Deceptively large states

[adventurernumber1]

Kansas and Nebraska seem like they'd be pretty boring drives. Colorado would be fun because of the mountains though.

I-35 is beautiful between Emporia and Wichita, especially at the right times of year.  Some of the north-south roads in western Kansas are nice too, but hardly anyone outside Kansas has need to drive them, so they go unappreciated.

I-80 ... gives the traveler the impression that Nebraska is flat and boring. 

As does I-70 to Kansas.

Good to know for when I take I-70 across Kansas this summer. If I didn't want the clinch...

Some good news is that (at least I thought that) Interstate 70 in Kansas through the Flint Hills is actually quite beautiful. It is probably the most interesting and scenic part of I-70 in the state - though since this is near kphoger's neck of the woods and not mine, he would be the one to clarify whether this is true or not.

[Flint1979]

Only time I've been to Kansas I came up through Oklahoma and I don't know why but I liked Oklahoma's scenery better for some reason. I-70 west of Salina doesn't look too interesting but east of it looks like it's going some nice scenery.

[intelati49]

Kansas and Nebraska seem like they'd be pretty boring drives. Colorado would be fun because of the mountains though.

I-35 is beautiful between Emporia and Wichita, especially at the right times of year.  Some of the north-south roads in western Kansas are nice too, but hardly anyone outside Kansas has need to drive them, so they go unappreciated.

I-80 ... gives the traveler the impression that Nebraska is flat and boring. 

As does I-70 to Kansas.

Good to know for when I take I-70 across Kansas this summer. If I didn't want the clinch...

Some good news is that (at least I thought that) Interstate 70 in Kansas through the Flint Hills is actually quite beautiful. It is probably the most interesting and scenic part of I-70 in the state - though since this is near kphoger's neck of the woods and not mine, he would be the one to clarify whether this is true or not.

It's more the type of "We got things to do l, places to be." So the flatlands of KS are annoying.

I've taken the slog several times and EB (towards home) is worse than WB. Thankfully I've taken the first shift the last few times, so I haven't driven much of the KS slog

[csw]

When you're hankering for the mountains, Kansas becomes your mortal enemy.

[Scott5114]

I haven't done I-70 west of Topeka yet, but as a roadgeek, I have a hard time thinking of Kansas as boring because I appreciate how many of the little details KDOT gets right, so it becomes a game of spotting differences in their approach and Oklahoma's lack of one.

Only time I've been to Kansas I came up through Oklahoma and I don't know why but I liked Oklahoma's scenery better for some reason. I-70 west of Salina doesn't look too interesting but east of it looks like it's going some nice scenery.

This is probably because Oklahoma has much more varied geography than Kansas does. Oklahoma is more or less where Kansas, Missouri, Arkansas, and Texas's geographies all mash into each other (and then throw in a few regions of "mountains" like the Arbuckles, too).



Here's one I think hasn't been mentioned: Illinois. Chicago seems like it should be a day's drive from Oklahoma City, and it can be done, but not without a little more pushing myself a little more than I'd like. Fortunately, when I clinched I-57, there was an overnight stay to break it up.

[kphoger]

Kansas and Nebraska seem like they'd be pretty boring drives. Colorado would be fun because of the mountains though.

I-35 is beautiful between Emporia and Wichita, especially at the right times of year.  Some of the north-south roads in western Kansas are nice too, but hardly anyone outside Kansas has need to drive them, so they go unappreciated.

I-80 ... gives the traveler the impression that Nebraska is flat and boring. 

As does I-70 to Kansas.

Good to know for when I take I-70 across Kansas this summer. If I didn't want the clinch...

Some good news is that (at least I thought that) Interstate 70 in Kansas through the Flint Hills is actually quite beautiful. It is probably the most interesting and scenic part of I-70 in the state - though since this is near kphoger's neck of the woods and not mine, he would be the one to clarify whether this is true or not.

Pretty much all of I-70 between Russell (KS) and Limon (CO) is bo-o-o-oring, in my opinion.  And that's the impression most people get of Kansas' landscape, because that's what most people are driving.  Which is a shame.  I grew up in northwestern Kansas, and there is decently pleasant scenery to be found; it's just that none of it is along I-70.

When you're hankering for the mountains, Kansas eastern Colorado becomes your mortal enemy.

FTFY.

[fillup420]

Tennessee is a very long state east-west, but not at all north-south, so I bet it was very deceptive driving all the way across it horizontally (east to west). I'd imagine it would be a very similar deceptive experience driving on Interstate 40 through the entirety of North Carolina as well.

I-40 as well as US 64 and US 74 all make the journey across the width of NC. US 64 is the longest, but it does meander a bit. I can say that I have never driven the full length across the state, even though I was born here.

[dvferyance]

I think Iowa is larger than some may realize. I thought of it as being similar size to Indiana. It's not it's much larger.

[Flint1979]

I think Iowa is larger than some may realize. I thought of it as being similar size to Indiana. It's not it's much larger.

Iowa's about the same size as Michigan, Illinois and Wisconsin.

[US 89]

I think Iowa is larger than some may realize. I thought of it as being similar size to Indiana. It's not it's much larger.

Iowa's about the same size as Michigan, Illinois and Wisconsin.

Kansas and Nebraska are also surprisingly large.

[Flint1979]

I think Iowa is larger than some may realize. I thought of it as being similar size to Indiana. It's not it's much larger.

Iowa's about the same size as Michigan, Illinois and Wisconsin.

Kansas and Nebraska are also surprisingly large.

Kansas is bigger than Nebraska and I'm not exactly seeing how. It seems like you could fit Kansas into Nebraska and still have the panhandle of Nebraska left over.

[hotdogPi]

I think Iowa is larger than some may realize. I thought of it as being similar size to Indiana. It's not it's much larger.

Iowa's about the same size as Michigan, Illinois and Wisconsin.

Kansas and Nebraska are also surprisingly large.

Kansas is bigger than Nebraska and I'm not exactly seeing how. It seems like you could fit Kansas into Nebraska and still have the panhandle of Nebraska left over.

Kansas is at a lower latitude, so the same longitude difference (which isn't quite the case, but it's close enough) means more area.

[Road Hog]

I think Iowa is larger than some may realize. I thought of it as being similar size to Indiana. It's not it's much larger.

Iowa is about the same size as Arkansas and with about the same population. Maybe just a tick bigger on both counts.

But Arkansas' winters are better.

[SD Mapman]

I think Iowa is larger than some may realize. I thought of it as being similar size to Indiana. It's not it's much larger.

Iowa is about the same size as Arkansas and with about the same population. Maybe just a tick bigger on both counts.

But Arkansas' winters are better.

And the Arkansas scenery (at least where I've been) is much more interesting. Iowa is so boring.

[Max Rockatansky]

I think Iowa is larger than some may realize. I thought of it as being similar size to Indiana. It's not it's much larger.

Iowa is about the same size as Arkansas and with about the same population. Maybe just a tick bigger on both counts.

But Arkansas' winters are better.

And the Arkansas scenery (at least where I've been) is much more interesting. Iowa is so boring.

Arkansas has some nice scenery and mountain terrain, especially near Hot Springs and AR 7.  Iowa probably would be a strong contender for least interesting state.

[Flint1979]

I've only been to Iowa twice and both times were in 2008. I remember this city called Ankeny that is just north of Des Moines, before I get there my friend kept telling me that it's some rural town out in the middle of nowhere, then I get there and I'm looking around and I'm thinking what is he talking about? This is just like any other American suburb, but I remember certain areas of Ankeny that were pretty rural in character too but did not think I was in the middle of nowhere only being about 10 miles from downtown Des Moines.

The part of Iowa that I traveled through to get there was on I-80 between the Quad Cities and Des Moines and I thought that it was a very boring drive. Once I put Chicago behind me and kept traveling west it just kept getting more and more boring except for the Quad Cities. I remember the second time I went to Iowa I ended up on perhaps the most useless Interstate of them all, I-180 in Illinois.

[DandyDan]

Anyone who thinks Iowa is boring should drive in Northeast Iowa, because there is decent scenery there. You gotta love the Driftless Area.

[MNHighwayMan]

I've only been to Iowa twice and both times were in 2008. I remember this city called Ankeny that is just north of Des Moines, before I get there my friend kept telling me that it's some rural town out in the middle of nowhere, then I get there and I'm looking around and I'm thinking what is he talking about? This is just like any other American suburb, but I remember certain areas of Ankeny that were pretty rural in character too but did not think I was in the middle of nowhere only being about 10 miles from downtown Des Moines.

At anyone calling Ankeny rural. It's as cookie-cutter, boring suburban as one can get in the Des Moines metro. (Well, maybe not West Des Moines...)

[Max Rockatansky]

Anyone who thinks Iowa is boring should drive in Northeast Iowa, because there is decent scenery there. You gotta love the Driftless Area.

That's just bleed over from Minnesota.    My top five contenders for most boring would be:

-  Iowa
-  Kansas
-  Rhode Island
-  Connecticut
-  Nebraska

The real dis-qualifiers for me would be a lack of a major national park, a lack of major out recreational activity, a lack of major city, and a lack of diversity of terrain (such as no little to no mountains or true water access).  Highways play a factor too in regards my own interests in history, but in the case of Kansas such a small segment of US Route 66 can't save it.  On the flip side some of the more interesting states (for me) I've been to include the following:

-  Arizona
-  Colorado
-  Utah
-  Washington
-  Montana

[webny99]

I've only been to Iowa twice and both times were in 2008. I remember this city called Ankeny that is just north of Des Moines, before I get there my friend kept telling me that it's some rural town out in the middle of nowhere, then I get there and I'm looking around and I'm thinking what is he talking about? This is just like any other American suburb, but I remember certain areas of Ankeny that were pretty rural in character too but did not think I was in the middle of nowhere only being about 10 miles from downtown Des Moines.

At anyone calling Ankeny rural. It's as cookie-cutter, boring suburban as one can get in the Des Moines metro. (Well, maybe not West Des Moines...)

I've never been to Des Moines, but from what I've heard from friends, Ankeny is basically the new, fast growing, Lego-homes suburb of Des Moines. So perhaps it was indeed more rural in 2008 than it is now, ten years later.

Anyone who thinks Iowa is boring should drive in Northeast Iowa, because there is decent scenery there. You gotta love the Driftless Area.

That's just bleed over from Minnesota.    My top five contenders for most boring would be:
[list snipped]

You've obviously never been to either of the Dakotas With regards to Iowa, I think it even looks boring on a map. The road network is so neat and structured and consistent that I have trouble believing there's much variation in the landscape.

[/list]

[Max Rockatansky]

^^^^

Actually I've been to both Dakotas.  The Black Hills are great and I really enjoyed Badlands National Park.  I was okay on the Wind and Jewel Caves but Custer State Park with SD 87 is spectacular.  You have all the mine country associated with Deadwood and Spearfish Canyon as well.  Western North Dakota and Theodore Roosevelt National Park is really nice and a great place to go for some hikes in solitude. 

[webny99]

^^^^

Actually I've been to both Dakotas.  The Black Hills are great and I really enjoyed Badlands National Park.  I was okay on the Wind and Jewel Caves but Custer State Park with SD 87 is spectacular.  You have all the mine country associated with Deadwood and Spearfish Canyon as well.  Western North Dakota and Theodore Roosevelt National Park is really nice and a great place to go for some hikes in solitude.

Fair enough. I've never been that far west, but I-29 is extremely long, flat, and boring. There is literally one hill near Grafton, and that's the only variation in landscape in the 150 miles between Fargo and Pembina. I've heard the Badlands are interesting, and of course, Mount Rushmore is a must-see. Both are on my bucket list.

[Max Rockatansky]

^^^^

Actually I've been to both Dakotas.  The Black Hills are great and I really enjoyed Badlands National Park.  I was okay on the Wind and Jewel Caves but Custer State Park with SD 87 is spectacular.  You have all the mine country associated with Deadwood and Spearfish Canyon as well.  Western North Dakota and Theodore Roosevelt National Park is really nice and a great place to go for some hikes in solitude.

Fair enough. I've never been that far west, but I-29 is extremely long, flat, and boring. There is literally one hill near Grafton, and that's the only variation in landscape in the 150 miles between Fargo and Pembina. I've heard the Badlands are interesting, and of course, Mount Rushmore is a must-see. Both are on my bucket list.

South Dakota definitely has more on the western side of the state than North Dakota.  I would put Rushmore pretty low on things to see in the Black Hills, fortunately SD 87 has a north terminus near it.  Custer State Park really is National Park level quality, there are tons of buffalo wandering about.  TR National Park is similar to Badlands but way more colorful and has way more animals.  The eastern parts of both Dakotas are extremely bland but the variance on the other side of the state makes it worth it.  Oddly Colorado is similar in that's regard in that the eastern part of the state is just vast empty nothingness until the Front Range of the Rockies. 

[oscar]

Fair enough. I've never been that far west, but I-29 is extremely long, flat, and boring.

At least it's fast. In South Dakota, 80mph speed limit on most parts outside the Sioux Falls metro.

[webny99]

Fair enough. I've never been that far west, but I-29 is extremely long, flat, and boring.

At least it's fast. 80mph speed limit on most parts outside the Sioux Falls metro.

Whoops. That may be true, but I was talking about ND, which has a 75 mph limit. Fast, but not fast enough 

ETA: I see you updated to add "In South Dakota" (which was not in what I quoted). If you update fast enough, it won't say "last edited by...". Yours doesn't, but mine does.