Cross country through Colorado....suggestions/tips? (Dillon: university, legal, title)

[jazzlover]

Originally Posted by Umberlee

Avoiding Denver is a big plus in my book--we used to go to Pueblo a couple times a year to visit family and we'd always take Monarch. However, I don't remember there being as many places to pull off and enjoy the scenery as there are along I-70--I-70 is sort of set up to accommodate those "feckless" tourists, which isn't necessarily a bad thing when you're looking for panoramic views and photo ops and all that. Of course, we did do Monarch a lot at night so I could just be mis-remembering. That route is less traveled but there are more deer. I don't think I've ever encountered a deer on I-70 but we've come close to hitting them lots of times heading toward or back from Monarch. The little towns you pass through that way aren't very exciting, either--there isn't much to do or see that I know of in Salida or Cimarron or even Gunnison, although they are in pretty areas.

It all depends on what "floats your boat." I prefer nature over plastic. I also agree with the statement that the Interstate Highway makes it possible to travel clear across America and see nothing.

I just returned from a 2,700 mile trip across three states. I set my itinerary such that I managed to avoid the Interstates for all but about 120 miles of that. I avoided most of the traffic, most of the tourist traps, and saw more of the real countryside than anyone traveling the Interstates would. I thoroughly enjoyed the trip and the only thing better would have been if I could have done it on a passenger train, rather than having my butt sitting in a car for 4 full days of driving. But, where I had to go, there was no practical way to get there by passenger rail--I wish that were not the case.

[sterlinggirl]

Originally Posted by jazzlover

I also agree with the statement that the Interstate Highway makes it possible to travel clear across America and see nothing.

Driving interstates is about as interesting as driving through suburbs.

On a few recent cross country trips, I programmed my GPS to take the shortest route rather than the fastest and just trusted it to get me there. It took me through parts of the country that virtually nobody sees and was a much more enjoyable trip than if I'd just left it on the default setting of taking the interstate whenever possible.

[jazzlover]

Originally Posted by sterlinggirl

Driving interstates is about as interesting as driving through suburbs.

On a few recent cross country trips, I programmed my GPS to take the shortest route rather than the fastest and just trusted it to get me there. It took me through parts of the country that virtually nobody sees and was a much more enjoyable trip than if I'd just left it on the default setting of taking the interstate whenever possible.

There is another little side benefit. On my trip, I could watch my real-time and average fuel economy in my 4-cylinder sedan. (For the record, its EPA rating is 24 mpg city, 32 mpg highway.) For the short periods that I was driving on the 75 mph Interstates, my fuel economy dropped to near 30 mpg. On those secondary highways, where my speed was generally around 60-65 mph, my fuel economy hovered very near 40 mpg most of the time. I was also much less stressed driving at the lower speeds. I still covered about the same mileage every day that I would have by driving 75 mph by shortening my rest stops by a few minutes and driving about an extra hour each day. No big deal.

[Katarina Witt]

Actually, I-70 through the mountains is itself a scenic road.

Interstate 70 in Colorado - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[CosmicWizard]

jazzlover wrote:

There is another little side benefit. On my trip, I could watch my real-time and average fuel economy in my 4-cylinder sedan. (For the record, its EPA rating is 24 mpg city, 32 mpg highway.) For the short periods that I was driving on the 75 mph Interstates, my fuel economy dropped to near 30 mpg. On those secondary highways, where my speed was generally around 60-65 mph, my fuel economy hovered very near 40 mpg most of the time. I was also much less stressed driving at the lower speeds. I still covered about the same mileage every day that I would have by driving 75 mph by shortening my rest stops by a few minutes and driving about an extra hour each day. No big deal.

This exactly mirrors my experience when driving my previous 4 cyl car ( an 88 Chevy Nova ). Driving at a saner 55 to 60 mph on longer trips, the mpg would be around 42, while the crazy 75 mph freeway speeds would drop the mpg down to the high 20s. For me too, lower speed = lower stress, while higher speed = higher stress.

[jazzlover]

Originally Posted by Katiana

Actually, I-70 through the mountains is itself a scenic road.

Interstate 70 in Colorado - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

If you think an ugly multi-lane highway ripped through a mountain ecosystem, going from one yuppie resort sprawl town to the next through an expanse of dead and dying lodgepole pine is "scenic."

[Katarina Witt]

Originally Posted by jazzlover

If you think an ugly multi-lane highway ripped through a mountain ecosystem, going from one yuppie resort sprawl town to the next through an expanse of dead and dying lodgepole pine is "scenic."

Oh, for Pity's sake! All the roadways in the mountains were "ripped through a mountain ecosystem", and mostly go from "one yuppie resort sprawl town to the next throuh an expanse of dead and dying lodgepole pine". Perhaps the OP should skip CO altogether, considering there is no way to avoid seeing the dead trees, no matter what road is taken.

[wanneroo]

Originally Posted by Katiana

Oh, for Pity's sake! All the roadways in the mountains were "ripped through a mountain ecosystem", and mostly go from "one yuppie resort sprawl town to the next throuh an expanse of dead and dying lodgepole pine". Perhaps the OP should skip CO altogether, considering there is no way to avoid seeing the dead trees, no matter what road is taken.

Even though I almost never agree with you, I have to agree on that!

When one puts the width of I-70 compared to the wildness around it, it's a needle in a haystack.

And as far as interstates goes it is "scenic".

[treedonkey]

Originally Posted by Neditate

You just go ahead and think that way based on YOUR experience.
The TRUTH is that it CAN and does happen to ANY one...

What part of my statement, "my take is, yes, it CAN happen to any one, so it's worth taking it easy on the way up" was unclear?

[treedonkey]

There's nothing wrong with taking the freeway if your more interested in getting to a certain spot and not so much in all the tidbits you might miss along the way... I've had road trips where I've done both and they've both been enjoyable in different ways.

I'm not sure why anyone would get annoyed by the fact that a lot of people opt for the freeway. If you really enjoy those uncrowded side roads as they are, shouldn't you be overjoyed that the masses stick to the main arteries and blow across the land from attraction to attraction?