I have found, in general, that both driver and coach perform much better on secondary roads, even if they are narrow and not in the best of shape. Something about driving on concrete interstates that my coach just doesn't like, no matter the speed. Trucks and sidewinds don't have much effect at all but the coach is a whole lot more directionally stable when off the superslab, even at the same speeds. I can typically take both hands off the wheel on straight sections for 15-20 seconds no problem on secondary roads, no way on the slab.
I keep hearing about people referring the the "ruts" on interstates. Guess they're deeper than I'd thought. Anybody else notice this?
I find that the right lanes of the I5 in California are very rough in places. I attempt to drive away from others and use the left lane - much smoother. I do worry about getting a ticket.
The I5 in Washington and Oregon is in much better condition, than in California.
I have tried secondary roads at times but find the stop and go driving really slows me down and increases the fuel consumption. I will use secondary roads south of Redding when travelling to southern CA just to see what there is to see.
Unless we have to do so because of schedule and/or time, we travel the side roads. Set the GPS to "reject" limited access roads and we're good!
40 footer are a bit more directionally stable with the extra 4 feet, 4K lbs and increased wheelbase.
My 36 footer had difficulty with pitching on concrete from the seperators - especially I-10, I-20 and !-40.(and some of the routes north outa dallas.
We alternated between I-5 and 99 on our way from Redding to the Los Angeles area. Where we used I-5 it was in pretty good shape until we got south of Bakersfield, where 99 has joined I-5. From around Lebec until you pass Castaic be prepared for some very very rough stretches of interstate. Lower speeds didn't seem to help. It makes you appreciate smooth roads just that much more though.
On I-90 going west out of Buffalo, NY, those "ruts" in the asphalt of the right hand lane are extremely noticable. Have not been that way in some time because I usually take the secondary roads and avoid the tolls, so they may have fixed the problem. Here in the southern tier, we have a different problem on I-86 with the joints between the concrete slabs are extremely pronounced. Normally take the old road because it is smoother. Taking the secondary roads that run along interstates usually does not add much time to the trips, and they are normally much better because they have been there so long that the many layers of highway material has improved the base under them.
Many of our California interstates and secondary roads were in absolutely terrible shape a couple of years ago. The stimulus money has made a huge difference not only in our county but on I-80 from the Nevada border to San Francisco. Sacramento is getting a couple more lanes and they are even using concrete for miles. The difference in Nevada City/Grass Valley is incredible. A new overpass, off ramps, landscaping, tastefully done rock walls for sound. Don't want to make it sound like it's Autobahn quality but the difference is like night and day.
Pierce
We have driven between Los Angeles and Northern California a number of times this year, and agree, all the interstates are beyond horrible. However, we were very pleasantly surprised when we drove the 101 last week, smooth as glass. We are actually looking forward to the drive back.
Lets add at the expense of every American we borrowed money and called it a stimulus. I really have not seen any of that money used across the nation on something worth it. Landscaping and rock walls - really.
Don't know the original source for interstate highway funds but they most likely got paid for with taxpayer money also. A TXDOT contractor commented on the extra cost of ornamentation on highway overpasses. He pointed to a Houston skyscraper and said, "This interchange cost more than that building. Why not go ahead and give it some class, it's a miniscule amount of extra money in the grand scheme of things." I agree...noise control and appearance are important items, not everything has to have a strict form/function industrial look.
And the rock walls are really only forms for concrete with cement dye added but sure do look better than institutional gray.
Driving through Dallas last year was an eye opener. Great freeway interchanges done very tastefully. Albuquerque has also done a nice job.
Pierce
I think that all of the interstates, and especially the bridges, need serious work.
Unfortunately here in Colorado the issue is not so much repairs but the fact that CDOT cannot seem to make contractors build good highways, especially when a highway crosses a bridge. If you are in a motor home be prepared for a very significant bounce going on to and coming off a bridge, state or federal. There is one in Colorado Springs on I-25 and Mark Dabling that, even after CDOT forced "repairs" in the newly rebuilt roadway, will put you up against your seat belts at the legal speed and can make for a major steering issue.
Best advice in Colorado, slow down for bridges, although I-76 from Denver to Nebraska is no bargain.
We will have traveled just over 9,000 miles this year in our coach (AZ, NM, UT, ID, OR, WA, MT, ND, MN, WI, MI, IN, KY, TN, NC, AR, and TX). The worst roads we encountered were in northern Wisconsin around Superior. Sure, I know, the winters are bad up there, but it seemed like they had a "speed bump' every 20 feet in Superior. Hope the rest of the state is not that bad.
Hmmm, how did you do MI, WI, MN and Indiana and miss IL?
Maybe via the UP ?
Yup, through the UP and then down the middle of MI. We did that in part to avoid IL and Chicago!
Here are our e-postcards that outline our route....
Travel Postcards (http://www.geoandpat.com/Travelpostcards7.html)
In Georgia they have special training programs for Engineers ( GT ) on how to build a bridge with a drop off at both ends. Our bridges can't be the result of anything else can they ? :)
Gary B