Talk:Two-lane expressway

It is requested that a photograph be included in this article to improve its quality.
The external tool WordPress Openverse may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Upload

Opening comment

Original poster User:SuperDude115 requested page move to "undivided expressway". Ken Gallager (talk) 15:21, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Reason being is because super-4 is mentioned on this article and there are some examples of a super-4 that I want mentioned. --SuperDude 01:29, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)

That's not what VFD is for. "Undivided expressway" doesn't cover all super-2s, as some have a barrier. I wish there was a better term, as while super-2 is well used, it seems to be used only by roadgeeks. --SPUI (talk) 01:31, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Super 2's with barriers may be seen as divided highways on road maps; and also, some major freeways may only have brief portions of 1 for each. --SuperDude 03:10, 26 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Super-4

I would like the term "Super-4" to have it's own page since more examples and details for it should be put in Wikipedia. --SuperDude 23:57, 30 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Super-4s are usually divided!

In fact, I oppose the term "undivided expressway" because super-2 and super-4 expressways are NOT intended to be undivided. Super-2 and Super-4 are usually the intermediate construction phases (not final phases) of a freeway project.

According to these highway websites, super-4 usually does refer to a divided expressway that still has at-grade intersections.

www.expresswaysite.com

www.onthighways.com/highway_40.htm (a multi-lane divided highway but with at-grade intersections)

The term "Super-2" or "Super-4" has perhaps never been used to describe undivided roads. There are very few examples of "undivided super-4" roads. Rare examples include Ontario Highway 27 within the City of Toronto, but I believe that it is an arterial rather than an expressway. International bridges (i.e. Ambassador bridge between Windsor and Detroit) are often known as super-4s on maps. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.38.206.28 (talk) 22:59, 5 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You're actually very incorrect. Super-x denotes an undivided controlled-access highway. The divided Super-2s are, in fact, an extreme rarity, and most are actually undivided (such as Airport Parkway in Ottawa, most 100-series highways in Nova Scotia, etc). A divided four-lane highway such as you describe falls into either the Expressway or Freeway category. The Hanlon Expressway, Highway 40, etc are Expressways. Do not let Ontario's incorrect usage of the term lead you to believe that they are somehow Super-4s. They are NOT Super-4s! The only Super-4 in Ontario is Highway 27 north of the 401, which is controlled-access, yet undivided - and yes, it is officially an 'Expressway' by Toronto standards, in the same class as the DVP, the Allen, the Gardiner, etc. The Super-4 reference you make will be removed, and I recommend that you take a look at the def'n of Expressway and Freeway before re-adding it. And for this reason, I fully SUPPORT a name-change to Undivided Expressway. Snickerdo 6 July 2005 06:54 (UTC)

The only divided Super-2 I can think of off the top of my head is the Franconia Notch section of Interstate 93 in central New Hampshire. CrazyC83 05:57, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Super-x does not denote an undivided controlled-access highway.

Although Hwy 27 may be in the class of 'Expressway' by Toronto standards, you gotta remember that Toronto's 'Expressway' system varies in quality. The Gardiner Expressway, DVP, and the Allen (south of Wilson) are actually full freeways. In fact, Hwy 27 and Kingston Road can be thought of as arterials, although the difference is that they try to limit at-grade intersections to other major arterials.

Second, the controversy over the super-x means that there is no agreed upon definition of Super-x, just like expressway is too ambiguous and varies from province/state to province. I suggest that you leave my Super-4 reference in there unless you can cite a universal reference defining what Super-4 is. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.38.206.185 (talk) 03:46, 6 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I just googled 'Super-4' and all references were to undivided 4-lane expressways. In addition, Highway 27 is classified as an Expressway, but Kingston Road is classified as an Arterial. Bit of a difference there. I'm still removing the reference until someone backs your (incorrect) claim. Snickerdo 6 July 2005 06:54 (UTC)

Every "Super-x" reference I've heard has been to a controlled-access, undivided highway (well, except Super-7...that's a lottery :)). I believe one of the state departments of transportation in the US has it as an official term, you might want to check the misc.transport.road archives on Google groups. Kirjtc2 6 July 2005 06:59 (UTC)

Some references on Google do refer to 4 lane divided highways as Super-4. Most importantly, that definition of Super-4, as divided, is consistent with your definition of Super-2: both are able to be upgraded to superhighways or full control-access freeways.

Super-x perhaps has nothing to do with whether the road is divided or not. For instance, there is no point in dividing a 2 lane road due to the narrowness of the 2-lane roadbed, but at the same time, there is no point in having a high-speed 4 lane road unless it is divided.

The problem with Highway 27 as a Super-4 is that it does violate aspects of a super-x expressway (Highway 27 does have private businesses and driveways), and thus it will never be upgraded to a superhighway or full controlled-access freeway. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.38.206.166 (talk) 04:45, 7 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Highway 27 directly north of the 401 does not have property access. Really, this is getting old. You've defaced two articles, and can't even bother to register. Time to stop. Snickerdo 7 July 2005 08:05 (UTC)

As I said earlier, your definition of Super-4 is inconsistent with your definition of Super-2 if you insist on the undivided precondition. Second, you use the term freeway incorrectly. Super-x is not a true freeway in its present form since it isn't divided and full controlled-access. I'm just leaving your Super-4 definition in there to be nice. Check www.onthighways.com, Highway 40

Highway 27 between 401 and Dixon Road is just a transitional section to accomodate the decrease in speed between the 427 collectors (freeway) to the regular Highway 27 (arterial) north of Dixon. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.38.206.177 (talk) 15:17, 7 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, a full Super-2 is fully controlled access. May I recommend taking a look at the St. Thomas Expressway, the Caledonia Bypass and Airport Parkway in Ottawa? Really, you OBVIOUSLY have no clue what a Super-2 (and Super-4, for that matter) are, and I recommend not getting involved in articles of which you have poor knowledge. --Snickerdo 7 July 2005 20:48 (UTC)

Take a look at Ontario Highway 40. I rest my case. The long term plans of the MTO call for a full freeway upgrade (including replacing at-grade intersections with interchanges) if traffic levels ever get high enough. That is a good example of super-2 and super-4, since both can be upgraded to a superhighway/freeway.

I would emphasize super-x the ability to upgrade, rather than whether it is divided or not, and that is consistent with the St Thomas Expressway. It makes absolutely no sense to upgrade a super-2 into an undivided super-4, since an undivided super-4 could not potentially support the high speeds of a real freeway. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.38.206.167 (talk) 21:24, 7 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

FOR THE LAST BLOODY TIME - Highway 40 is an EXPRESSWAY. Not a freeway, not a Super-whatever, a god damn EXPRESSWAY! END OF BLOODY STORY! Snickerdo 8 July 2005 05:32 (UTC)

That's kind of rude isn't it? You two might have differing opinions, but please place nice with each other! 67.43.133.84 15:51, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

For the last time... Super-4...

This is the last time I will post anything to this :talk in regards to this issue. Some references, since you can't seem to grasp reality on your own:

Super-2 : A controlled-access freeway with two lanes and without a center median. Super-4s are undivided 4-lane freeways. A Super-2 Expressway is a Super-2 with occasional at-grade intersections. [1]

A controlled-access freeway with two lanes and usually without a center median. Super 4s are undivided 4-lane freeways. A Super 2 Expressway is a Super 2 with occasional at-grade intersections; some states call these Super 2s. [2]

YOU ARE WRONG. I know that you like to use your own personal opinion and claim it as fact (see 400-Series Highway, 400-series standards section), but the rest of the world knows otherwise. Stop defacing these articles, or I will go further up the chain to ensure that your erroneous edits are prevented from being saved on Wikipedia. Snickerdo 8 July 2005 05:43 (UTC)

This super-x makes logical sense

No need to get excited. Plus, you are violating the spirit of wikipedia if you insist on a monopoly. I am not defacing this article, I am merely suggesting a more logical definition to complement yours. The definition of super-x varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction and I already found a contradictory account to your example. That mtrfaq is not the "bible" that every transportation authority adheres to. It admits that there are discrepencies in other terms, notably freeway and expressway.

Logically, an "undivided 4-lane freeway" makes no logical sense in practical and safety terms because the lack of median barrier reduces the possible speeds. The problem with your definition of super-x is that you have a fixation on the "undivided" aspect. In fact, your examples of super-2 and super-4 have not much in common other than "undivided" and "lack of property access"; your examples have entirely different purposes with a super-2 likely to be upgraded in the future to a full freeway while a super-4 is stuck where it is because of a lack of median. Your super-4 example in that case is more akin to the Highway 7 (York Region) than a potential freeway.

Say we have a super-2 expressway with at-grade intersections, but enough right-of-way to twin it and replace the at-grade with interchanges and overpasses for a multilane freeway. Say we twin that super-2 but leave the at-grade intersections for the time being. Does a twinned super-2 stop being a super-x just because it is no longer "undivided"? Keep in mind that a super-2 that is twinned allows for higher speeds due to the median barrier even if at-grade intersections remain. Then what if interchanges/overpasses replace all at-grade intersections? Does it become super again as a superhighway or full freeway?

Thus, super-4 expressway should apply to a 4 lane divided road with at-grade intersections, but with right-of way to replace them with interchanges. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.38.206.116 (talk) 15:04, 8 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Uhhh...the DEFINITION of Super-4 is that's it's EXACTLY the same as a Super-2, only with four lanes instead of two. There are NO other differences! It might not make logical sense in a long-form highway, which is why there are few of them (the Westmorland Street Bridge in Fredericton is the only local example I can think of in my area). If a super-2 is twinned, it is no longer a super-2. That's always been the definition I've heard. Kirjtc2 04:02, 16 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Finally, someone who knows what they're talking about. Snickerdo 06:04, 16 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I-95 North of Houlton, Maine

Can anyone confirm this stretch is still a super-2? AFAIK, it's been upgraded to a 4 lane divided freeway all the way to the Canadian border. LoveOfFate ^talk 03:29, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Google Maps says you are correct.[3] Follow the map to the right all the way to the Canuck border, and you'll see that it's 4 lane divided. The bridges and other hints clearly show that one side is newer than the other, though. Nova SS 04:16, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

US 167 in El Dorado, AR is not a super 2

I found that US 167 in El Dorado is not a super 2.[4]. Its intersection with AR 7 is controlled[5], but that's about it. Nova SS 04:41, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Official definitions of super-2

Oklahoma:

As used in this section, a super two-lane highway shall mean any two-lane highway with designated passing lanes, and consisting of paved shoulders not less than eight (8) feet in width.

Ohio:

A super two-lane highway, wider than a normal two-lane road, is designed to allow for safer, faster travel, because it includes turn lanes and deacceleration lanes, Athens County Commissioner David Ratliff said.

National Freight Transportation Workshop Proceedings:

The two studies found an alternative called "super two" lane roads that were economically justified. The features of a super-two highway are:

two paved travel lanes 12- to 15-feet wide

10-foot paved shoulders, or at least a three-foot strip of asphalt and the balance graveled, with a 33-foot clear zone in rural area

a design speed of 70-miles per hour except a 60-mph limit in rolling hills

maximum grade of three degrees

vertical clearance of at least 16-feet

bridges that exceed road width by three-feet on each side

passing lanes every five miles

bypasses around smaller communities

turn lane and acceleration lanes at intersections

Semisequicentennial Transportation Conference Proceedings

Super Two refers to a freeway or controlled access at-grade roadway with a single through lane per direction. The design features of the Super Two work together to maximize the capacity of that single lane. The key defining elements of a Super Two include:

Full width lanes, paved shoulders, and clear zones

A center buffer area

Limited access, with turn lanes for all permitted turns

Horizontal and vertical curves with high design speeds

Passing lanes, speed differential, and truck lanes

Provisions for expansion to freeway or divided roadway

Proper interchange design for a two-lane freeway

Minnesota:

Super Two: a two-lane highway with wide shoulders and periodic passing lanes

AASHTO safety?:

Even though there is a broad range of definitions for the "Super Two" design in both the United States and Europe, most definitions are characterized by wider cross sections. These designs include wider lanes, wider full-strength shoulders, and high-speed alignment with 100-percent passing sight distance. A common design for the United States includes 14-ft travel lanes, 10-ft shoulders, and a design speed of 70 mph. The design may also include alternating passing lanes and sometimes two-way left-turn lanes.

It looks like most official (non-roadgeek) definitions are what's referred to here as a "super-2 expressway". I'm thinking of moving this article to two-lane freeway or undivided freeway, while super two should deal with the actual definition. --SPUI (T - C - RFC - Curpsbot problems) 18:22, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

All those references are only for the USA. So another possible choice could be official classifications of roads in the USA? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.199.96.59 (talk) 20:58, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Highway 16 (Ontario)?

The article on Ontario highway 16/416 links here. The (former) Ontario 16 highway (Ogdensburg NY - Ottawa ON) did use what is now the northbound 416 freeway from Johnstown to Manotick as a two-lane highway with a posted speed limit of 56mph (90km/h) instead of the 50mph (80km/h) in use on most other two-lane Ontario highways, but is this enough to qualify it as a two-lane freeway or super-two if (before the rest of the 416 was constructed):

The highway, while routed away from any villages through a freeway-sized and vacant right-of-way, did not have any of its overpasses installed until after it was upgraded to build a 400-series freeway
Major intersections (such as the crossroads of former highways 16 and 43) did use traffic lights and level crossing
While traffic lights were rare, all intersections were level crossings. These were either turned into overpasses or dead-ends (where a rural secondary road is terminated just short of the highway) once this was replaced with a freeway.
There were no businesses, driveways or services of any kind on this stretch of road, as it was intended for later upgrade to limited-access.

So basically an undivided two-lane road with level crossings at all intersections. Sure, it was planned and built to be routed on the path of what was later to be a freeway, but (other than the wide right-of-way and the absence of any buildings at roadside) what makes this a two-lane freeway as opposed to just another provincial highway in the middle of nowhere? --carlb 14:23, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Natchez Trace Parkway?

It's hard to tell, as the article doesn't clearly define a two-lane freeway (versus a regular two-lane highway), but would the Natchez Trace Parkway (and possibly other NPS parkways, such as the Blue Ridge Parkway and the Colonial Parkway, although I'm not personally familiar with them) be considered two-lane freeways? They (at least the Natchez Trace) are limited access (and do not stop for cross traffic ever), contained in their own right-of-way, and feel very much like driving a two-lane freeway (although the NPS keeps the speed limits deliberately low--50, in the case of the Natchez Trace, lower on the others, I think, despite road conditions being fine for 65, 70 or higher). I didn't want to add them to this article without checking first. Thoughts? cluth 08:41, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's true that they are in esscence limited access two lane roads. However, because the term "freeway" kind of implies a high speed route through route, I'm not 100% on adding those roads. Not totally opposed though either. The parkways were built for scenic purposes as opposed to most roads which are meant to carry goods and people from one place to another. It would be nice if we had a clear definition of a two lane freeway from AASHTO or someone and then it would be easier to decide whether to add them.--Analogue Kid 14:01, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've never heard of any of those being considered freeways. - Aerobird ^{Target locked - Fox One!}

Franconia Notch Parkway (I-93)

...is actually a mixture of 4 lanes (southern state park boundary to exit 34A, and exit 34C to northern state park boundary), 3 lanes (2 northbound, 1 southbound) in the southern portion of the Notch, and 2 lanes northward to exit 34C. No, I don't recall the exact mile marker where the second northbound lane drops out, but it's well north of exit 34A (where the second southbound lane reappears). The official Parkway (designated by white-on-brown informational signs) includes a long stretch of 4-lane interstate-grade road with a 45 MPH speed limit in the southern section of FNSP. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 18.78.7.125 (talk) 19:19, 31 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

The Parkway is a divided highway, which varies from the common definition of a super-2. This segment of I-93 was built as a Super-2 to protect the Old Man of the Mountain from damage or collapse associated with blasting enough rock to build a standard four lane Interstate along Profile Lake (1,200 ft below the Old Man). The Old Man collapsed from natural causes in May 2003. Are there any plans to bring the Franconia Notch Parkway up to full Interstate standards? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sehome Bay (talk • contribs) 13:59, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Compare and contrast with other countries

This article and discussion may be suffering from a natural US bias, since most of us haven't had the opportunity to drive across that big lake between the US and Europe. But it looks like some similar road types exist over there:

Super two, as defined in Ireland, might look like just a wide two-lane highway here.
2+1 road, in Ireland and possibly Denmark, appears to be a road like Kentucky's Daniel Boone Parkway (sorry, Hal Rogers Parkway, because nobody's heard of Daniel Boone :P ) except that it has a tensabarrier (linky?) in the middle and no passing except where the third lane exists.

Both articles have rudimentary sections dealing with US applications. It seems like for the non-roadgeek community, it would be helpful to merge the articles into an overview of road types that don't quite reach the bar of four-lane-plus, fully-controlled-access. For us roadgeeks, we badly need our own roadwiki, where we can define every possible permutation of highway type and designation. If the Trekkies can have their Memory Alpha, why can't we? --Robertb-dc 22:18, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Name should be changed back to two-lane freeway

No one uses the term two-lane expressway except to describe roads like the old U.S. 395 in Mono County (that is, two lanes of opposing traffic, with a wide separation, but with at-grade intersections). The term two-lane expressway is NOT used in the way in which it is defined in this article. The term two-lane freeway is much more common in the published literature.

I am countering Vegaswikian's extremely poorly thought-out page move in a few days. --Coolcaesar (talk) 13:27, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, great. I just tried to move this back and I can't because there's already a redirect there from the first move. I'll have to draft a proposal to get an admin to do the move. What a mess. This is why, as a matter of courtesy, you're supposed to discuss proposed moves FIRST before doing them, so that people like me can point out when a proposed move is just laughably stupid.--Coolcaesar (talk) 22:06, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

additional photo requested

The photo given does not seem to depict an expressway; perhaps an additional photo would clarify. Bwrs (talk) 20:38, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Rare four line undivided?

Are four lane undivided freeways really much rarer? They are fairly common in South Africa in more rural areas. A good example is the N3; from the Buccleuch interchange in the northern suburbs of Johannesburg to Villiers it is an eight, six or four lane divided freeway and then from Villiers to Warden a four lane undivided freeway. From Warden to Harrismith there is a gap in the freeway because there are at-grade intersections. Around Harrismith there is a four lane undivided freeway bypass and then another non-freeway section to just past Van Reenen. From Van Reenen to the R103 interchange is 4-lane undivided and then from there on to Durban 4 to 8 lane divided freeway.

This is a typical section:

http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=Roodepoort,+Gauteng,+South+Africa&sll=53.800651,-4.064941&sspn=18.514185,39.506836&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Roodepoort,+Gauteng,+South+Africa&t=k&layer=c&cbll=-27.028864,28.61647&panoid=t1LtgGYS1Rlw489z6tTOrQ&cbp=12,141.34,,0,8.8&ll=-27.029145,28.616756&spn=0.003417,0.004823&z=18 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.32.72.129 (talk) 18:30, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Statistics for 1957-1958 in the USA are here: https://books.google.fr/books?id=Fo8jAQAAMAAJ

It looks like four line undivided was 1% of US road and 30% of 4 lanes roads at that time.

Of course, it might depend on various factors: urban/rural, countries' legal framework, cost/safety political choices for instance.

Anyway for south Africa, it is quite similar: http://www.nra.co.za/live/content.php?Session_ID=d46c04c22ac2cc1f2b99bbf2fe7a84c0&Item_ID=279

For France, the collisions/fatalities/injuries data (slide "Page 67" [6]) suggests undivided 4 lanes (Chaussée simple, 4 voies et +) exists with: (around 3% of fatalities on motorways, around 4% in urban areas, and around 0.5% in rural areas, although the unknown is much bigger), in 2016. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.67.188.226 (talk) 22:57, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Anyway, even if there are 4 lanes roads in western Europe, I do not believe they would be considered in this region neither as motorway nor as express road. For instance, in France, the trend is to limit the speed at 80 km/h rather than 90 km/h on (usually 2 lanes) undivided rural roads, with the goal to save between 300 and 400 lives yearly.

In South Africa, it looks like the four line undivided highway are planned this way: «2.0m wide paved median to make provision for cable barrier is preferred. However, for AADT’s of less than 15 000 vehs/day a painted median approximately 800mm wide can be considered.» [7]

Might be the road you showed has a median width similar to sv:Riksväg_51? But the Riksväg 51 had some kind of small median and appear to be limited to 100 km/h, in its southern 4 lanes part, as shown in the GAFA's maps. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.67.188.226 (talk) 11:42, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 29 May 2015

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: no consensus. Number 5 7 18:11, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Two-lane expressway → Two-lane freeway – User:Vegaswikian improperly moved Two-lane freeway to Two-lane expressway on 24 October 2008. I pointed out on 29 May 2009 exactly why that was a really bad idea because the latter term is applied only to a very narrow set of roads, which are at most a small subset of the kinds actually addressed in the article. As six years have elapsed and User:Vegaswikian has failed to defend his/her use of the wrong term, I suggest it is time to move this article back to where it belongs. --Relisted. George Ho (talk) 00:42, 6 June 2015 (UTC) Coolcaesar (talk) 16:19, 29 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Support - freeway is more common, etc. Red Slash 22:30, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose it implies there are no tollbooths on any of these, when they are actually limited access routes, and not toll-free routes. -- 70.51.46.11 (talk) 06:59, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- The free in freeway doesn't mean "free of charges or tolls", it means "free-moving traffic". A freeway can have tolls and still remain a freeway. Imzadi 1979 → 07:02, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  - As I said, it implies no tolls. Expressway has not such implication. -- 70.51.46.11 (talk) 04:16, 5 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    - An expressway is a different, but related concept. Expressways have lower levels of access control allowing some driveways. They may also have cross-traffic from at-grade intersections. Freeways have full access control disallowing driveways in most cases and they're fully grade separated. In the Venn diagram, all freeways are also expressways, but not all expressways are freeways. Either classification my have tolls. Imzadi 1979 → 04:38, 5 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      - That argues even more strongly against using "freeway", since under that statement, "expressway" is more inclusive but describes virtually the same thing. Further, we don't have separate expressway and freeway articles, so the more inclusive term is more appropriate. Under both implied and WP:JARGON usage, "expressway" is the better term. -- 70.51.202.183 (talk) 06:29, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
        Actually there are two separate articles, Limited-access road covers the concept of expressways as controlled-access highway covers freeways. - Floydian ^τ _¢ 00:39, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
        "Expressway" is a dab page, listing both those articles, so, as stated before, "expressway" is still the better choice. -- 70.51.202.183 (talk) 05:56, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - most Super twos are a staging for an upgrade to a full freeway when traffic warrants. Although they are generally controlled access highways, they often feature some at-grade intersections or even traffic lights that make them not quite a freeway. - Floydian ^τ _¢ 15:19, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- A "two-lane expressway" with limited access is nearly indistinguishable as a practical matter from a two-lane arterial road; the only difference is less or no driveways to private property. "Controlled access" with at-grade intersections or traffic lights is an oxymoron. Most drivers would agree that there is a substantial difference in terms of the quality of driving between a road that they know for certain has very little chance of catastrophic 90-degree high-speed side collisions for the next few hundred miles (because it has full access control at interchanges), such as Interstate 5, versus a road where side collisions can and do happen on at-grade intersections, such as U.S. Route 101 on its expressway portions. A true Super Two or two-lane freeway is thus much more readily distinguishable from an ordinary arterial road, rather than a two-lane expressway. (Plus it is much more expensive to achieve full access control.) --Coolcaesar (talk) 15:44, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  - Well, controlled-access means not just interchanges and free-flowing movements, but also refers to property connections. Without control of access, any business or resident can put a driveway out to the highway from their adjacent property. Roads have to be designated as such for control-of-access to apply. Also, as I mentioned, super twos are usually designed for future expansion: wide right-of-way (possibly even graded for future opposing lanes), property reserved for future interchanges, maybe a handful built but other not. In my mind the best example of what encompasses this type is the St. Thomas Expressway [8] - Floydian ^τ _¢ 16:02, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    - Actually, the more I think about it, the better way to handle this situation is to have separate articles on two-lane freeways and two-lane expressways. For example, California State Route 108 through Sonora (the Sonora Expressway) is a true two-lane expressway while Interstate 93 in New Hampshire at Franconia Notch is a two-lane freeway (with a center barrier). Both have no driveways and both are controlled-access highways in the sense that all cross-traffic is handled by interchanges, but it is a lot easier to get in a head-on crash on one than the other. --Coolcaesar (talk) 09:22, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Reluctantly support because the original move was improper. O N R (talk) 20:43, 6 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose As a native Californian, I was used to calling these roads freeways but now that I live on the East Coast, I never hear that term used, it is always highway or expressway. If you check the East Coast roads and routes that are called "freeways" in this article, you will see they are identified as highways on their articles. I think the most generic word should be used and for different roads in his article, freeway should be changed to highway when the latter is more accurate. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:59, 6 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- The reason for that is that many of the old East Coast highway departments are wildly screwed up because of high levels of corruption, so historically they have ended up with a lot of patronage hires who have no idea what they are doing. Most anti-corruption measures that were implemented across the Midwest and West Coast were never implemented on the East Coast. The more professional West Coast highway departments developed the consistent freeway/expressway dichotomy which has been implemented in federal law in the form of the MUTCD (and other federal publications). A freeway is not supposed to have any at-grade intersections; an expressway may have a limited number of them. --Coolcaesar (talk) 09:22, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support. The original move was improper. Rreagan007 (talk) 01:43, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not a bureaucracy, that move was made 7 years ago! At least give your reasoning on why one is superior to the other. - Floydian ^τ _¢ 02:17, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. I'm not sure the current title is best, but I don't see any argument supporting the move that is based on usage in reliable sources. If someone finds appropriate sources, please ping me and I might change my mind. --В²C ☎ 03:09, 19 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Prefer Motorway, as nuanced meaning of "expressway" may not be correct, and the "free" in "freeway" is often not correct, conflicting with tollways. In terms of details as covered, it is not a good idea to discriminate tollways. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 11:58, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The "free" in freeway does not refer to the price of driving the road. A tolled freeway isn't an oxymoron. - Floydian ^τ _¢ 16:18, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

UK ?

The term is not used in the UK, nor I believe in European languages, so it is pure synth to extrapolate that they exist/do not exist. Dual/single carriageway are UK terms, but they do not have the same associations/definitions used here. Pincrete (talk) 11:05, 31 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

For the EU, you can have a look at Transport in the European Union which provide info about: motorways, express roads, and 4 lanes roads. That is if the UK is considered as part of the EU. For any other concept (than UK part of the EU), it is up to you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.199.96.59 (talk) 21:11, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The difference between a two-lane freeway and a two-lane expressway

This is for the benefit of people who still don't understand the difference, which was what held up the proposed move back in May 2015.

Go look at California State Route 108 in Sonora, California and U.S. Route 101 near Willits, California on Google Street View. The Sonora Bypass (completed 2013) is a two-lane expressway. The Willits Bypass (completed 2016) is mostly a two-lane freeway, except for a very short four-lane section just south of the town.

Notice how both bypasses were built as two lanes wide, one in each direction, with broad shoulders and no center divider. Both have access control in the sense of no driveways.

Here is what the Willits Bypass has that the Sonora Bypass does not:

Begin Freeway and End Freeway signs at each end.
User restrictions. (Notice the little signs at the interchanges at each end of Willits saying pedestrians and motor-driven cycles must exit.)
Freeway Entrance signs on the onramps at interchanges.
No at-grade intersections. (The Sonora Bypass has a single at-grade intersection with traffic lights with Lime Kiln Road.)
Higher speed limit, posted at 65 mph. (The Sonora Bypass doesn't have posted speed limits, meaning the default rural highway speed limit of 55 mph applies.)

It is really that simple. And yes, those small differences matter. User restrictions and no at-grade intersections means the probability is significantly reduced of T-bone side crashes and of striking pedestrians in the roadway at 55 mph. Which is why the speed limit can be set higher at 65 mph. If you don't understand why that's important, you haven't seen enough car crash scenes or read enough accident reports. --Coolcaesar (talk) 20:10, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Here's another example from Google Ngram Viewer: Since 2004, two-lane freeway has been the more common term in the literature than two-lane expressway. The one outlier is during the early 1960s, when two-lane expressway was more common. Reviewing Google Books materials from that period reveals that Caltrans discussed both types of roads in their publications in that timeframe because they were building a lot of both at the time. They were building a lot of two-lane expressways (basically two-lane highways with no driveways but with a few at-grade intersections) in the hope of upgrading them to two-lane freeways and then later, four-lane freeways. --Coolcaesar (talk) 17:15, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The difference is jurisdictional. Some places do not have any differentiation between a freeway or expressway, some do. For example, in Ontario we use the terms interchangeably, although some cities have their urban freeways termed as "municipal expressways", some are just "expressway" in name, and would be better described as limited-access roads. - Floydian ^τ _¢ 15:41, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Which is exactly why the majority position in the United States at the federal level and in many states is to draw a clear distinction: a freeway is a controlled-access road and an expressway is a limited-access road. The point of an expressway is that it has some limited driveways and at-grade intersections, so drivers will expect and deal with cross-traffic and right-in-right-out traffic. The point of a freeway is that it is nearly always guaranteed to be free from cross-traffic (except for ships at drawbridges). Unfortunately, the jurisdictions that refused to adopt that clear distinction make life more difficult for all travelers (because then everyone has to either research road terminology thoroughly in advance or drive slowly until they figure out what kind of road they are dealing with). --Coolcaesar (talk) 14:53, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Listing every instance?

I am concerned about the direction this article is taking. Do we really need to list every single instance of a two-lane expressway? It seems US-centric but if we added the rest of the world it would likely be super long. This sort of list also can result in original research. Rs chen 7754 21:47, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I say we cut the listings, we do not need to list every example. Dough4872 23:14, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Articulating the distinction more cleanly

I just thought of a clearer way of stating the distinction between two-lane freeway and two-lane expressway.

Both are high-speed highways with only two lanes, one in each direction.

The first is a controlled-access highway. It is more likely to be divided.

The second is a limited-access highway. It is more likely to be undivided, to allow other road users besides motor vehicles, and to have right-in/right-out or at-grade intersections. Coolcaesar (talk) 18:45, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Remove exmaples

Should the list of examples be removed since much of it is speculation? Cwater1 (talk) 18:46, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. Thank you for taking out the garbage. Come to think of it, the entire article should be deleted as OR since very little of the remaining assertions are supported by the two citations remaining after you purged that laundry list. --Coolcaesar (talk) 19:20, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]