If you would guess which are the busiest north-south and east-west Interstates in the nation, which do you think they are?
I have heard that I-95 is the busiest for north-south and I-80 is the busiest for east-west, and I wouldn't be surprised if both are true.
http://www.dot.gov/briefing-room/new-fhwa-report-reveals-states-busiest-highways (http://www.dot.gov/briefing-room/new-fhwa-report-reveals-states-busiest-highways)
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policyinformation/tables/02.cfm (https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policyinformation/tables/02.cfm)
FHWA says California in general is the busiest. I-95 appears the most times on the second table, thus making it the busiest north-south interstate route in the country. East-west, on the other hand, it tougher to identify... just going on the list, the highest east-west interstate route is I-90. It probably good to say that I-90 is the busiest east-west, though should note that all east-west routes go through vast openness with little traffic.
Quote from: WashuOtaku on December 27, 2014, 04:27:54 PM
http://www.dot.gov/briefing-room/new-fhwa-report-reveals-states-busiest-highways (http://www.dot.gov/briefing-room/new-fhwa-report-reveals-states-busiest-highways)
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policyinformation/tables/02.cfm (https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policyinformation/tables/02.cfm)
FHWA says California in general is the busiest. I-95 appears the most times on the second table, thus making it the busiest north-south interstate route in the country. East-west, on the other hand, it tougher to identify... just going on the list, the highest east-west interstate route is I-90. It probably good to say that I-90 is the busiest east-west, though should note that all east-west routes go through vast openness with little traffic.
Note that that list only includes urban segments of highways, and I do believe that I-80 passes through more urban areas than I-90. I-90 just happens to have more traffic on its segments within its urban areas. That list includes some 3-digit Interstates, but there is absolutely no way they carry more traffic overall than the entire length of most 1-digit or 2-digit Interstates. If you include the rural segments and smaller urban areas, I wouldn't be surprised if I-80's total is higher than that of I-90.
Quote from: Pink Jazz on December 27, 2014, 04:37:28 PM
Note that that list only includes urban segments of highways, and I do believe that I-80 passes through more urban areas than I-90. I-90 just happens to have more traffic on its segments within its urban areas. That list includes some 3-digit Interstates, but there is absolutely no way they carry more traffic overall than the entire length of most 1-digit or 2-digit Interstates. If you include the rural segments and smaller urban areas, I wouldn't be surprised if I-80's total is higher than that of I-90.
Urban segments is where the traffic is, those rural sections are generally all the same. But if we are going to split hairs here, then here is a breakdown of those two interstates (assuming nobody questions I-95).
I-80 = 2,900 miles (11 states), west end = San Francisco, CA; east end = Teaneck, NJ.
Metropolitan areas = Greater San Francisco Bay Area, CA (8.4m); Sacramento, CA (2.4m); Reno, NV (0.6m); Salt Lake City, UT (2.4m); Omaha, NE (0.9m); Chicago, IL (9.9m); Cleveland, OH (3.5m); New York, NY (23.4m). (total 51.5m)
I-90 = 3,101 miles (13 states), west end = Seattle, WA; east end = Boston, MA.
Metropolitan areas = Seattle, WA (4.4m); Spokane, WA (0.7m); Minneapolis, MN (3.7m); Chicago, IL (9.9m); Cleveland, OH (3.5m); Buffalo, NY (1.2m); Rochester, NY (1.2m); Syracuse, NY (0.7m); Albany, NY (1.2m); Springfield, MA (0.7m); Boston, MA (8.0m). (total 35.2m)
Though I-90 is longer, I-80 hits bigger metropolitan areas; however, if you look on a map, it skirts a lot of them as oppose to I-90 going through them. Great examples is how I-80 and I-90 differ in both Chicago and Cleveland areas. Also, I-80 doesn't really go into New York City, ending short at I-95 in New Jersey.
IMHO, it's I-90 still.
Quote from: WashuOtaku on December 27, 2014, 05:55:34 PM
I-80 = Chicago, IL (9.9m); Cleveland, OH (3.5m)
I-90 = Chicago, IL (9.9m); Cleveland, OH (3.5m)
Great examples is how I-80 and I-90 differ in both Chicago and Cleveland areas.
You just contradicted yourself.
Quote from: WashuOtaku on December 27, 2014, 05:55:34 PM
I-90 = 3,101 miles (13 states), west end = Seattle, WA; east end = Boston, MA.
Metropolitan areas = Minneapolis, MN (3.7m)
Nitpick:
I-90 misses the Twin Cities by over 50 miles.
Quote from: 1 on December 27, 2014, 06:04:23 PM
Quote from: WashuOtaku on December 27, 2014, 05:55:34 PM
I-80 = Chicago, IL (9.9m); Cleveland, OH (3.5m)
I-90 = Chicago, IL (9.9m); Cleveland, OH (3.5m)
Great examples is how I-80 and I-90 differ in both Chicago and Cleveland areas.
You just contradicted yourself.
He didn't. The mileage could be the same (or close to it) but the routing different. In both areas, I-80 goes through the metro area and I-90 heads straight downtown. I-90 would have greater traffic in both instances.
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=14307.0
Z Mapper but a great Map of Interstate Traffic Volumes . It would be nice to have it larger or a link I could not find it. Also Froggie made a map for the site a few months ago. Maybe the moderators could find a place for these maps?
Quote from: WashuOtaku on December 27, 2014, 05:55:34 PM
Though I-90 is longer, I-80 hits bigger metropolitan areas; however, if you look on a map, it skirts a lot of them as oppose to I-90 going through them. Great examples is how I-80 and I-90 differ in both Chicago and Cleveland areas. Also, I-80 doesn't really go into New York City, ending short at I-95 in New Jersey.
IMHO, it's I-90 still.
I'm not sure how you figure that. I-80 goes either through or within 5 miles of the downtowns of all the cities listed, excepting Chicago and Cleveland.
As mentioned above, I-90 does not even come close to Minneapolis/St. Paul; also, you missed Des Moines and Youngstown on I-80, both comparable in size to Syracuse or Springfield, which you did list on I-90.
I'm not saying you're right or wrong about I-90 being busier; but you may want to do some more careful research before making a conclusive statement.
What about I-10? You have Jacksonville, Talahassee, Pensacola, Mobile, A string of cities in MS (that section is busy, I have driven it), New Orleans, Baton Rouge, Lake Charles, Beaumont, Houston, San Antonio, El Paso, Phoenix, Tuscon, Palm Springs, San Bernadino, and Los Angeles. West Texas is hugely empty, but most of the rest is busy, with two of the four largest cities in the country on its route (Houston and LA).
Quote from: DTComposer on December 27, 2014, 07:12:44 PM
I'm not sure how you figure that. I-80 goes either through or within 5 miles of the downtowns of all the cities listed, excepting Chicago and Cleveland.
As mentioned above, I-90 does not even come close to Minneapolis/St. Paul; also, you missed Des Moines and Youngstown on I-80, both comparable in size to Syracuse or Springfield, which you did list on I-90.
I'm not saying you're right or wrong about I-90 being busier; but you may want to do some more careful research before making a conclusive statement.
Yes, you got me, it was an error as I accidentally followed I-94 instead of I-90 on the map when writing the earlier post. I still argue though that I-90 is busier as the New York State Thruway is no joke; while I-80 through PA is a bit of a yawn till it reaches the NYC Metro Area. Basically, I-90 heavier use in the Eastern U.S. makes up more than enough from what it lacks even less in the west compared to I-80.
Quote from: RoadWarrior56 on December 27, 2014, 07:24:29 PM
What about I-10? You have Jacksonville, Talahassee, Pensacola, Mobile, A string of cities in MS (that section is busy, I have driven it), New Orleans, Baton Rouge, Lake Charles, Beaumont, Houston, San Antonio, El Paso, Phoenix, Tuscon, Palm Springs, San Bernadino, and Los Angeles. West Texas is hugely empty, but most of the rest is busy, with two of the four largest cities in the country on its route (Houston and LA).
Oh snap, you might be right. The FHWA table does show I-10 twice, in L.A. and Phoenix areas; which is more times than either I-80 or I-90 on the list.
I-10, I-20, I-40, I-70, I-80 and I-90 go through a lot of "empty space" in the Western United States.
Although I agree that I-95 is the busiest N-S Interstate, I think it would be rivaled by I-5, which connects all the major cities on the West Coast except San Francisco. And I-55 between Chicago and New Orleans (with St. Louis and Memphis in between) can be pretty busy too.
As for the E-W Interstates, I say it comes down to a battle between I-10, I-80 and I-90.
When you say "busiest" interstate, do you mean the one with the highest overall volume, or the one with the highest traffic density? Density would take into account the length of the highway as well as those wide-open spaces with little traffic. It would be rather painstaking to calculate either one, though...
Quote from: 2Co5_14 on December 29, 2014, 12:56:54 PM
When you say "busiest" interstate, do you mean the one with the highest overall volume, or the one with the highest traffic density? Density would take into account the length of the highway as well as those wide-open spaces with little traffic. It would be rather painstaking to calculate either one, though...
I mean by highest overall volume.
"highest overall volume" and "highest traffic density" are basically one and the same...just semantics being the difference. And as long as you have a complete dataset, it's not too difficult to calculate VMT (Vehicle Miles Traveled) which would probably be the easiest way to compare Interstate traffic volumes.
Quote from: froggie on December 29, 2014, 01:06:17 PM
"highest overall volume" and "highest traffic density" are basically one and the same. And as long as you have a complete dataset, it's possible to calculate.
A 3di in a major city would probably win "highest traffic density".
Quote from: froggie on December 29, 2014, 01:06:17 PM
"highest overall volume" and "highest traffic density" are basically one and the same...just semantics being the difference. And as long as you have a complete dataset, it's not too difficult to calculate VMT (Vehicle Miles Traveled) which would probably be the easiest way to compare Interstate traffic volumes.
There is a slight difference - density is traffic volume divided by length of highway segment. So as an example: if I-80 and I-90 had equal total traffic volumes, I-80 would have a higher density since it is shorter than I-90.
I have to imagine I-40 is one of the busiest. For a big chunk of the country, 40 is the route to Los Angeles and most of Southern California. Leave LA on 15 and go to 40 at Barstow, and it takes to to the Grand Canyon (via AZ 64), Flagstaff, Albuquerque, Amarillo, Oklahoma City, Little Rock, Memphis, Nashville, not far from Charlotte, Raleigh-Durham, and finally Wilmington.
I look at it from a truck travel perspective and also a destination perspective. If you are in the midwest and further east, and wanted to go to Southern California (and its ports) for travel or for product distribution, you make your way down to 40 from whatever other route. It all kind of funnels its way down to 40. Conversely, 40 is also used to go the other way as well. From this part of the country, 40 is used to get to the midwest and places north, Chicago and the Ohio River Valley, ultimately New England, Washington, DC, and NYC.
I'm by no means an expert, just lived along 40 for a number of years, traveled along it, etc, and just using my layman's observations for that.
Quote from: Sonic99 on December 29, 2014, 01:54:04 PM
I have to imagine I-40 is one of the busiest. For a big chunk of the country, 40 is the route to Los Angeles and most of Southern California. Leave LA on 15 and go to 40 at Barstow, and it takes to to the Grand Canyon (via AZ 64), Flagstaff, Albuquerque, Amarillo, Oklahoma City, Little Rock, Memphis, Nashville, not far from Charlotte, Raleigh-Durham, and finally Wilmington.
I look at it from a truck travel perspective and also a destination perspective. If you are in the midwest and further east, and wanted to go to Southern California (and its ports) for travel or for product distribution, you make your way down to 40 from whatever other route. It all kind of funnels its way down to 40. Conversely, 40 is also used to go the other way as well. From this part of the country, 40 is used to get to the midwest and places north, Chicago and the Ohio River Valley, ultimately New England, Washington, DC, and NYC.
I'm by no means an expert, just lived along 40 for a number of years, traveled along it, etc, and just using my layman's observations for that.
Not sure if it would be I-40, since much of the cities that I-40 passes through are smaller than those of I-10, I-80, and I-90.
The cities themselves may not be the largest, but I'm thinking more in terms of trucking and transportation, not local traffic. Cross country trucking headed to SoCal will in all likelihood end up using 40 through the mountain west, and depending on their origin, head to 40 at points further east as well. Isn't the 40/81 combo one of the busiest for trucking traffic?
When I traveled to Virginia in 2012 most of our trip east was on 40, and it was semi's everywhere, many of whom using 40 at the very least to traverse the region, and many going cross-country.
Again, not a scientific opinion by any means, just observations from my travels and from living along 40 for 10 years.
Quote from: Sonic99 on December 29, 2014, 02:44:48 PM
The cities themselves may not be the largest, but I'm thinking more in terms of trucking and transportation, not local traffic. Cross country trucking headed to SoCal will in all likelihood end up using 40 through the mountain west, and depending on their origin, head to 40 at points further east as well. Isn't the 40/81 combo one of the busiest for trucking traffic?
When I traveled to Virginia in 2012 most of our trip east was on 40, and it was semi's everywhere, many of whom using 40 at the very least to traverse the region, and many going cross-country.
Again, not a scientific opinion by any means, just observations from my travels and from living along 40 for 10 years.
I-40 is a good traversed highway, but as shown on the FHWA tables provided above, not one section appears in the urban high count. I simply don't buy that argument that some how truck traffic on rural highways makes a route more busy compared to routes that are busy by shear traffic volumes of metro areas along it. As the case, we can easily rule I-40 out and stay specific to I-10, I-80 or I-90.
Going by this map:
http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/freight_analysis/nat_freight_stats/images/hi_res_jpg/nhslnghultrktraf2007.jpg
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ops.fhwa.dot.gov%2Ffreight%2Ffreight_analysis%2Fnat_freight_stats%2Fimages%2Fhi_res_jpg%2Fnhslnghultrktraf2007.jpg&hash=72ddd447a6f33793fdbedd335d9489cc289a438e)
we see that the I-40 truck traffic thing seems pretty solid. There is easily more traffic along the length of I-40 than I-10 and I-70. And it certainly seems to have higher traffic than I-80 and I-90 too, at least west of the Mississippi. Now, if the part through North Carolina were higher, I-40 would seem to be a shoe-in, but it still seems like it might be enough.
I admit that this is a bit crude, though, since we're looking only a truck traffic here. I did find a total traffic map, but the lines were all too close to being the same thickness to really be useful.
In any case, though, I'm not sure we can easily knock I-40 out of the running here.
Also, as far as north-south interstates go, I-65 and I-75 seem pretty comparable to I-95.
I found this list:
http://listosaur.com/travel/10-busiest-interstates-in-the-us/
However, I believe this list is based on density, not overall traffic since it lists some 3-digit Interstates. Here is the list:
1. I-95
2. I-405
3. I-5
4. I-90
5. I-15
6. I-110
7. I-45
8. I-10
9. I-80
10. I-85
Quote from: CtrlAltDel on December 29, 2014, 08:19:40 PM
Going by this map:
we see that the I-40 truck traffic thing seems pretty solid. There is easily more traffic along the length of I-40 than I-10 and I-70. And it certainly seems to have higher traffic than I-80 and I-90 too, at least west of the Mississippi. Now, if the part through North Carolina were higher, I-40 would seem to be a shoe-in, but it still seems like it might be enough.
I admit that this is a bit crude, though, since we're looking only a truck traffic here. I did find a total traffic map, but the lines were all too close to being the same thickness to really be useful.
In any case, though, I'm not sure we can easily knock I-40 out of the running here.
Also, as far as north-south interstates go, I-65 and I-75 seem pretty comparable to I-95.
I see what you mean, but keep in mind that the very reason why I-40 may be the busiest for truck traffic may be because it passes through fewer large metro areas than I-10, I-80, and I-90, since truckers may want to avoid these huge metro areas. I-10, I-80, and I-90, on the other hand, likely have more car traffic since they connect more major cities.
At the same time, I-81 passes through hardly any major metro areas, but is one of the busiest north-south corridors for trucks.
Strictly based on the truck traffic map above, if I-65 north of Nashville, I-24 between Nashville and Chattanooga, and I-74 south of Chattanooga were a single continous route, it would be the busiest N-S route. As somebody who drives much of it frequently, IMO, it would be one of the busiest overall.
Typo above - I-75, not I-74.
Froggie did a map of total Traffic. I noticed it like 81, 39 in Illinois doesn't pass through any big metros but it bypasses one and for free(for now, it could be tolled at will by Illinois because it was not an original)
I also noticed it includes all the NHS routes . One of the thicker lines in the Midwest is US 218/IA 27 . I know it carries about 2000 trucks and it is one of the busier non Interstate route
Quote from: Pink Jazz on December 29, 2014, 09:23:46 PM
I found this list:
http://listosaur.com/travel/10-busiest-interstates-in-the-us/
However, I believe this list is based on density, not overall traffic since it lists some 3-digit Interstates. Here is the list:
1. I-95
2. I-405
3. I-5
4. I-90
5. I-15
6. I-110
7. I-45
8. I-10
9. I-80
10. I-85
It looks like this list shows the top ten interstates by the volume occuring on short individual segments only - it doesn't attempt to rank the entire length of the highway.
Quote from: 3467 on December 29, 2014, 10:26:31 PM
Froggie did a map of total Traffic.
Can you, Froggie, or someone else provide a link to this map? Thanks.
You just reposted the Z Mapper map on the if the interstate system wasn't built thread. I hope Froggie can remember where he put that map. He did it about a year ago because that was when I was last posting regularly. It was a red flow map like the truck volume map we have here that he made from the raw data at FHWA. He mentioned doing another for other routes( US or NHS like the Trucks?)
All I can recall is it was a post under General Highway Talk
Quote from: 3467 on December 31, 2014, 04:09:57 PM
You just reposted the Z Mapper map on the if the interstate system wasn't built thread. I hope Froggie can remember where he put that map. He did it about a year ago because that was when I was last posting regularly. It was a red flow map like the truck volume map we have here that he made from the raw data at FHWA. He mentioned doing another for other routes( US or NHS like the Trucks?)
All I can recall is it was a post under General Highway Talk
Is this the one you're thinking of?
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm4.staticflickr.com%2F3724%2F9192304528_d22e85e3be_c_d.jpg&hash=f69f8a5921bb4157c06aa85c90eaca5dfa86daea) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/ajfroggie/9192304528/)
This is the one where I thought the lines were all too close to the same thickness.
I posted the original maps on my Flickr page. Here's the one people are asking for:
(https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3805/9189409385_bf11d54b83_c_d.jpg) (https://www.flickr.com/photos/ajfroggie/9189409385)
It shows just the Interstates. Of note: since I created this map, I've learned that the traffic data is 2002 data. I'm in the process of acquiring more recent data for a map update, though it's taking awhile.
Thank-you Froggie. ! Don't rush . I hope I speak for everyone on this site when I say how Appreciated this is
Most interesting part to me? Look at the I-85 corridor in North Carolina. It looks like we're getting VERY close to a continuous urban strip (at least in terms of traffic) from the Triangle to the Triad and down to Charlotte.
This is a really nice map. Sure, updated data would be nice, or the differences between them to highlight areas that are growing fastest. Or the whole National Highway System :) But this is really helpful.
Looks like I-75 may be the second-most heavily traveled N/S interstate. According to that graphic, it travels through fewer "dead zones" than I-95 (basically anything between Jacksonville and Richmond).
As for an E/W interstate, looks like I-4 has the highest density, but it's probably not long enough to count for this discussion.