4 each way w/no EZ-Pass discount is only due to the fact that the highway's a toll facility (as opposed to a bridge or tunnel); exiting off just beforehand and getting back on afterwards makes perfect sense.  The distance between Exits 1A-B in DE and MD Exits 109A-B is close enough that a couple extra minutes using DE 896/DE 2/MD 279 won't be a deal-breaker.

2.  I-95/NJ Turnpike north of Exit 11/GSP as well as most Hudson River Crossings: for my many trips to/from New England from/to the Delaware Valley, this one's almost automatic.  Yes, I'm still paying a toll for the GSP and the Tappan Zee Bridge (one-way) & drivng longer in miles; but such is significantly cheaper (& usually less congested) than staying on the NJ Turnpike all the way to its northern end and taking the GW.

3.  When coming from the north, I almost always cross back into PA via the NJ-PA Turnpike (Future I-95) bridge and use US 13/PA 413 to pick I-95.  The overall NJ & PA Turnpike toll still comes out cheaper than exiting off the NJ Turnpike sooner (usually at Exit 7A vs. Exit 6) but paying the $5 Walt Whitman Bridge toll to Philly.

4.  When heading to Carlise for the various car shows; I have exited off the PA Turnpike (I-76) at Exit 247 (Harrisburg-East) and used I-283/83/81/PA 581/US 11 vs. staying on I-76 to Exit 226 (Carlise) & US 11 so I can save a bit on tolls (roughly $3 r/t w/EZ-Pass).  Although, now that the Turnpike has a 70-mph speed limit west of Morgantown (Exit 298/I-176); I might be more willing to use the Turnpike again.

5.  To/from the North Shore (MA) from/to the Mass Pike (I-90): Much to the chagrin of my mother (she doesn't like using highways even when she's not the one driving), I almost always use MA 128/I-95 vs. going through Boston via MA 1A to I-90.  Even though it's longer in overall miles; it's usually quicker and much cheaper in terms of Turnpike tolls and Boston Harbor crossings.

I've stated such in other threads and I'll state it here; had the I-95/Somerset Freeway and I-695 in NJ been built as originally planned, the only toll facilities I would be using for my New England trips would be the Tappan Zee Bridge and the Mass Pike (#s 2 & 3 cover such).

Quote from: Brandon on December 24, 2014, 06:02:13 PM

Quote from: US 41 on December 24, 2014, 02:27:11 PM

Quote from: KG909 on December 24, 2014, 02:24:23 PM

Quote from: NE2 on December 24, 2014, 02:11:44 PM

Quote from: KG909 on December 24, 2014, 01:16:31 PM
Oh yes I used the calculator and got $12 too, so I'm thinking it's glitched and was hoping someone would know.

Why do you think it's glitched? Expecting a higher toll? The whole 300+ mile road is only $25 (which is about half the toll per mile of Laredo-Mazatlan).

Really? I expected it to be like $95-110. Never used an American toll so I had no idea of the prices.

There is no way it is even close to being that expensive. I think to drive from Chicago to Philadelphia it is only about $35 total in tolls.

It's a bit more than that, but that's due to the very high tolls on the Pennsylvania Turnpike.

I calculated it this morning and to drive from Philadelphia to Chicago it would cost $72.65 if you were paying in cash the whole time. And yes, the Pennsylvania Turnpike is expensive! It costs $40.65 to drive on I-76 across the state. (It costs $46.10 to drive the whole thing from the Delaware River to Ohio.) It's $4.50 to drive the Chicago Skyway and $10 to drive across the whole state of Indiana. To drive across Ohio it is $17.50.

This is exactly why I take the free roads. If I had to drive from Philly to Chicago and back to Philly it would cost a little over $145 if I stuck straight to the toll roads. $145 is a lot of money that I could use elsewhere.

I would honestly be the guy that would take US 30 the whole trip. According to Google Maps it would only take 3 - 3.5 hours longer that way (so 7 total). I think I might actually drive US 30 from Chicago to Philadelphia one day for a shunpike road trip.

Quote from: PHLBOS on December 31, 2014, 05:28:53 PM

Quote from: cpzilliacus on December 25, 2014, 09:49:36 PMAs much as I agreed with the decision by USDOT and the Federal Highway Administration to (twice) reject Pennsylvania's proposal to toll all of I-80 across that state, the proposal did have one good idea - allowing four-wheel traffic with an E-ZPass transponder to pass through one of the transponder gantries without being charged a toll, effectively allowing (relatively) short trips to be made without paying any toll charges.

Recent efforts to toll I-80 in PA were rejected three times.

I am aware of two rejections - once by the George W. Bush USDOT, then by the Barrack Obama USDOT.

But the USDOT did not reject tolling of I-80 because of the plan to allow some (shorter) trips to be toll-free. 

The plan was rejected since Pennsylvania was not going to use most of the collected revenue for any improvements that might have been of benefit to I-80 drivers.  Most of the revenue was to be shipped to Philadelphia to pay SEPTA hourly employees and to Pittsburgh to pay Port Authority of Allegheny County hourly transit workers - and benefits, and some smaller part to other Pennsylvania transit operators.

Quote from: cpzilliacus on January 07, 2015, 03:24:30 PMI am aware of two rejections - once by the George W. Bush USDOT, then by the Barrack Obama USDOT.

It was rejected by the FHWA twice during the Bush 43 years; once on Dec. 12, 2007 and again on Sept. 11, 2008 as listed in my earlier post.  I remember the three FHWA rejections (including the one on April 6, 2010 under Obama) very well mainly because I've lived in the Keystone State for nearly 25 years and remember all this going through the various headlines and the news reports.   

Quote from: cpzilliacus on January 07, 2015, 03:24:30 PM
But the USDOT did not reject tolling of I-80 because of the plan to allow some (shorter) trips to be toll-free.

Never stated nor insinuated that it did. 

Quote from: cpzilliacus on January 07, 2015, 03:24:30 PMThe plan was rejected since Pennsylvania was not going to use most of the collected revenue for any improvements that might have been of benefit to I-80 drivers.  Most of the revenue was to be shipped to Philadelphia to pay SEPTA hourly employees and to Pittsburgh to pay Port Authority of Allegheny County hourly transit workers - and benefits, and some smaller part to other Pennsylvania transit operators.

Agreed, it was a classic case of "Robbing Peter to Pay Paul".

Quote from: PHLBOS on January 07, 2015, 03:56:16 PM

Quote from: cpzilliacus on January 07, 2015, 03:24:30 PMI am aware of two rejections - once by the George W. Bush USDOT, then by the Barrack Obama USDOT.

It was rejected by the FHWA twice during the Bush 43 years; once on Dec. 12, 2007 and again on Sept. 11, 2008 as listed in my earlier post.  I remember the three FHWA rejections (including the one on April 6, 2010 under Obama) very well mainly because I've lived in the Keystone State for nearly 25 years and remember all this going through the various headlines and the news reports.

Did not recall the second W. Bush Administration rejection.  Aside regarding Obama - the transit union that represents many SETPA hourly workers urged  its members to vote for him because they assumed his administration would approve the proposed tolling of I-80.

Quote from: PHLBOS on January 07, 2015, 03:56:16 PM

Quote from: cpzilliacus on January 07, 2015, 03:24:30 PM
But the USDOT did not reject tolling of I-80 because of the plan to allow some (shorter) trips to be toll-free.

Never stated nor insinuated that it did.

Agreed.  I think someone else upthread did. 

Quote from: PHLBOS on January 07, 2015, 03:56:16 PM

Quote from: cpzilliacus on January 07, 2015, 03:24:30 PMThe plan was rejected since Pennsylvania was not going to use most of the collected revenue for any improvements that might have been of benefit to I-80 drivers.  Most of the revenue was to be shipped to Philadelphia to pay SEPTA hourly employees and to Pittsburgh to pay Port Authority of Allegheny County hourly transit workers - and benefits, and some smaller part to other Pennsylvania transit operators.

Agreed, it was a classic case of "Robbing Peter to Pay Paul".

Agreed too.

Or actually robbing I-80 drivers to fund generous wage and benefit packages in cities far from any part of I-80?

Quote from: cpzilliacus on January 07, 2015, 10:47:56 PMDid not recall the second W. Bush Administration rejection.

With all due respect, while you may not have necessarily recall the second time (which took place roughly 2 months prior to the 2008 elections); it doesn't mean that such didn't happen.  Again, I posted the dates and a source for the three rejections in my earlier post.

Another source (http://tollroadsnews.com/news/problems-for-penn-pike-in-getting-feds-ok-to-toll-i-80-in-legal-counsel-memo) (if one doesn't like Wiki) referring to the Sept. 2008 rejection circa June 2009.

QuoteA previously unpublished Memorandum (included in the above-link) written by the Federal Highway Administration's (FHWA) chief counsel at the time, Marcus J Lemon, explains rather clearly the thinking behind the US Government rejection last September of the second Pennsylvania application to toll I-80.

Quote from: cpzilliacus on January 07, 2015, 10:47:56 PMAside regarding Obama - the transit union that represents many SEPTA hourly workers urged  its members to vote for him because they assumed his administration would approve the proposed tolling of I-80.

I'm sure then-Gov. Rendell was thinking at the time, if Obama's elected President; he would try for it again.  What he didn't expect was Ray LaHood remaining as Secretary of Transportation after the transition from Bush 43 to Obama.

Quote from: roadman on December 30, 2014, 07:37:18 PM
One word - politics.  MassDOT (and Massport and Mass. Turnpike Authority before them) have given in to similar local extortion demands and offer "resident rate" EZ-Pass transponders so people in Chelsea and East Boston can use the Tobin Bridge and Boston Harbor tunnels for next to nothing.  Of course, if those same people decide to use public transportation instead to cross the harbor, they have to pay the full transit fare.

...which begs the question:  How were the toll points on the AET design for the MassPike determined?  They appear to be set up so that the Pike could be used in certain areas for toll-free trips.

Quote from: SidS1045 on January 08, 2015, 04:12:04 PM

Quote from: roadman on December 30, 2014, 07:37:18 PM
One word - politics.  MassDOT (and Massport and Mass. Turnpike Authority before them) have given in to similar local extortion demands and offer "resident rate" EZ-Pass transponders so people in Chelsea and East Boston can use the Tobin Bridge and Boston Harbor tunnels for next to nothing.  Of course, if those same people decide to use public transportation instead to cross the harbor, they have to pay the full transit fare.

...which begs the question:  How were the toll points on the AET design for the MassPike determined?  They appear to be set up so that the Pike could be used in certain areas for toll-free trips.

I have heard that there will be a 40¢ barrier between exit, except between those within Springfield and Worcester areas.

Quote from: 1 on January 08, 2015, 04:21:48 PM
I have heard that there will be a 40¢ barrier between exit, except between those within Springfield and Worcester areas.

Here is a map of the proposed toll points:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ftollroadsnews.com%2Fsites%2Fdefault%2Ffiles%2Fu2%2F2013%2F1308182mpLocns.gif&hash=729edffbd5f9c48835a68f321647b43b0493761e)

If they stick with this plan, trips in the Springfield (exits 4-7), Worcester (exits 10-11) and downtown Boston (exits 21-25) areas will be free, although most of the exits in downtown Boston are one-way (E entrance/W exit, or the reverse).  Passing each toll point will cost 40¢.

Why are all the toll points the same cost?  Under that plan, a trip between exits 15 and 18 would cost close to a dollar, which a much longer trip between exits 2 and 3 would be half the cost.  That makes NO sense.  Plus a trip between Albany and Boston would have 10 entries on the E-ZPass statement instead of one.  They can put the gantries in the mainline if they want, but IMO they should at least have a virtual ticket system.

Quote from: vdeane on January 13, 2015, 12:52:10 PM
Why are all the toll points the same cost?  Under that plan, a trip between exits 15 and 18 would cost close to a dollar, which a much longer trip between exits 2 and 3 would be half the cost.  That makes NO sense.

Current toll between Exits 15 & 18: $2.50 ($1.25 collected at Exit 15 (I-95/MA 128) and another $1.25 at the Allston Plaza/Exit 18 (eastbound)/20 (westbound))

Current toll between Exits 2 & 3: $1.05 (until recently, the toll between these 2 plazas was zero)

The Boston Extension (between I-95 and I-93) of the Pike has always had a higher cost.  Just like the NJ Turnpike tolls north of the Garden State Parkway (Exit 11) are higher than the tolls south of the GSP.

Quote from: vdeane on January 13, 2015, 12:52:10 PMPlus a trip between Albany and Boston would have 10 entries on the E-ZPass statement instead of one.  They can put the gantries in the mainline if they want, but IMO they should at least have a virtual ticket system.

My understanding is that these new gantries along the mainline will replace the existing interchange toll plazas (aka the ticket system).

As far as the numerous gantries for longer Turnpike trips is concerned, since these are not traditional toll booths where one has to stop; why would a user care about how many legitimate toll entries that appear on their statement(s)?

BTW, at present when one gets on I-90 in East Boston and heads west towards Albany; they pass through 4 gantries/plazas (Ted williams Tunnel/Allston Plaza/Weston (beginning of ticket system)/Stockbridge (end of ticket system)) by the time they exit the Bay State.

I'm quite frugal in real life. So, naturally, for roads I would take the cheaper one, even if it's a little bit slower.
Of course, if I have to get somewhere quickly, then I'll take the toll road.

I live near Orlando and the toll roads can be expensive. I 4 is the only freeway that is not tolled. The Sunpass transponder is convenient. But I have friends who between 2 of them going to work and back have $90 toll bill per month. For someone Living pay check to paycheck that is a big chunk. And lits of people avoid the tolls.. I-4 is always congested.. Not  417 or 408..( as an aside the toll roads are called on traffic reports like they are in LA.. The 408.. Etc.. I don't like)

Quote from: jwolfer on January 14, 2015, 12:18:29 AM
I live near Orlando and the toll roads can be expensive. I 4 is the only freeway that is not tolled. The Sunpass transponder is convenient. But I have friends who between 2 of them going to work and back have $90 toll bill per month. For someone Living pay check to paycheck that is a big chunk. And lits of people avoid the tolls.. I-4 is always congested.. Not  417 or 408..( as an aside the toll roads are called on traffic reports like they are in LA.. The 408.. Etc.. I don't like)

Except for the 528 which is called "The Beachline" and never by its number. Even considering that the Beachline name is not signed at all along it with the one mile guide for it on FL 417 being the only mention along with a supplemental guide on the SB FL TPK at the Sand Lake Road overpass, it is still called that particular name.

Quote from: vdeane on January 13, 2015, 12:52:10 PM
a trip between Albany and Boston would have 10 entries on the E-ZPass statement instead of one.

I count 13 toll points between the NY line and Boston, 14 if you go all the way to the end of I-90 near Logan Airport.  One thing I haven't been able to find out is how each toll point passed will be billed (individually or by date), but as PHLBOS pointed out, who cares?

And, PHLBOS, you are correct: All tolls will be collected electronically on the mainline of the Pike only.  Part of the appropriation for the project includes money to demolish the barrier and ramp toll booths and attached buildings, and reconfigure the traffic lanes in those areas to eliminate the widening where the booths were and the subsequent merges...good news for those who pass interchanges 14-15 and 18-19-20 every day, as these are massive choke points during rush hours.  The ramp to interchange 9 also backs up on the day before most major holidays.

Quote from: SidS1045 on January 14, 2015, 03:21:00 PMgood news for those who pass interchanges 14-15 and 18-19-20 every day, as these are massive choke points during rush hours.

Since there are plans to reconfigure 18/19/20; an ideal situation would be to time the erection/implementation of AET concurrently with that project. 

Quote from: SidS1045 on January 14, 2015, 03:21:00 PMThe ramp to interchange 9 also backs up on the day before most major holidays.

It's also backed up there (and along I-84 eastbound approaching I-90) during peak holiday travel times.

Well, I care if I have 20 million entries on my E-ZPass statement from one trip, none of which conform to NYSTA's standard format (the statement is designed for ticket systems; barrier tolls have to be shoehorned in with blank exit information).  I'm not sure what you mean "by date"; all the tolls I've ever dealt with were either straight barrier or ticket, and the 40 cents/barrier system precludes a virtual ticket system where it guesses your entry and exit points based on the barriers passed.

Quote from: vdeane on January 15, 2015, 12:48:56 PM
I'm not sure what you mean "by date"; all the tolls I've ever dealt with were either straight barrier or ticket, and the 40 cents/barrier system precludes a virtual ticket system where it guesses your entry and exit points based on the barriers passed.

It certainly requires a re-think of the concept of tolling in general (in the past, the usual formula is so many cents per mile), because in MA (and, I suspect, many more jurisdictions as time goes on) tolls will no longer be collected at exits and the proposed tolling points are not separated by a set distance.  (As I recall, the MassPike AET project is expected to pay for itself in about five years, based mostly on the savings in manpower, so it will inevitably be an attractive alternative in other jurisdictions which collect tolls.)  As I stated, I have no information on the details of how billing will be done, so I can't say how NYSTA and other members of the E-ZPass IAG will bill MassPike usage.

What I mean by "by date" was:  It's possible they will list all tolls collected on one day on one line in the statement.  As you pointed out, listing one toll-point passage per line makes for a longer bill.  But whichever method they use, it should add up to the same amount.

Quote from: SidS1045 on January 15, 2015, 03:13:36 PM
....

What I mean by "by date" was:  It's possible they will list all tolls collected on one day on one line in the statement.  As you pointed out, listing one toll-point passage per line makes for a longer bill.  But whichever method they use, it should add up to the same amount.

That's certainly possible. That's the system being used on the new I-95 express lanes in Virginia. The reversible lanes are divided into multiple "segments" (two northbound, three southbound) and the toll rate for each segment is different, but it shows up as a single transaction on your E-ZPass statement because the system adds the rates together into a single charge (e.g., if the southern segment is $4.75 and the northern segment is $2.10, instead of two transactions for those amounts appearing on your statement you see a single transaction for $6.85). I suspect this may be part of the reason why it takes a week for the toll charge to post.

The issue of one aggregated transaction versus individual transactions is probably all the more important for people who don't have the appropriate transponder because it conceivably makes a difference in what sort of surcharge you might face–if there's a per-transaction surcharge, it can make a huge difference if they aggregate a whole trip into one transaction and impose one surcharge versus charging a separate surcharge for each of ten gantries. (Again citing the Virginia example, it's a huge distinction because they charge you $12.50 per trip if they send you a bill in the mail. If each segment were a separate toll charge, someone without an E-ZPass could conceivably be socked with $62.50 in service charges, on top of the tolls, for a single day's roundtrip commute–$12.50 times 5 segments! $25 in service charges for one day's commute isn't trivial either, but it's a lot less than $62.50.)

Quote from: SidS1045 on January 15, 2015, 03:13:36 PM

Quote from: vdeane on January 15, 2015, 12:48:56 PM
I'm not sure what you mean "by date"; all the tolls I've ever dealt with were either straight barrier or ticket, and the 40 cents/barrier system precludes a virtual ticket system where it guesses your entry and exit points based on the barriers passed.

It certainly requires a re-think of the concept of tolling in general (in the past, the usual formula is so many cents per mile), because in MA (and, I suspect, many more jurisdictions as time goes on) tolls will no longer be collected at exits and the proposed tolling points are not separated by a set distance.  (As I recall, the MassPike AET project is expected to pay for itself in about five years, based mostly on the savings in manpower, so it will inevitably be an attractive alternative in other jurisdictions which collect tolls.)  As I stated, I have no information on the details of how billing will be done, so I can't say how NYSTA and other members of the E-ZPass IAG will bill MassPike usage.

What I mean by "by date" was:  It's possible they will list all tolls collected on one day on one line in the statement.  As you pointed out, listing one toll-point passage per line makes for a longer bill.  But whichever method they use, it should add up to the same amount.

ISTHA will probably show it like they do their current barrier system.  That's how they show the ticket turnpikes to the east.  As an example, here's some of mine below:

Date/Time    Type    Amount    Agency    Location*    Plaza

09/19/14 10:32 PM     TOLL       ($0.95)    ISTHA     Plz 89-Boughton Rd Mainline-Ln 54     89          
09/22/14 03:43 PM     TOLL       ($6.00)    MDTA     Plz WPL-Lane Memorial Br-Ln 11     WPL          
09/22/14 05:45 PM     TOLL       ($1.00)    DELDOT     Plz 020-Dover Plaza-Ln 41     020          
09/22/14 05:53 PM     TOLL       $0.25    DELDOT     Plz 022-South Smyrna Ramp-Ln 4     022          
09/22/14 06:04 PM     TOLL       ($0.25)    DELDOT     Plz 022-South Smyrna Ramp-Ln 4     022          
09/22/14 06:21 PM     TOLL       ($1.00)    DELDOT     Plz 030-Biddles Plaza-Ln 10     030          
09/22/14 07:07 PM     TOLL       ($2.15)    NJTP     Plz -Woodbury/S. Camden/NJ Aquarium-Ln 07X               
09/22/14 07:16 PM     TOLL       ($5.00)    DRPA     Plz -Walt Whitman Br-Ln 04W               
09/22/14 09:29 PM     TOLL       ($6.21)    PTC     Plz -Harrisburg East Shore-Ln 9               
09/23/14 11:35 AM     TOLL       ($17.60)    PTC     Plz -Warrendale-Ln 8               
09/23/14 03:27 PM     TOLL       ($0.48)    INDOT     Plz -Angola-Ln 01W               
09/23/14 04:11 PM     TOLL       ($11.50)    OTIC     Plz 2-Westgate-Ln 2     2          
09/23/14 05:49 PM     TOLL       ($3.73)    INDOT     Plz -Portage-Ln 01W               
09/23/14 06:29 PM     TOLL       ($0.55)    ISTHA     Plz 43-I-80 West-Ln 53     43

* Any lane beginning with a 5 or 6 indicates that the lane is an Open Road Tolling Lane (ISTHA only)

I notice that some of the eastern turnpikes do not have plaza numbers.

Quote from: 1995hoo on January 15, 2015, 03:25:29 PM

Quote from: SidS1045 on January 15, 2015, 03:13:36 PM
....

What I mean by "by date" was:  It's possible they will list all tolls collected on one day on one line in the statement.  As you pointed out, listing one toll-point passage per line makes for a longer bill.  But whichever method they use, it should add up to the same amount.

That's certainly possible. That's the system being used on the new I-95 express lanes in Virginia. The reversible lanes are divided into multiple "segments" (two northbound, three southbound) and the toll rate for each segment is different, but it shows up as a single transaction on your E-ZPass statement because the system adds the rates together into a single charge (e.g., if the southern segment is $4.75 and the northern segment is $2.10, instead of two transactions for those amounts appearing on your statement you see a single transaction for $6.85). I suspect this may be part of the reason why it takes a week for the toll charge to post.

The issue of one aggregated transaction versus individual transactions is probably all the more important for people who don't have the appropriate transponder because it conceivably makes a difference in what sort of surcharge you might face–if there's a per-transaction surcharge, it can make a huge difference if they aggregate a whole trip into one transaction and impose one surcharge versus charging a separate surcharge for each of ten gantries. (Again citing the Virginia example, it's a huge distinction because they charge you $12.50 per trip if they send you a bill in the mail. If each segment were a separate toll charge, someone without an E-ZPass could conceivably be socked with $62.50 in service charges, on top of the tolls, for a single day's roundtrip commute–$12.50 times 5 segments! $25 in service charges for one day's commute isn't trivial either, but it's a lot less than $62.50.)

I'd imagine with any AET system, the service charges are generally per month, not per day and absolutely not per transaction, that would be insane (not counting them sometimes giving discounts for being a member of the program)

Quote from: jwolfer on January 14, 2015, 12:18:29 AM
I live near Orlando and the toll roads can be expensive. I 4 is the only freeway that is not tolled. The Sunpass transponder is convenient. But I have friends who between 2 of them going to work and back have $90 toll bill per month. For someone Living pay check to paycheck that is a big chunk. And lits of people avoid the tolls.. I-4 is always congested.. Not  417 or 408..( as an aside the toll roads are called on traffic reports like they are in LA.. The 408.. Etc.. I don't like)

No duh.  Mine is $140 a month and that's JUST the Bee...I mean the Beachline.
I could drop that down to $100 if I took the East-West to I-4 but the widening of SR 50 on the east side and the resulting traffic is a nightmare...with at least another year or two to go before it's done.
I can barely afford it, but not having a job to go to to get food, water, internet or power is the issue.

Quote from: UCFKnights on January 15, 2015, 08:19:11 PM
I'd imagine with any AET system, the service charges are generally per month, not per day and absolutely not per transaction, that would be insane (not counting them sometimes giving discounts for being a member of the program)

That's why it depends on where you are. I've already noted one place where it's per trip, meaning you can incur multiple service charges per day.

Quote from: vdeane on January 15, 2015, 12:48:56 PM
Well, I care if I have 20 million entries on my E-ZPass statement from one trip, none of which conform to NYSTA's standard format (the statement is designed for ticket systems; barrier tolls have to be shoehorned in with blank exit information).

2 things:

1.  The Mass Pike AETs are still in the planning or design stage and, hence, aren't erected yet.

2.  No offense, based on where you reside & work; you're not a regular user of the Mass Pike and have (guess on my part) seldom used any of it let alone its entire length.

That said, why should you personally care about how numerous Mass Pike toll entries appear on your statement if you're not using the road?

Quote from: PHLBOS on January 16, 2015, 08:57:28 AM
2.  No offense, based on where you reside & work; you're not a regular user of the Mass Pike and have (guess on my part) seldom used any of it let alone its entire length.

That said, why should you personally care about how numerous Mass Pike toll entries appear on your statement if you're not using the road?

I have been on the entire ticket system, though I've never driven it (family vacation to Boston and a field trip to Cape Cod; I've been on all of it west of I-95).  My 2015 road trip plans will bring me on the Mass Pike west of Springfield and I imagine I'll be seeing it more often in the future as my non-NY, non-meet travel bucket list is oriented mostly towards New England/eastern Canada.

So yes, it will be appearing on some of my statements in the future.  Also, I tend to personally care about everything; for me, there isn't even a differentiation of personal vs. not personal with respect to how my emotions respond!

Quote from: vdeane on January 16, 2015, 01:01:58 PMMy 2015 road trip plans will bring me on the Mass Pike west of Springfield

Based on the earlier-posted graphic, one will only pass under 3 AETs for one-way trips.  3 lines on a statement (6 for a round-trip) is not a deal-breaker in the grand scheme of things.  Plus, what's not to say that NYSTA won't update/modify the format of their statements down the road as they (as well as other toll agencies) introduce AET?   

Quote from: vdeane on January 16, 2015, 01:01:58 PMI imagine I'll be seeing it more often in the future as my non-NY, non-meet travel bucket list is oriented mostly towards New England/eastern Canada.

If the New England destinations you're planning to visit are just VT, NH and/or ME plus eastern Canada; there's absolutely no reason for somebody in your area to use the Mass Pike as a partial means of getting to those places, it's out of the way.

Last I checked, the Mass Pike was the most efficient way to get to I-495/I-95 from Albany.

I'm not aware of NYSTA plans to adopt AET on the ticket system in the near future.  If there's any current plans to convert anything other than Harriman, Yonkers, and the Tappan Zee Bridge, they're not public knowledge.  I'm sure it will happen eventually, though it's worth noting there are a couple barriers that the MTA encountered that will need to be rectified for AET to be mainstream in NY: the inability to pursue Connecticut toll violators at all, and the lack of a law in NY automatically suspending the registrations of people with a significant amount of unpaid tolls.  The Thruway would also have more to adapt other things too, including the Annual Permit Program (which makes trips under 30 miles free (except the Castleton-on-Hudson Bridge) for people who pay the $88/year for the plan; it's a stand-in covering for the fact that there's no commuter plan for the ticket system).

Interestingly enough, I could have sworn that NYSTA statements used to include entry/exit lane information but I don't see that on the last statement I got.  Maybe they already changed it?

How do other agencies handle ticket systems if they don't use separate fields for the entry/exit plaza dates/times?

Quote from: vdeane on January 16, 2015, 10:08:51 PM
Last I checked, the Mass Pike was the most efficient way to get to I-495/I-95 from Albany.

However, if going north on I-495, NY/MA 2 has three advantages over I-90:

Shorter distance
Toll-free
Much more beautiful

Quote from: 1 on January 16, 2015, 10:19:18 PM

Quote from: vdeane on January 16, 2015, 10:08:51 PM
Last I checked, the Mass Pike was the most efficient way to get to I-495/I-95 from Albany.

However, if going north on I-495, NY/MA 2 has three advantages over I-90:

Shorter distance
Toll-free
Much more beautiful

And the time difference really isn't all that much if you use 2 or VT/NH 9 because the Pike goes so far out of the way. Does it take longer? Yes. Once you get east of I-91, much of MA 2 is controlled-access.

Time/distance from my apartment to Portsmouth according to Google Maps:
-I-90: 3h 31m, 227 miles
-VT 9/MA 2: 4h 3m, 213 miles
-VT/NH 9: 3h 55m, 201 miles

Quote from: vdeane on January 17, 2015, 03:27:56 PM
Time/distance from my apartment to Portsmouth according to Google Maps:
-I-90: 3h 31m, 227 miles
-VT 9/MA 2: 4h 3m, 213 miles
-VT/NH 9: 3h 55m, 201 miles

If you're going to Portsmouth, you'd save time by taking the Pike from Albany because it's a straight shot. But if you're going to Manchester or somewhere else that isn't right along I-95 or I-495 south of Portland, you're talking 10-15 added minutes tops, with 9 possibly taking less time. And once your starting point in New York gets north of Malta, the Pike is slower for anything in New Hampshire or north. As your mileage would remain constant and speeds would be more efficient, you might actually spend less for gas by taking 2 or 9.

Quote from: UCFKnights on January 15, 2015, 08:19:11 PM

Quote from: 1995hoo on January 15, 2015, 03:25:29 PM

Quote from: SidS1045 on January 15, 2015, 03:13:36 PM
....

What I mean by "by date" was:  It's possible they will list all tolls collected on one day on one line in the statement.  As you pointed out, listing one toll-point passage per line makes for a longer bill.  But whichever method they use, it should add up to the same amount.

That's certainly possible. That's the system being used on the new I-95 express lanes in Virginia. The reversible lanes are divided into multiple "segments" (two northbound, three southbound) and the toll rate for each segment is different, but it shows up as a single transaction on your E-ZPass statement because the system adds the rates together into a single charge (e.g., if the southern segment is $4.75 and the northern segment is $2.10, instead of two transactions for those amounts appearing on your statement you see a single transaction for $6.85). I suspect this may be part of the reason why it takes a week for the toll charge to post.

The issue of one aggregated transaction versus individual transactions is probably all the more important for people who don't have the appropriate transponder because it conceivably makes a difference in what sort of surcharge you might face–if there's a per-transaction surcharge, it can make a huge difference if they aggregate a whole trip into one transaction and impose one surcharge versus charging a separate surcharge for each of ten gantries. (Again citing the Virginia example, it's a huge distinction because they charge you $12.50 per trip if they send you a bill in the mail. If each segment were a separate toll charge, someone without an E-ZPass could conceivably be socked with $62.50 in service charges, on top of the tolls, for a single day's roundtrip commute–$12.50 times 5 segments! $25 in service charges for one day's commute isn't trivial either, but it's a lot less than $62.50.)

I'd imagine with any AET system, the service charges are generally per month, not per day and absolutely not per transaction, that would be insane (not counting them sometimes giving discounts for being a member of the program)

In Florida, the AET toll roads are transponder or pay-by-mail. They charge a single fee per month.

On many systems in the Northeast, toll roads such as the HO/T lanes are EZ Pass only. Each time you use the road without an EZ Pass, you are fined. The lanes are well signed as well, so it's not like one could claim they didn't know, as entering the lanes would mean they saw the signs as to the lanes' purpose. One even needs to merge over to get into the lanes.

Quote from: cl94 on January 17, 2015, 04:48:54 PM

Quote from: vdeane on January 17, 2015, 03:27:56 PM
Time/distance from my apartment to Portsmouth according to Google Maps:
-I-90: 3h 31m, 227 miles
-VT 9/MA 2: 4h 3m, 213 miles
-VT/NH 9: 3h 55m, 201 miles

If you're going to Portsmouth, you'd save time by taking the Pike from Albany because it's a straight shot. But if you're going to Manchester or somewhere else that isn't right along I-95 or I-495 south of Portland, you're talking 10-15 added minutes tops, with 9 possibly taking less time. And once your starting point in New York gets north of Malta, the Pike is slower for anything in New Hampshire or north. As your mileage would remain constant and speeds would be more efficient, you might actually spend less for gas by taking 2 or 9.

My starting point is south of the Twin Bridges, which therefore means that getting to VT 9 requires going through Troy and on the infamous NY 7.  Pretty much any trip to Maine or the Maritimes requires going by Portsmouth (unless you take US 2, which I found to go on and on and on the one time I was on it; it winds around so much that it's not a direct route to anywhere).  I find that I usually get stuck behind someone going 45 or 50 when taking two lane roads, and the speed limit difference from the interstates in huge.  Also, as I have prioritized the clinching of New England's interstates, that will bring me down to Pike territory as well.

Quote from: vdeane on January 18, 2015, 08:52:49 PMAlso, as I have prioritized the clinching of New England's interstates, that will bring me down to Pike territory as well.

Since you mentioned that you were planning to do these trip this year; the implementation of those AET gantries are still at least a year or two down the road.

Also, if one's heading to Portsmouth or Maine from western MA (and not stopping into the greater Boston area for sightseeing or whatever); one does NOT take the Pike all the way into Boston or even I-95 for that matter.  Most usually exit off at Auburn (Exit 10) and take I-290 East to I-495 North.  Based on the AET graphic, that's 7 future AET crossings each way.

I'm doing I-91 from Springfield to Brattleboro this year, and if the Portland, ME meet happens, the x90s, I-495, and some stuff around Boston.  I don't have definitive plans for the rest yet, though.

Also worth noting: most non-roadgeeks are probably using the Pike to get to/from Boston.

Quote from: vdeane on January 19, 2015, 12:45:32 PM
I'm doing I-91 from Springfield to Brattleboro this year, and if the Portland, ME meet happens, the x90s, I-495, and some stuff around Boston.  I don't have definitive plans for the rest yet, though.

Also worth noting: most non-roadgeeks are probably using the Pike to get to/from Boston.

Boston, yes. Not necessarily points north.

I'm pretty sure most non-Boston tourist traffic from the west is going to Cape Cod anyways.  Don't most people stick to the interstates?

Quote from: vdeane on January 19, 2015, 01:01:14 PM
I'm pretty sure most non-Boston tourist traffic from the west is going to Cape Cod anyways.  Don't most people stick to the interstates?

Eh, not necessarily. I know quite a few shunpikers who avoid toll roads whenever practical. If you're traveling within Northern New England and the part of New York that is effectively part of it, cutting down to I-90 isn't practical because, while US 2, US 4, US 11, and VT/NH 9 are slow, they're faster than going 40+ miles out of your way to use the Mass Pike or Thruway. Going between the Albany area and downstate, many use the Taconic to avoid the toll and view the scenery. And you'd be surprised how many people from the west go to Vermont, New Hampshire, or Maine.

QuoteAnd you'd be surprised how many people from the west go to Vermont, New Hampshire, or Maine.

If I were to rank the number of non-Vermont license plates I see here, the top states would be NY, MA, and NH (naturally, since they're all Vermont's neighbors), followed by CT, PA, RI, ME, MD, and VA.  We also see a lot of Quebec and the occasional Ontario.  Only rarely will I see a plate from a state/province not mentioned above.