States with the most scenic roads? States with the least scenic roads?

[TheHighwayMan3561]

Colorado probably falls into Category 2. For the amazing stuff it has, it's still checked a bit by the eastern half being boring plains.

[Ben114]

Massachusetts would probably fit into category 2, as most of the state is nice, except with a swath of "eh."

That "eh" area would be anywhere within 20 miles of downtown Boston (with the exception of regions to the southeast and northeast).

[Flint1979]

I would for sure put Michigan above the 5th category. Decent scenery?

[Flint1979]

And I don't find Indiana boring at all especially the southern part.

[Roadgeekteen]

Colorado probably falls into Category 2. For the amazing stuff it has, it's still checked a bit by the eastern half being boring plains.

Well California also has the boring Central Valley.

[Roadgeekteen]

Massachusetts would probably fit into category 2, as most of the state is nice, except with a swath of "eh."

That "eh" area would be anywhere within 20 miles of downtown Boston (with the exception of regions to the southeast and northeast).

There are nice roads, but nothing spectacular.

[Rothman]

Massachusetts would probably fit into category 2, as most of the state is nice, except with a swath of "eh."

That "eh" area would be anywhere within 20 miles of downtown Boston (with the exception of regions to the southeast and northeast).

There are nice roads, but nothing spectacular.

Pfft.  Tell that to the hordes that descend upon the Mohawk trail each fall.

[STLmapboy]

Personally I would put UT above Colo. Consistently mountainous except for a few places (unlike half plains CO), and many great driving features like I-70s San Rafael swell and Lake Bonneville on I-80. Not to mention the national parks.

[STLmapboy]

Massachusetts would probably fit into category 2, as most of the state is nice, except with a swath of "eh."

That "eh" area would be anywhere within 20 miles of downtown Boston (with the exception of regions to the southeast and northeast).

There are nice roads, but nothing spectacular.

Pfft.  Tell that to the hordes that descend upon the Mohawk trail each fall.

If there were a trail in the only "mountainous" region of my home state than that's where I'd go in the fall too, regardless of scenery. It's not like Bostonians can choose between the Berkshires and the Rockies.

[ozarkman417]

Massachusetts would probably fit into category 2, as most of the state is nice, except with a swath of "eh."

That "eh" area would be anywhere within 20 miles of downtown Boston (with the exception of regions to the southeast and northeast).

There are nice roads, but nothing spectacular.

Pfft.  Tell that to the hordes that descend upon the Mohawk trail each fall.

If there were a trail in the only "mountainous" region of my home state than that's where I'd go in the fall too, regardless of scenery. It's not like Bostonians can choose between the Berkshires and the Rockies.

The St. Francois Mountains? The roads in that small region mostly stay on the valley floors. If it is an auto trail that is famous for fall foliage in the Show-Me-State it is the Glade Top Trail southwest of Ava. I drove the whole twenty-three mile route and it is very scenic by Missouri standards, though the fall foliage was quite mediocre last year when I drove it. Also, the St. Francois Mountains only go as high as 1772 feet, or 700 to 900 feet above the valleys below. When it comes to actual hiking trails, I can't really speak for the St. Francis region, as the one time I was there it was very cloudy and foggy, though I may be returning in a month. I missed out on one of the top vistas in the state (literally). 

[Rothman]

Massachusetts would probably fit into category 2, as most of the state is nice, except with a swath of "eh."

That "eh" area would be anywhere within 20 miles of downtown Boston (with the exception of regions to the southeast and northeast).

There are nice roads, but nothing spectacular.

Pfft.  Tell that to the hordes that descend upon the Mohawk trail each fall.

If there were a trail in the only "mountainous" region of my home state than that's where I'd go in the fall too, regardless of scenery. It's not like Bostonians can choose between the Berkshires and the Rockies.

They can choose between the Berkshires, Taconics, Greens, Whites, Catskills, Adirondacks...

Remember that Mount Washington in NH is one of the most prominent peaks in the country, its lower elevation notwithstanding.

[US 89]

Utah needs to be moved up a category. And California should probably come down one. There's plenty of great scenery across the state, but the Central Valley is big and gets old fast.

[GaryV]

Ok I'll try to sort the states into categories:

1. Amazing Scenery Nearly Everywhere
2. Widespread Great Scenery
3. Great Scenery In Many Places
4. Good Scenery, If You Know Where To Look
5. Decent Scenery In Localized Areas
6. Mediocre Scenery
7. Generally Boring
8. Bottom Of The Barrel

How is 4 different from 5?  If you have to know where to look for it, doesn't that mean you're looking in localized areas?

[Roadgeekteen]

Utah needs to be moved up a category. And California should probably come down one. There's plenty of great scenery across the state, but the Central Valley is big and gets old fast.

Utah also has some boring areas, probably less than California though.

[webny99]

-Maybe Vermont should replace California and/or Colorado in Tier 1. As I mentioned upthread, Vermont totally wins when it comes to how much of the state is scenic. West Virginia is similar although not quite to the same extent.

-Michigan needs to move up one or more tiers. Not quite as mountainous as Upstate NY, but similar in many other respects, and the UP is amazing.

-Kansas and Nebraska probably belong in tier #4 or #5 (although I agree those two tiers need to be differentiated better).

[STLmapboy]

Massachusetts would probably fit into category 2, as most of the state is nice, except with a swath of "eh."

That "eh" area would be anywhere within 20 miles of downtown Boston (with the exception of regions to the southeast and northeast).

There are nice roads, but nothing spectacular.

Pfft.  Tell that to the hordes that descend upon the Mohawk trail each fall.

If there were a trail in the only "mountainous" region of my home state than that's where I'd go in the fall too, regardless of scenery. It's not like Bostonians can choose between the Berkshires and the Rockies.

The St. Francois Mountains? The roads in that small region mostly stay on the valley floors. If it is an auto trail that is famous for fall foliage in the Show-Me-State it is the Glade Top Trail southwest of Ava. I drove the whole twenty-three mile route and it is very scenic by Missouri standards, though the fall foliage was quite mediocre last year when I drove it. Also, the St. Francois Mountains only go as high as 1772 feet, or 700 to 900 feet above the valleys below. When it comes to actual hiking trails, I can't really speak for the St. Francis region, as the one time I was there it was very cloudy and foggy, though I may be returning in a month. I missed out on one of the top vistas in the state (literally).

Yeah, St Louisans often head down to St Francois SP, Elephant Rocks, and Johnson Shut-ins (although more weekend at the Lake of the Ozarks). A friend of mine has a place at a lake in Bismarck, another in Hermann (on a bluff above the Missouri). I've also headed down to Council Bluffs Lake for Scouts (created in 1981 when the Big River was dammed and making Enough, MO, a ghost town), and the now-closed Boy Scout Camp Sunnen near Potosi for 6th-grade camp. S-F Scout Ranch (pronounced "s-bar-f") is on a lake between Fredericktown and Farmington, and I've been down there quite a bit. I once got stuck behind a car fire on 67 that closed the road for an hour. Further south, my dad and I went to Echo Bluff SP after it was created in 2017, and MO-19 between Salem and Winona is quite scenic, though Eminence is Deliverance territory and Route A between MO-19 and MO-72 has the worst pavement I've ever driven on in my life. Sorry to ramble, but there's a lot down there.

[Flint1979]

-Maybe Vermont should replace California and/or Colorado in Tier 1. As I mentioned upthread, Vermont totally wins when it comes to how much of the state is scenic. West Virginia is similar although not quite to the same extent.

-Michigan needs to move up one or more tiers. Not quite as mountainous as Upstate NY, but similar in many other respects, and the UP is amazing.

-Kansas and Nebraska probably belong in tier #4 or #5 (although I agree those two tiers need to be differentiated better).

I think Michigan should be in tier 3.

[cjk374]

I definitely think Louisiana would be the least scenic. I decided to find the most scenic area I could there in street view, here is what I came up with. As a challenge, see if you can find anything better.

Here's my best I can think of:

https://www.google.com/maps/@29.9406561,-90.3749306,3a,75y,246.7h,83.62t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sHK9LyZjNfMJG6GTptx6jGA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e4

https://www.google.com/maps/@30.7194649,-91.3543363,3a,75y,72.04h,99.56t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sUFMnhYX6zuChWD-Fk0bawQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!5m1!1e4

https://www.google.com/maps/@31.1972033,-93.5724435,3a,75y,252.65h,82.44t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sC3R3wrcTtE5GQHtszOpYMg!2e0!7i3328!8i1664!5m1!1e4
(almost not even Louisiana here)

Add this (old) street view image of LA 507 near Louisiana's highest point (Mt. Driskill-535 ft):

https://maps.app.goo.gl/HGGoqwwVUU4xgWyx5

[Roadgeekteen]

I definitely think Louisiana would be the least scenic. I decided to find the most scenic area I could there in street view, here is what I came up with. As a challenge, see if you can find anything better.

Here's my best I can think of:

https://www.google.com/maps/@29.9406561,-90.3749306,3a,75y,246.7h,83.62t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sHK9LyZjNfMJG6GTptx6jGA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e4

https://www.google.com/maps/@30.7194649,-91.3543363,3a,75y,72.04h,99.56t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sUFMnhYX6zuChWD-Fk0bawQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!5m1!1e4

https://www.google.com/maps/@31.1972033,-93.5724435,3a,75y,252.65h,82.44t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sC3R3wrcTtE5GQHtszOpYMg!2e0!7i3328!8i1664!5m1!1e4
(almost not even Louisiana here)

Add this (old) street view image of LA 507 near Louisiana's highest point (Mt. Driskill-535 ft):

https://maps.app.goo.gl/HGGoqwwVUU4xgWyx5

Louisiana doesn't have spectacular scenery, but what it does have is quite unique.

[Max Rockatansky]

Utah needs to be moved up a category. And California should probably come down one. There's plenty of great scenery across the state, but the Central Valley is big and gets old fast.

If you're doing I-5 you're doing California wrong.  CA 99 isn't much better unless you're a US 99 nerd that is scoping out some old highway alignments.  I picked CA 137 as the least scenic California State Highway and that's smack dab in the Central Valley.  Oddly I found CA 43 and CA 45 have a lot of interesting things to go look at; railroad stuff with the former and the Sacramento River with the latter. 

[michravera]

Colorado probably falls into Category 2. For the amazing stuff it has, it's still checked a bit by the eastern half being boring plains.

Well California also has the boring Central Valley.

Maybe we are spoiled in California, but I-5 in the Central Valley would qualify as scenic in most states. It's only boring because most people's destination isn't there and I-5 was built to get people from where they are to where they want to be. The 3.5 hours between I-580 and CASR-14 are fairly scenic, but you generally aren't there to look.

[formulanone]

Going to play the Local Card and say that Alabama is more of a 4/5 than a 6.

It's a 6/7/8 if you've just done the 67-mile straight shot on I-10, or powered though I-20; also probably underwhelming in the north-central parts of the Tennessee Valley. It's not going to be overly mountainous like states in Rockies (or even its neighbors in Georgia and Tennessee) but 2/3 of the state is rarely flat and has some varied vegetation from north to south, east to west. The charm is off the interstate, though there's a few spots I-65 north of Birmingham and I-20 just east of it which are quite scenic.

Florida is another oddity that deserves better. If you've only driven on the Interstates/Turnpike, I can't convince you that it's not really dull. 375 of 380+ miles of I-95 is straight-up agonizing, I-10 is repetitive in most places, and much of I-75 is in the same boat (though, a little more varied). 80% of the Turnpike is fearsomely dull. If you're looking for mountains, then that's your fault! Like looking for beaches in Iowa, swampland in Oregon, or dormant volcanoes in Rhode Island, you need to fixate on something else in each. The secret is in the state and county roads, though some of the US Routes are much more interesting. Though there's some dogs...SR 70 is a boring slog, while SR 50/60 is a great way to see a lot of the state's variety.

But the Lake Wales Ridge is scenic; the thousands of lakes and ponds make for curvy roads. The northern part of the state has a variety of vegetation and plenty of hills, though few that would require scaling. Show me another place on the East Coast with lush flowering plants in December and February, dozens of types of palm trees, and a variety of public beaches. The Keys are like nothing else in the US, and the same goes for the Everglades (though, it's mostly just a huge uninhabited swamp which is formidable to wander around in). Florida is different because it doesn't have what most states do have, but it also has a lot of what others do not.

Not going to put Florida on a pedestal with New York, California, Colorado, or even North Carolina...but there's a lot off the interstates, away from the big cities/suburbs.

[TheHighwayMan3561]

Illinois was duplicated. It is in both #5 and #7. I would have it in #5 because of the "Illinois Ozarks"/Shawnee Nat'l Forest.

My original thought was he might have meant to put Minnesota in #5 where he put Illinois. Other than the two Highway 61s and MN 16, you pretty much have to know where you're looking to find the other good scenery.

[Max Rockatansky]

Colorado probably falls into Category 2. For the amazing stuff it has, it's still checked a bit by the eastern half being boring plains.

Well California also has the boring Central Valley.

Maybe we are spoiled in California, but I-5 in the Central Valley would qualify as scenic in most states. It's only boring because most people's destination isn't there and I-5 was built to get people from where they are to where they want to be. The 3.5 hours between I-580 and CASR-14 are fairly scenic, but you generally aren't there to look.

Regarding I-5 it kind of does have a scenic corridor nearby in the form of CA 33.  While I-5 bypasses everything CA 33 barrels through every community and small mountain range.  There are a crap ton of food stands along CA 33 that comes directly from the Central Valley farms.  Even I-5 between CA 41 north to I-580 has some really nice winter views of the Diablo Range. 

[ftballfan]

Going to play the Local Card and say that Alabama is more of a 4/5 than a 6.

It's a 6/7/8 if you've just done the 67-mile straight shot on I-10, or powered though I-20; also probably underwhelming in the north-central parts of the Tennessee Valley. It's not going to be overly mountainous like states in Rockies (or even its neighbors in Georgia and Tennessee) but 2/3 of the state is rarely flat and has some varied vegetation from north to south, east to west. The charm is off the interstate, though there's a few spots I-65 north of Birmingham and I-20 just east of it which are quite scenic.

Florida is another oddity that deserves better. If you've only driven on the Interstates/Turnpike, I can't convince you that it's not really dull. 375 of 380+ miles of I-95 is straight-up agonizing, I-10 is repetitive in most places, and much of I-75 is in the same boat (though, a little more varied). 80% of the Turnpike is fearsomely dull. If you're looking for mountains, then that's your fault! Like looking for beaches in Iowa, swampland in Oregon, or dormant volcanoes in Rhode Island, you need to fixate on something else in each. The secret is in the state and county roads, though some of the US Routes are much more interesting. Though there's some dogs...SR 70 is a boring slog, while SR 50/60 is a great way to see a lot of the state's variety.

But the Lake Wales Ridge is scenic; the thousands of lakes and ponds make for curvy roads. The northern part of the state has a variety of vegetation and plenty of hills, though few that would require scaling. Show me another place on the East Coast with lush flowering plants in December and February, dozens of types of palm trees, and a variety of public beaches. The Keys are like nothing else in the US, and the same goes for the Everglades (though, it's mostly just a huge uninhabited swamp which is formidable to wander around in). Florida is different because it doesn't have what most states do have, but it also has a lot of what others do not.

Not going to put Florida on a pedestal with New York, California, Colorado, or even North Carolina...but there's a lot off the interstates, away from the big cities/suburbs.

The last time I was on the Florida Turnpike, I didn't realize how many rolling hills there were just west of Orlando