AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

New rules for political content in signatures and user profiles. See this thread for details.

Author Topic: Mexican Exit Numbers  (Read 8216 times)

vdeane

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 9580
  • Age: 27
  • Location: Latham, NY
  • Last Login: December 14, 2018, 09:39:29 PM
    • New York State Roads
Mexican Exit Numbers
« on: November 21, 2014, 01:55:36 PM »

I was looking in street view and noticed that MX 2 has exit numbers in Juarez.  Is this a new thing?  I was under the impression that Mexico didn't use exit numbers (or gore signs, for that matter).

https://www.google.com/maps/@31.6308618,-106.3480259,3a,15.9y,30.42h,92.51t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sGbp3ngZ1NCTub1JarxKvZQ!2e0
Logged
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position of NYSDOT or its affiliates.

J N Winkler

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6068
  • Location: Wichita, Kansas/Oxford, Great Britain
  • Last Login: Today at 01:35:52 AM
Re: Mexican Exit Numbers
« Reply #1 on: November 22, 2014, 09:58:39 AM »

I think it is new.  I didn't see any on my trips to Mexico in 2002 or 2003, though I didn't pass through downtown Juárez.  At that time, however, they were already using bottom yellow panels, though those were not restricted to true lane drops as in the US.
Logged
"It is necessary to spend a hundred lire now to save a thousand lire later."--Piero Puricelli, explaining the need for a first-class road system to Benito Mussolini

NE2

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 13610
  • fuck

  • Age: 10
  • Location: central Florida
  • Last Login: December 14, 2018, 10:50:16 PM
Re: Mexican Exit Numbers
« Reply #2 on: November 22, 2014, 10:24:27 AM »

This appears to be a locally-maintained bypass that is signed as Highway 2 for continuity. See the map here: http://www.sct.gob.mx/fileadmin/DireccionesGrales/DGST/Datos-Viales-2014/08_CHIHUAHUA.pdf
Logged
Florida route log | pre-1945
I will do my best to not make America hate again.
Global warming denial is barely worse than white privilege denial.

vdeane

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 9580
  • Age: 27
  • Location: Latham, NY
  • Last Login: December 14, 2018, 09:39:29 PM
    • New York State Roads
Re: Mexican Exit Numbers
« Reply #3 on: November 22, 2014, 08:38:26 PM »

Unfortunately I don't read Spanish (I'm afraid I let it go *cue the music* since high school).  If that's a bypass, where's the real MX 2?  Or is there just a gap that Juarez fills in signs for?  It definitely explains why the signs look rather American though.
Logged
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position of NYSDOT or its affiliates.

J N Winkler

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6068
  • Location: Wichita, Kansas/Oxford, Great Britain
  • Last Login: Today at 01:35:52 AM
Re: Mexican Exit Numbers
« Reply #4 on: November 22, 2014, 08:56:25 PM »

Unfortunately I don't read Spanish (I'm afraid I let it go *cue the music* since high school).  If that's a bypass, where's the real MX 2?  Or is there just a gap that Juarez fills in signs for?  It definitely explains why the signs look rather American though.

This length of Mex. 2 is a feeder for multiple border crossings that lead to Texas.

I don't think being able to read Spanish would help much.  In my experience, Mexican direction signing does not distinguish well between unbannered and "TO" situations, which creates the impression that a federal highway has multiple parallel routings through a large city.
Logged
"It is necessary to spend a hundred lire now to save a thousand lire later."--Piero Puricelli, explaining the need for a first-class road system to Benito Mussolini

NE2

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 13610
  • fuck

  • Age: 10
  • Location: central Florida
  • Last Login: December 14, 2018, 10:50:16 PM
Re: Mexican Exit Numbers
« Reply #5 on: November 22, 2014, 09:10:33 PM »

If that's a bypass, where's the real MX 2?  Or is there just a gap that Juarez fills in signs for?
It's essentially a gap. It looks like officially MEX 2 continues west to MEX 45 near downtown Nuevo Laredo, but it may not be all federally maintained there anyway, and it's not signed.

These gaps occur in most Mexican cities, where signage is more intended as 'this is the way to get through the city to rejoin this route'. Sometimes the routes in opposite directions follow different roads. Mexicali may be this way with 2 (compare eastbound here to westbound here - and WTF is going on here? a poorly signed U-turn?), though signage may simply disappear westbound. (It doesn't help that there's also a state highway 2 near the westbound sign.) http://www.sct.gob.mx/fileadmin/DireccionesGrales/DGST/Datos-Viales-2014/02_BAJA_CALIFORNIA.pdf appears to show that what the Goog calls San Luis Rio Colorado is officially MEX 2, while Lazaro Cardenas is BC 2 (number 27 on the map, but the table afterwards lists no data until it crosses MEX 2 at Puebla).

This is probably similar to NYC pre-1934.
Logged
Florida route log | pre-1945
I will do my best to not make America hate again.
Global warming denial is barely worse than white privilege denial.

J N Winkler

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6068
  • Location: Wichita, Kansas/Oxford, Great Britain
  • Last Login: Today at 01:35:52 AM
Re: Mexican Exit Numbers
« Reply #6 on: November 22, 2014, 10:15:37 PM »

It's essentially a gap. It looks like officially MEX 2 continues west to MEX 45 near downtown Nuevo Laredo, but it may not be all federally maintained there anyway, and it's not signed.

This is a small point, but the town in question is actually Juárez (Nuevo Laredo is in the Mex. 85 corridor).

In the field, a general rule of thumb is that you can assume a federal or state entity has maintenance jurisdiction only if there are fifth km-posts with a route shield.  And even then the shield does not necessarily match the maintainer.  Chihuahua state, for example, maintains the tolled lengths of Mex. 45 between Chihuahua city and Juárez.  (I don't know if examples of the reciprocal situation--federal government maintaining a highway signed as a state route--exist.)

Quote
These gaps occur in most Mexican cities, where signage is more intended as 'this is the way to get through the city to rejoin this route'. Sometimes the routes in opposite directions follow different roads. Mexicali may be this way with 2 (compare eastbound here to westbound here - and WTF is going on here? a poorly signed U-turn?), though signage may simply disappear westbound. (It doesn't help that there's also a state highway 2 near the westbound sign.) http://www.sct.gob.mx/fileadmin/DireccionesGrales/DGST/Datos-Viales-2014/02_BAJA_CALIFORNIA.pdf appears to show that what the Goog calls San Luis Rio Colorado is officially MEX 2, while Lazaro Cardenas is BC 2 (number 27 on the map, but the table afterwards lists no data until it crosses MEX 2 at Puebla).

In the field, sometimes federal and state shields get mixed up in signing, while some state routes are bona fide examples of spurs, extensions, or old alignments of the federal route with the same number.  Chih. 16 running from Guerrero to Madera is one example of the latter.

The situation is somewhat obscured by the construction (in the last ten years) of a new-location toll expressway (Chih. 11D) from Mex. 16 just east of La Junta to just east of Guerrero, but the entirety of the former state highway between La Junta and Guerrero, and probably also present-day Chih. 16 between Guerrero and Madera, was formerly part of Mex. 16.  The trans-Sierra crossing along Mex. 16 was not finished until quite late (mid-1980's), along a route probably more to the south than was originally planned, so when I passed through in 2003 on Mex. 16 westbound, I had to turn left just east of La Junta, at what was then a tee junction, to stay on Mex. 16.  The former Mex. 16 alignment was signed as Chih. 37 and Mex. 37 on the same sign, which I photographed (and used as computer wallpaper for a number of years).  Now the tee is a full crossroads, the extra leg being a cutoff to the toll road that runs just to the north, and a new sign (using what looks suspiciously like mixed-case FHWA Series D) erroneously (!!!) tells westbound travelers to keep going straight ahead for Mex. 16, instead of turning left toward Creel.

In the vicinity of Juárez, Mex. 2 from Jerónimo to the US border at Santa Teresa, NM is a spur of mainline Mex. 2, although in practical terms it is a direct continuation of the Super Two toll expressway (Chih. [blank], signed using an empty Chihuahua state route marker) that connects Mex. 45 at Samalayuca with Mex. 2 at Jerónimo.
Logged
"It is necessary to spend a hundred lire now to save a thousand lire later."--Piero Puricelli, explaining the need for a first-class road system to Benito Mussolini

vdeane

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 9580
  • Age: 27
  • Location: Latham, NY
  • Last Login: December 14, 2018, 09:39:29 PM
    • New York State Roads
Re: Mexican Exit Numbers
« Reply #7 on: November 23, 2014, 04:24:58 PM »

I looked at Wikipedia.  It appears that federal MX 2 ends at MX 45, making the rest a state route extension.  It reappears around where NE 2 said.

As for reading Spanish, that comment was in reference to the document NE 2 posted.
Logged
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position of NYSDOT or its affiliates.

J N Winkler

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6068
  • Location: Wichita, Kansas/Oxford, Great Britain
  • Last Login: Today at 01:35:52 AM
Re: Mexican Exit Numbers
« Reply #8 on: November 23, 2014, 05:32:40 PM »

I looked at Wikipedia.  It appears that federal MX 2 ends at MX 45, making the rest a state route extension.  It reappears around where NE 2 said.

Where do you get that?  I looked at the article and it identifies Mex. 45 just as a major intersection.  The terminus of the western segment is at Porvenir, which is consistent with the traffic data document, which is cited as a source but does not have enough resolution (either in the map or the segment listing) to say how Mex. 2 gets through Juárez.

Quote
As for reading Spanish, that comment was in reference to the document NE 2 posted.

Same applies.  It is a traffic count document and as such is very straightforward for its main purpose, which is to report traffic.  TDPA = tráfico diario por año = AADT.  Vehicle classification requires detailed knowledge of Mexican vehicle licensing categories to understand, though this is not Spanish as such.

Edit:  I have come up with a way to extract segment termini from the traffic count document using Google Maps.  The zero point for the Porvenir-Juárez segment (16) of Mex. 2 is (per Google Maps) a roundabout in the center of Porvenir.  Dragging a B destination ("distance from here") pushpin along Mex. 2 to get a distance value that matches the kilometrage of the segment (81.43 km) puts it almost at the flyover intersection with Mex. 45 (81.9 km--close enough?), which suggests that the segment that has the exit numbers is claimed by SCT. 

Moreover, the zero point for segment 1, which is Mex. 2 between Juárez and Janos, is given as "T. C. El Sueco-Cd. Juárez," which I think translates as "trunk of the Sueco-Juárez highway," i.e. Mex. 45.  Taken in conjunction with segment 16, this suggests that the Mex. 2 designation is continuous across Mex. 45, but the lengths on either side are treated as separate segments for traffic reporting and maintenance purposes despite being both maintained by SCT as part of the federal untolled highway network.  (As an aside, Google Maps reports a length of 205 km for Juárez-Janos measured from the major intersection in the middle of Janos, versus 202 km in the traffic count report.  However, Google Maps also shows a break between "Ascension-Agua Prieta" and "Juárez-Janos" which is located a short distance out of Janos, about 200 km away from Juárez.)

A caveat:  this analysis assumes that there are no issues with kilometer-pointing along relocated segments of Mex. 2.
« Last Edit: November 23, 2014, 06:00:40 PM by J N Winkler »
Logged
"It is necessary to spend a hundred lire now to save a thousand lire later."--Piero Puricelli, explaining the need for a first-class road system to Benito Mussolini

Jbte

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 72
  • Last Login: August 03, 2018, 09:44:16 AM
Re: Mexican Exit Numbers
« Reply #9 on: November 23, 2014, 07:25:11 PM »

Recently in new urban highways, there are some places (specially in northern cities) where exits are numbered, as like this case in Saltillo:
https://www.google.com/maps/@25.4330237,-100.9290257,3a,75y,251.22h,85.34t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1szvtRIUI-fiLU-CD7b5WBMw!2e0
But most of those cities are influenced by US highways, but everywhere else its different and every city has its own designs.

Mostly of these changes such the numbering system are placed by local government (by the city or state), also theres another transport dependency called CAPUFE (which works in different format than SCT) and not at a federal level which complicate how highways, roads and bridges are constructed and maintained in Mexico. Some examples you see are like different segments of highways well maintained and some other not, even if the highway its a federal route, some segments are part of CAPUFE, some by SCT, some by local city (municipally), by the state even by private companies (some toll routes)... some examples you'll see in highway signs in cities advertise stores and use any font and design of their desire. Such this highway sign near Guadalajara that advertises an Hotel:
https://www.google.com/maps/@20.5866087,-103.445525,3a,75y,230.4h,88.38t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sDAYZwL0CORxHq5CV4oBLYQ!2e0

This is a classical example what happens in many cities avenues:
https://www.google.com/maps/@20.6651316,-103.4565811,3a,75y,39.62h,76.69t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s42bCnHjSN5YyA5arU45J3g!2e0

At left side of the image thats a concrete avenue paved by private interest and the state (in that case Jalisco), in the same path, it changes to municipally manner (unpaved route) and far right there's asphalt, all its about politics.

Logged

NE2

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 13610
  • fuck

  • Age: 10
  • Location: central Florida
  • Last Login: December 14, 2018, 10:50:16 PM
Re: Mexican Exit Numbers
« Reply #10 on: November 23, 2014, 08:20:29 PM »

does not have enough resolution (either in the map or the segment listing) to say how Mex. 2 gets through Juárez.
"E. Zapata" is clearly just west of the circle interchange where 45 crosses the beltway. Segment 16 intersects MEX 45 way north of there.

In the distance table, 1.67 is almost certainly the turnoff for the Fort Hancock-El Porvenir International Bridge. That puts the Zaragoza point at Calle Ramon Rayon and the west end right where 45 crosses Avenida de la Raza. The table implies that west of Zaragoza is locally maintained, which jibes surprisingly well with the interactive map here: http://gaia.inegi.org.mx/mdm6/

Here's a better source for length of federal maintenance. SCT maintains 69.9 km between Porvenir and Juarez, and note 1 says 11.5 km were given to cities. This adds to 81.4, which matches the Datos Viales PDF. (11.5 km isn't quite enough for what's on the interactive map, so that may be wrong in showing gaps through Guadalupe and Praxedis G. Guerrero.)
Logged
Florida route log | pre-1945
I will do my best to not make America hate again.
Global warming denial is barely worse than white privilege denial.

J N Winkler

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6068
  • Location: Wichita, Kansas/Oxford, Great Britain
  • Last Login: Today at 01:35:52 AM
Re: Mexican Exit Numbers
« Reply #11 on: November 23, 2014, 10:28:53 PM »

"E. Zapata" is clearly just west of the circle interchange where 45 crosses the beltway.

E. Zapata is where?  (Other than a grave in Cuautla.)

Quote
Segment 16 intersects MEX 45 way north of there.

If I understand correctly, you argue that Mex. 2 follows Manuel Gómez Morín in a northwestward beeline routing to Mex. 45 from Zaragoza.  I think this is a reasonable position.  It offers a better match to the traffic report in terms both of cartography and kilometrage.  It may at one time have been the main route of Mex. 2 through Juárez and it may still be signed as a Mex. 2 routing (I haven't been into the densely populated part of Juárez, so I can't be sure).  I believe the SCT/DGCC has part of it listed without a maintained kilometrage value as "Ramal a Puente Internacional Río Bravo" (the Mexican name for what we call the Cordova Bridge), and attached note 2 says "Entregado al Municipio 2.00 km a cuatro carriles," which clearly makes sense only if the intersection with Mex. 45 is north in Juárez, fairly close to the bridge.

This leaves two candidates for current main routing of Mex. 2 in Juárez:  the city-street itinerary, or the expressway-grade connector from Zaragoza to Mex. 45 and Mex. 2 west south of Juárez.  The INEGI map offers only partial support to the former, and the better match to the map and distance value in the traffic report is the strongest argument supporting it.  Google Maps favors the latter, and the SCT/DGCC listing does not support either--as I argue below, both are part of Mex. 2.  The latter is improved to a higher standard, offers more direct access to Mex. 2 west, and is better equipped to handle commercially important through-through freight and passenger traffic, an increasing amount of which is handled at border crossings to the south and east of El Paso rather than through downtown Juárez.

Quote
Here's a better source for length of federal maintenance. SCT maintains 69.9 km between Porvenir and Juarez, and note 1 says 11.5 km were given to cities. This adds to 81.4, which matches the Datos Viales PDF. (11.5 km isn't quite enough for what's on the interactive map, so that may be wrong in showing gaps through Guadalupe and Praxedis G. Guerrero.)

I would surmise that this SCT/DGCC list totals only lengths of road that are maintained directly by SCT or a federal entity.  The Chihuahua-Sacramento (traffic report segment 21) and El Sueco-Villa Ahumada (22) parts of Mex. 45 between Chihuahua and Juárez are maintained by Chihuahua SCOP, for example, but are still signed using Mex. 45 shields and are listed in the traffic data report as part of the red federal de cuota (since tolls are charged on both).  In the SCT/DGCC list they are shown in red.

The SCT/DGCC list does not show Mex. 16 at all between Chihuahua and Cuauhtémoc; this is segment 43 in the traffic report, categorized as a carretera integrada por tramos federales y estatales but signed throughout as Mex. 16, with (if memory serves) one tollbooth.

Note also that the "R-2" box in the SCT/DGCC list ("R" probably for ruta, so R-2 = Mex. 2) includes a 13.50 km segment labeled "Cd. Juárez-Glorieta," the glorieta in question being the grade-separated roundabout where Mex. 2 intersects Mex. 45.  I passed through it in 2002 (approaching from the west) when it was still a flat roundabout and it was signed as "Glorieta" then, though Google Maps does not show that.  Note 4 says "Entregado al Municipio . . . a seis carriles," so this is pretty clearly what Google Maps shows as the Bulevar Independencia and the INEGI map shows as the Libramiento del Aeropuerto.

Conclusion:  it seems to be correct to say that Mex. 2 follows both Manuel Gómez Morín and the airport bypass to Mex. 45, intersecting the north-south route at different places, both Mex. 2 routings being part of the untolled federal highway network but not actually maintained by SCT, while the single-sheet state map in the traffic report shows just the northern routing.  The traffic report does not list any intermediate count stations west of Zaragoza, where the two routings diverge, and the line "Cd. Juárez"--presumptive terminus of the segment at 81.43 km--is otherwise blank, with no traffic values or latitude and longitude for a count station.  This smells to me like a reporting template with recycled map, neither of which has been thoroughly updated to reflect a change in preferred routing along Mex. 2.  INEGI is also independent of SCT, and may not be totally up to date, for much the same reasons we don't necessarily expect USGS 7.5" maps to be totally up to date as to route numbers.
Logged
"It is necessary to spend a hundred lire now to save a thousand lire later."--Piero Puricelli, explaining the need for a first-class road system to Benito Mussolini

NE2

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 13610
  • fuck

  • Age: 10
  • Location: central Florida
  • Last Login: December 14, 2018, 10:50:16 PM
Re: Mexican Exit Numbers
« Reply #12 on: November 24, 2014, 12:15:44 AM »

"E. Zapata" is clearly just west of the circle interchange where 45 crosses the beltway.

E. Zapata is where?  (Other than a grave in Cuautla.)
On the map in the Datos Viales PDF... This is just west of what is apparently known as Glorieta.

I believe the SCT/DGCC has part of it listed without a maintained kilometrage value as "Ramal a Puente Internacional Río Bravo" (the Mexican name for what we call the Cordova Bridge), and attached note 2 says "Entregado al Municipio 2.00 km a cuatro carriles," which clearly makes sense only if the intersection with Mex. 45 is north in Juárez, fairly close to the bridge.
Note 3 actually (3.3 km). In particular, it's two lanes (carriles) for the first 2.4 km and then four lanes the rest of the way. I can't make the lanes match (perhaps a portion was recently widened), but 3.3 km is the length of Calle Ramon Rayon from 2 at Zaragoza to the Ysleta-Zaragoza International Bridge.

Note 2 is a 2 km branch (ramal) to Nuevo Zaragoza. Total guess, but this might be the other leg of the huge Y with the Ysleta Bridge, what the Goog calls "Waterfill" but appears to be signed as Avenida Internacional. USGS confirms that these roads were the original bridge approaches.

This leaves two candidates for current main routing of Mex. 2 in Juárez:  the city-street itinerary, or the expressway-grade connector from Zaragoza to Mex. 45 and Mex. 2 west south of Juárez.  The INEGI map offers only partial support to the former, and the better match to the map and distance value in the traffic report is the strongest argument supporting it.  Google Maps favors the latter, and the SCT/DGCC listing does not support either--as I argue below, both are part of Mex. 2.  The latter is improved to a higher standard, offers more direct access to Mex. 2 west, and is better equipped to handle commercially important through-through freight and passenger traffic, an increasing amount of which is handled at border crossings to the south and east of El Paso rather than through downtown Juárez.
My question: what's the actual significance of the official routing of a federal highway where it is maintained by the city? It's clearly not reflected in signage. It may be similar to VDOT's "primary extension" routings in independent cities, which serve for calculating funding but little else. As an example, US 60 in Virginia Beach still officially turns east at 17th Street and then follows Atlantic Avenue to end at 5th Street, despite 'end US 60' signage on General Booth Boulevard (supposedly dating back to the Rudee Inlet bridge's completion in about 1970). Since the city has control over these streets, it's arguably their decision how to sign routes over them.

I would surmise that this SCT/DGCC list totals only lengths of road that are maintained directly by SCT or a federal entity.  The Chihuahua-Sacramento (traffic report segment 21) and El Sueco-Villa Ahumada (22) parts of Mex. 45 between Chihuahua and Juárez are maintained by Chihuahua SCOP, for example, but are still signed using Mex. 45 shields and are listed in the traffic data report as part of the red federal de cuota (since tolls are charged on both).  In the SCT/DGCC list they are shown in red.
I'm not sure what the red color means, but these toll portions (shown as green on the Datos Viales map, hence federally maintained) are not listed in the Longitud Red Federal PDF. Chihuahua-El Sueco and Villa Ahumada-Glorieta Juárez appear, but not El Sueco to Villa Ahumada (22 on the Datos Viales map).

Note also that the "R-2" box in the SCT/DGCC list ("R" probably for ruta, so R-2 = Mex. 2) includes a 13.50 km segment labeled "Cd. Juárez-Glorieta," the glorieta in question being the grade-separated roundabout where Mex. 2 intersects Mex. 45.  I passed through it in 2002 (approaching from the west) when it was still a flat roundabout and it was signed as "Glorieta" then, though Google Maps does not show that.  Note 4 says "Entregado al Municipio . . . a seis carriles," so this is pretty clearly what Google Maps shows as the Bulevar Independencia and the INEGI map shows as the Libramiento del Aeropuerto.
Disagree. 13.5 km is the length of what is logically 45 between Avenida de la Raza and Glorieta. Note that the entry for 45 includes "Villa Ahumada-Glorieta Juárez" but nothing north of there. (I'm unable to get the distances for 45 to match reality, however.)

INEGI is also independent of SCT, and may not be totally up to date, for much the same reasons we don't necessarily expect USGS 7.5" maps to be totally up to date as to route numbers.
I agree with this. But it's an interesting secondary source that agrees on the maintenance endpoint.

My conclusion: 2 officially follows Gomez Morin/La Raza into central Juarez, then turns south on what's historically part of 45 to Glorieta before turning back west towards Janos. SCT has implicitly accepted the bypass as the through route by not signing their portion of 2 (Gomez Morin) between the bypass and Ramon Rayon. (Though, strangely, I don't see any signs pointing westbound 2 left onto the bypass, only this one facing southbound frontage road traffic.) Signs at the bypass only show it as 2 with implied 'to', for example this one with the 2 shields next to Nuevo Casas Grandes and Carretera Juarez-Porvenir. Many other signs omit 2 entirely, but include 45 towards Chihuahua. So the bypass does not appear to be officially part of 2 on any level, but definitely is for practical purposes.

I have come across cases in the U.S. where a route is fully signed on a through-city alignment, but there are also 'to' signs pointing along a bypass for the route you're on. This appears to be a similar case where the route is not fully signed.

What I think we both agree on, and what is most important for this thread, is that these exit numbers were posted by the city, so they are not part of a change in Mexican signage practice.
Logged
Florida route log | pre-1945
I will do my best to not make America hate again.
Global warming denial is barely worse than white privilege denial.

NE2

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 13610
  • fuck

  • Age: 10
  • Location: central Florida
  • Last Login: December 14, 2018, 10:50:16 PM
Re: Mexican Exit Numbers
« Reply #13 on: December 01, 2014, 12:24:40 PM »

I have come across cases in the U.S. where a route is fully signed on a through-city alignment, but there are also 'to' signs pointing along a bypass for the route you're on.
http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=31.810588,-94.190383&spn=0.013001,0.024784&t=m&z=16&layer=c&cbll=31.810587,-94.194587&panoid=nYstZHLr3vrWFYZ-gL0N6A&cbp=12,137.28,,1,7.45
Logged
Florida route log | pre-1945
I will do my best to not make America hate again.
Global warming denial is barely worse than white privilege denial.

US 41

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1774
  • Age: 22
  • Location: Terre Haute, IN
  • Last Login: December 14, 2018, 09:41:34 PM
Re: Mexican Exit Numbers
« Reply #14 on: December 17, 2014, 09:46:00 PM »

If you look at Google Maps, they tend to do a fairly poor job of mapping Mexican Highways through cities and towns. From streetview, it's easy to follow the correct highway through the city your driving through. Example: Piedras Negras. MX 2's routing is wrong. It follows the Boulevard Republica, not the libramiento Manuel Trevino.

Mexico tends to do a fairly good job of signing their highways. The only time it can get a little confusing is when libres and cuotas are running next to each other. A lot of times you have to pay closer attention to the next town rather than the highway number. Or look for the words "cuota" and "libre" or the "D" after the highway number.
« Last Edit: December 17, 2014, 09:48:30 PM by US 41 »
Logged
Places I've drove in North America

USA (34)= AL, AZ, AR, CO, CT, DE, GA, IL, IN, KS, KY, LA, MA, MD, ME, MI, MS, MO, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, OH, OK, PA, RI, TN, TX, UT, VA, VT, WV, WI
Canada (5)= NB, NS, ON, PE, QC
Mexico (6)= CH, CO, DG, NL, SI, TM

NE2

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 13610
  • fuck

  • Age: 10
  • Location: central Florida
  • Last Login: December 14, 2018, 10:50:16 PM
Re: Mexican Exit Numbers
« Reply #15 on: December 17, 2014, 10:16:11 PM »

If you look at Google Maps, they tend to do a fairly poor job of mapping Mexican Highways through cities and towns. From streetview, it's easy to follow the correct highway through the city your driving through. Example: Piedras Negras. MX 2's routing is wrong. It follows the Boulevard Republica, not the libramiento Manuel Trevino.
Easy to follow, huh? Which way does 2 go here?

And here is a perfect example of the problems with signage: instead of pointing left to stay on Republica, it points right towards Perez Treviño (at which there are no signs telling you which way 2 turns).
« Last Edit: December 17, 2014, 10:20:38 PM by NE2 »
Logged
Florida route log | pre-1945
I will do my best to not make America hate again.
Global warming denial is barely worse than white privilege denial.

US 41

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1774
  • Age: 22
  • Location: Terre Haute, IN
  • Last Login: December 14, 2018, 09:41:34 PM
Re: Mexican Exit Numbers
« Reply #16 on: December 18, 2014, 07:19:02 AM »

2 towards piedras negras goes straight. If you want to go to Nuevo Laredo you must go right. Like I said you sometimes you have to follow cities on the sign more than the highway numbers.

I have no idea why westbound 2 goes a different way than eastbound 2 though. It definitely goes the long way around.
« Last Edit: December 18, 2014, 07:22:05 AM by US 41 »
Logged
Places I've drove in North America

USA (34)= AL, AZ, AR, CO, CT, DE, GA, IL, IN, KS, KY, LA, MA, MD, ME, MI, MS, MO, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, OH, OK, PA, RI, TN, TX, UT, VA, VT, WV, WI
Canada (5)= NB, NS, ON, PE, QC
Mexico (6)= CH, CO, DG, NL, SI, TM

vdeane

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 9580
  • Age: 27
  • Location: Latham, NY
  • Last Login: December 14, 2018, 09:39:29 PM
    • New York State Roads
Re: Mexican Exit Numbers
« Reply #17 on: December 18, 2014, 01:29:37 PM »

So how is someone who doesn't know the area supposed to follow the highway?  I don't navigate by thinking "OK, the next city on my route is Piedras Negras, so I'll follow the direction with that control city", I think "continue on route 2 east until I get to my destination".
Logged
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position of NYSDOT or its affiliates.

SSOWorld

  • 'Sconsin
  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2966
  • Interstate <Make up your mind!>

  • Age: 45
  • Location: MAH House!
  • Last Login: December 14, 2018, 09:39:30 PM
Re: Mexican Exit Numbers
« Reply #18 on: December 19, 2014, 08:22:28 PM »

This isn't the U.S., so expect to get lost.  :bigass:
Logged
Scott O.

Not all who wander are lost...
Ah, the open skies, wind at my back, warm sun on my... wait, where the hell am I?!
As a matter of fact, I do own the road.
Raise your what?

Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/ssoworld-roads/

Wisconsin - out-multiplexing your state since 1918.

US 41

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1774
  • Age: 22
  • Location: Terre Haute, IN
  • Last Login: December 14, 2018, 09:41:34 PM
Re: Mexican Exit Numbers
« Reply #19 on: December 21, 2014, 09:44:20 AM »

So how is someone who doesn't know the area supposed to follow the highway?  I don't navigate by thinking "OK, the next city on my route is Piedras Negras, so I'll follow the direction with that control city", I think "continue on route 2 east until I get to my destination".

If you ever drive in Mexico all I can say is memorize the decent sized cities you plan on passing through. It will come in handy. For example if you were to drive from Ciudad Acuna to Matamoros using highway 2, memorize Piedras Negras, Nuevo Laredo, and Reynosa.
Logged
Places I've drove in North America

USA (34)= AL, AZ, AR, CO, CT, DE, GA, IL, IN, KS, KY, LA, MA, MD, ME, MI, MS, MO, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, OH, OK, PA, RI, TN, TX, UT, VA, VT, WV, WI
Canada (5)= NB, NS, ON, PE, QC
Mexico (6)= CH, CO, DG, NL, SI, TM

J N Winkler

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6068
  • Location: Wichita, Kansas/Oxford, Great Britain
  • Last Login: Today at 01:35:52 AM
Re: Mexican Exit Numbers
« Reply #20 on: December 21, 2014, 11:02:03 AM »

Neither the MDCT nor any of the "off-label" signing applications alluded to in this thread has any provision for signing cardinal directions.

Mexico uses shields, but although the MDCT makes provision for them to be independently mounted as cut-outs, this is almost never done and I cannot remember seeing a single instance of it in my travels in Chihuahua and Sonora.  At junctions, ramps, and other decision points, the usual practice is to range a shield next to a city on a green-background sign.  Reassurance is provided by shields (not cities or cardinal directions) on fifth km-posts in rural areas, with distance signs having a shield ranged to the left of each city/kilometrage pair.

In regard to NE2's comment about the exit numbers being posted by the city and so not reflecting a change in the MDCT, I wonder if there is some experimentation going on, whether it is sanctioned by SCT or not.  The MDCT has not been revised since 1986.  The exit numbers look like a test of contemporary US practice, as does the use of mixed-case legend (instead of all-uppercase as shown in the MDCT) for green-background signs installed as part of the recently completed La Junta bypass.

In regard to the suggested workaround of memorizing control cities, it is as well to remember that longer-distance control cities are often used at junctions.  As an example, the Mex. 45 signs I encountered in Chihuahua all said "Mexico" (meaning Mexico City) when referencing the southbound direction, while the next control city was actually Camargo.
Logged
"It is necessary to spend a hundred lire now to save a thousand lire later."--Piero Puricelli, explaining the need for a first-class road system to Benito Mussolini

KEK Inc.

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1796
  • Nintendo Roadgeek

  • Age: 26
  • Location: Seattle, WA
  • Last Login: Today at 03:52:01 AM
Re: Mexican Exit Numbers
« Reply #21 on: March 03, 2015, 04:33:26 PM »

Why is the object marker on the gore sign upside down?
Logged
Take the road less traveled.

 


Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.