narrow vs. wide route markers

[Mergingtraffic]

And Riverside, thank you for rubbing in our uggggggly square shields here in CT lol

I like the CT shields with the thick border...however, I wish CT would adopt the way W. Virginia does 3D routes with the rectangle shield.

NY I think resembles the US Route Shiled too closley and MA shields look wierd without the thick border.

[hbelkins]

I like the CT shields with the thick border...however, I wish CT would adopt the way W. Virginia does 3D routes with the rectangle shield.

Not me. I hate the wide application for all routes, be they state, US or interstate. I much prefer the square or equivalent signage with smaller numbers vs. rectangular (24 x 30 or equivalent).



I MUCH prefer the right sign to the left.

[Riverside Frwy]

I like the CT shields with the thick border...however, I wish CT would adopt the way W. Virginia does 3D routes with the rectangle shield.

Not me. I hate the wide application for all routes, be they state, US or interstate. I much prefer the square or equivalent signage with smaller numbers vs. rectangular (24 x 30 or equivalent).



I MUCH prefer the right sign to the left.

I have to say I like the 3 digit shields better, especially California:

edit: threw in an example that works - linking to a .svg doesn't quite work in browsers yet

[wytout]

I like the CT shields with the thick border...however, I wish CT would adopt the way W. Virginia does 3D routes with the rectangle shield.

Not me. I hate the wide application for all routes, be they state, US or interstate. I much prefer the square or equivalent signage with smaller numbers vs. rectangular (24 x 30 or equivalent).



I MUCH prefer the right sign to the left.

I seriously hate Type B font. It's numbers lack the more graceful lines of Type C and especially the those of Type D.  The type D number set is IMHO the nicest, so I say make the sign however wide it need be to fit some nice type D digits on it!

[agentsteel53]

some states work better with wide shields than others.  California's recent design isn't too bad, nor is its US route shape (though "101" really is a two-digit number, for the purposes of sizing!) 

however, the state of Alabaaaaaama is a disaster.

[agentsteel53]

I don't much like B either.  A is a much better-looking font.



a slightly bolder A should have been the font to keep, instead of B, in 1968 when A was dropped.

(and this topic is about to be split in a minute...)

[wytout]

I know the shape of the state I live in is shaped just right for three digit shields.  In fact I wonder if that's what they had in mind way back when when the state boundaries were set .  

You know that series A is a hell of a lot better looking than series B.  Is it just me or do the tails on the 6 and 9 seem to work hard at appearing to stick out excessively on Type B's number set?

just putting the new topic together...

[Riverside Frwy]

I know US Route 3 digits using the California Style cut outs are sexy as hell, especially 395.

[wytout]

That IS good looking.  Seeing as those three digits are the sexiest in the set to start with!

[agentsteel53]

and if you're going to go wide, may as well go whole hog!



alas I do not have an example of a three-digit porcelain white shield in the wild. 

[wytout]

It's not in the wild but it's still yummy!

[agentsteel53]

this is a "halfway wide" shield shape.  From 1958-1961, California had about five different widths for each marker style (interstate, US, state) on their green overhead guide signs, before switching to the federal standard shapes in 1961, which provided for only two widths.

this is width number 3 of 5.  Examples of widths 1 through 5 would be US-50, US-40, US-101, US-199, US-395.  US-6 did not get an especially narrow width (though the single-digit state route spade did have its own separate style).



as far as I know, they switched over to the federal standard shapes when they went with the white shields, so there are no white shields with that shape, or outline shields with the slightly more modern shape.

[Riverside Frwy]

I could just stare at California 210 shield all day, but I depending the shape of the sield, I hate Interstate 3 digit markers.

For example interstate 210:

The numbers look too small, and the "forehead"(space above the numbers) is way too large.

Compare that to a California 210 shield:

Again, absolutely beautiful and I could just stare at it all day until my eyes fall out and rot.

[agentsteel53]

the three-digit interstate shields are 30x25 in the standard, while keeping the 8" numbers - meaning there is an extra inch of gap that has to go ... somewhere.  It's why they look a bit silly, even with standard margins and crown height.

The 21x18 (rarely seen trailblazer, though still on the books in CA, despite being abolished by the 1970 federal standard) and 42x36 (freeway reassurance marker) shields are more proportional, as they use the originally intended spacing (18x18, 24x24, etc) of the 1958 spec.



I do not know why they went with 30x25 instead of 28x24 in the 1961 specification.

[Ian]

I agree with Jake and how it depends on which state is using the narrow/wide route markers. I LOVE the way NH does their route shields. I like the 2-digit shield for every route, including suffixed routes. In fact, when there is a suffix route, NHDOT will just have the letter suffix UNDER the shield (except for the 1 number digit routes). Here is an example:
http://picasaweb.google.com/Iansignal/NewHampshireTrafficSignalsAndRoadSigns#5417804186374305026

[agentsteel53]

I don't think there is a design for which I prefer the wider variety over the equivalent narrow possibility. 



looks good to me!

[Ian]

I also forgot to mention that New Hampshire also loves to use 2-digit sheilds for its 3-digit interstates!

http://picasaweb.google.com/Iansignal/NewHampshireTrafficSignalsAndRoadSigns#5353907741958959282

[wytout]

I don't think there is a design for which I prefer the wider variety over the equivalent narrow possibility.  



looks good to me!

As long as anything higher than series B fits it... I'm game!  However, we know that by current MUTCD standards no 395 would fit in a 2 digit shield and be able to maintain the character height set forth.

[jdb1234]

some states work better with wide shields than others.  California's recent design isn't too bad, nor is its US route shape (though "101" really is a two-digit number, for the purposes of sizing!) 

however, the state of Alabaaaaaama is a disaster.

If you think that is bad, take a look at this

[wytout]

take a look at what? It's such a SMALL sign... I can barely even SEE it! lol  

[Riverside Frwy]

I don't think there is a design for which I prefer the wider variety over the equivalent narrow possibility.  



looks good to me!

Not like'in it.As wytout said, 395 is a very sexy number, so it will look on almost(almost) anything.Putting in an ugly number like 266 is a different story.

some states work better with wide shields than others.  California's recent design isn't too bad, nor is its US route shape (though "101" really is a two-digit number, for the purposes of sizing!)  

however, the state of Alabaaaaaama is a disaster.

If you think that is bad, take a look at this

This what we call a quadruple fail.

It's too big(fail), the shield being the ugly shape of the state of Alabama is a fail in itself, and using a series B font when they don't have to should get double-fail bonus points.

[realjd]

I was always amused by the fact that Texas usually puts them backwards. They tend to put 3-digit interstates on a narrow sign while putting the 2-digit interstates on a wide sign.

http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=32.688527,-96.627073&spn=0,359.98071&z=16&layer=c&cbll=32.688923,-96.627778&panoid=7M7nuCnURVGWNWVyq7dv7w&cbp=12,310.93,,0,-4.21

[mightyace]

Due to the width of the state outline at the bottom of the shield, all TN primary state highways are three digits wide.

There aren't many single digit examples as these numbers are mainly used for hidden multiplexes from US routes.  However, TN 7 does go out on its own north and west of Columbia.



TN 96


and the iconic TN 840


The secondary routes (which use the old state route shape are different for 2d and 3d)

TN secondary 46


TN secondary 246


http://www.flickr.com/photos/mightyace/

EDIT:
Added TN 7 image and rearrange SRs in 1 2 3 digit order.

[J N Winkler]

I was always amused by the fact that Texas usually puts them backwards. They tend to put 3-digit interstates on a narrow sign while putting the 2-digit interstates on a wide sign.

http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=32.688527,-96.627073&spn=0,359.98071&z=16&layer=c&cbll=32.688923,-96.627778&panoid=7M7nuCnURVGWNWVyq7dv7w&cbp=12,310.93,,0,-4.21

Used to--TxDOT snapped to the federal standard several years ago, and now uses three-digit shields for three-digit routes and two-digit shields for two-digit routes.  (IH 35E and IH 35W count as three-digit.)

[realjd]

Used to--TxDOT snapped to the federal standard several years ago, and now uses three-digit shields for three-digit routes and two-digit shields for two-digit routes.  (IH 35E and IH 35W count as three-digit.)

Do you have any clue why they did that to begin with?