Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It's a classic question of traveling - see as much as you can in as little time as possible but accept the drawback that you will only get a superficial impression vs in-depth focus on small selected areas with the acceptance of the drawback that there's a lot of stuff you'll never see and experience.
But even if you choose the former option I'd wager that just riding on the interstate isn't a great use of time. If someone gave you a week to explore Europe, would you want to spend it just riding on the European motorway system? I can assure you from personal experience that you'd see a lot of concrete, trees and fields, but not much that would show you just how different the Netherlands are from France for instance.
In most places the things that make them unique and intriguing are a good bit away from main transportation routes, so while the interstate might be great to get you there, you'll need to actually get off the interstate to understand why anyone would want to go there.
Your points are well taken and I agree with what you've said. I admit that I tend to be the first type of traveler: quantity over quality. For one, I actually like the interstates themselves (weird, huh?); but also, given the choice between wide but shallow or narrow but deep, I generally prefer the first one. Sure, there are a few places that I've gone deep in, such as Hawaii and (in years gone by) New York and San Francisco. But for the most part, I'm the first type of traveler. And maybe the OP is as well.
Your points are well taken and I agree with what you've said. I admit that I tend to be the first type of traveler: quantity over quality. For one, I actually like the interstates themselves (weird, huh?); but also, given the choice between wide but shallow or narrow but deep, I generally prefer the first one. Sure, there are a few places that I've gone deep in, such as Hawaii and (in years gone by) New York and San Francisco. But for the most part, I'm the first type of traveler. And maybe the OP is as well.
And I think that's totally fine. I just have a bit of an issue with a guy having like 3 things to say about a state and they all relate to the highway system and on the basis of that thinking there's nothing of value there.
I mean you take a place like Montana and as you said, you figured it's beautiful just on the back of what you saw from the interstate, which I can believe. But then again that's exactly the one thing Montana has, isn't it? Raw landscape i.e. one of the things you can actually see from the interstate. Does that make Montana a great place to live? For some, I'm sure, but there's loads of folks who move to those states in the Mountain West every year on the back of the scenery and then after a short while realize 'oh man there's way more to living somewhere than the views.' and pack it in.
There's just a lot more to a place and the QOL etc. than what you see from the freeway.
I have more input on this: I think the further west you are in this country, where terrain becomes a major factor, and through roads are less in number, interstates being the only way to pass through mountainous areas, are actually a good thing, along small stretches. I live in Southern New Mexico, and have used I-25 many times. The stretch midway between my home in Las Cruces and Albuquerque affords some spectacular views, especially north of Hatch, up to Socorro. Not a lot of traffic, either, which is a BIG deal for me, when using these roads.
Some people mention taking backroads to certain destinations. What most people usually refer to when they say backroads are "US/State/County" roads that used to be more popular during the pre-interstate days. However, there are backroads, then there are backroads, AND then there are backroads!!
.....snipped......Then you have South of the Border, where the worst of both stretches meet in a "celebration" of cultural appropriation and racism.
.....snipped........
Bumped right into this and was stunned, open mouthed, stunned. I've been in that place many times going between Fl and NC and loved it. The grandkids and even the grandparents would be shouting when we saw the signs and knew we were in familiar territory, halfway there, either way. The first one to see the first sign........ Why would you say this, interject racism into something that is not?
Bumped right into this and was stunned, open mouthed, stunned. I've been in that place many times going between Fl and NC and loved it. The grandkids and even the grandparents would be shouting when we saw the signs and knew we were in familiar territory, halfway there, either way. The first one to see the first sign........ Why would you say this, interject racism into something that is not?
When I was a kid, we drove I-95 from Virginia to Florida every year. I loved seeing the South of the Border billboards! ("Weather forecast: chili today, hot tamale." Pure comedy gold to a young child!) And seeing the actual place at night, when it was all lit up, was a real treat. I never actually stopped there until I was an adult and decided to check it out one time. Racist? I don't think so. Tacky? Hugely so.
I live in Southern New Mexico, and have used I-25 many times. The stretch midway between my home in Las Cruces and Albuquerque affords some spectacular views, especially north of Hatch, up to Socorro. Not a lot of traffic, either, which is a BIG deal for me, when using these roads.
I often go north on I-25 out of Albuquerque and the scenery is nice and the history, if one makes an effort to learn it, is very interesting. Most people have no idea what they are driving through. Knowing geology helps, too. The Rio Grande flows through the great rift with mountain ranges in sight on both sides along I-25 all along the way. The Jornada del Muerto section is well named. Part of the joy of driving in New Mexico is that you often have the road to yourself.
I have probably made three trips the full length of the Santa Fe Trail. Kansas is flat and sometimes bleak and boring but there is history there if you look for it. The wagon ruts are still there along with ruins and remnants of the forts that guarded the trail. The geologic landmarks are still there. That route is not interstate until you approach Raton Pass and cross into New Mexico.
Bumped right into this and was stunned, open mouthed, stunned. I've been in that place many times going between Fl and NC and loved it. The grandkids and even the grandparents would be shouting when we saw the signs and knew we were in familiar territory, halfway there, either way. The first one to see the first sign........ Why would you say this, interject racism into something that is not?
I never sausage a place!
The east coasts largest tourist trap! Wait, I think Orlando has that one beat!
I have more input on this: I think the further west you are in this country, where terrain becomes a major factor, and through roads are less in number, interstates being the only way to pass through mountainous areas, are actually a good thing, along small stretches. I live in Southern New Mexico, and have used I-25 many times. The stretch midway between my home in Las Cruces and Albuquerque affords some spectacular views, especially north of Hatch, up to Socorro. Not a lot of traffic, either, which is a BIG deal for me, when using these roads.
In much of the west, the Interatates simply replaced the old 2-lane road, which is just not there anymore. as an alternative. Do you have another way to drive to Albuquerque?
In much of the west, the Interatates simply replaced the old 2-lane road, which is just not there anymore. as an alternative. Do you have another way to drive to Albuquerque?
For the most part, I do. It would have been considered old US 85. It is entirely possible to drive that same stretch of road today, except for two stretches at the Exit 91 Mitchell Point exit, then again from Exit 163, San Acacia, to Exit 175 which is US 60. The rest of the roadbed still exists, in different variations. I have driven most of it. But I-25, in its place is still a fine road to drive on.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
