Route Numbers vs. Road Names

I prefer road names and at least in Ontario, Canada, most roads are being given names. It's easier for the fire department to find a location, when the people in rural areas give road names, instead of route or highway numbers and a location number.

In addition, hwy routes can carry on for a significant distance more than a particular section of a road, that has been given a name.

It's not uncommon for a road to have two route numbers, because two roads overlap each other at some point and then they split off at another spot.

In that case, what route number do you call it?

I prefer the road name most of the time. And, I figger most people would too. Locals when talking to you about where something is, they usually refer to the road name. My Garmna, seems to use routes sometimes, and road names sometimes. So, it doesnt bother me at all, but generally the road name is preferable, especially in the inner cities.

But that won't fit all situations, either. In my area, we have just the opposite problem. All the county roads have names, and there are no route numbers posted. The Garmin shows and speaks route numbers most of the time and not the street names. What's odd is that the map shows CR-22 and the spoken guidance says "County Route 22" but the green bar showing the next turn has the street name. Obviously, both data are in the Garmin map and the GPS is choosing which to display and which to speak.

Based on your post, the route numbers would be better for you. For my area, the names would be better. Sure would be nice if we had a setup option to let us choose what we prefer.

In some cases, people refer to a road by it's FM #, but the addresses of places on that road are the road name, not the number. That leads to a lot of confusion, but it isn't Garmin's fault. In other locations the main reference is the name, but there is also a route number or multiple route numbers on the road.

I prefer route names...but BOTH would be best. I also think it is riculous that Garmin understands I93 but has no clue if I enter just route 93. Please. It doesn't even give I93 as a CHOICE if I forget and just enter the number without the letter.

Almost everyone will call "East Dublin-Granville Road" "161". That is actually "OHIO State Route 161" but everyone locally just calls it "161."

Sometimes one way is convenient, sometimes the other way is. Being told in Logan OH to follow Hunter Street going east towards New Straitsville is wrong, because OH 93 forks to the left almost immediately, and if I stay on Hunter, I wind up off route.

So, I have to use my brain, and I look at the magenta line. I am on Hunter Street AND OH 93 at the time of the voice command from my GPS. Somehow, I figure out what to do.

I can pretty well go just about anywhere, with the GPS just showing the road name. The only place I would need a route number would be in finding interstate highways. Cities and towns is the main place I need a GPS, the route numbers are almost meaningless to me there. I see no need in Garmin changing it from the way they are doing things now!

One of my pet peeves are the local TV traffic reporters that use names for the Interstates around Chicago rather than the numbers. Kennedy Expy, Eisenhauer Expy, Reagan Memorial Hwy, Veterans Pkwy, Jane Adams Tollway and Edens Expy are not familiar enough, even living in this area for my 62 years to process quickly when they are reporting. I-90, I-94, I-294, I-355 and I-88 are much easier for my brain.

I can't imagine what visitors must think. The names are not posted along these routes like the numbers are.

Companies like Navteq should accept feedback from us, their end customers. They should not be making arbitrary decisions on these navigation issues.

I really like the idea of an option, especially if they both really are available.

As example, I have spent all my 71 years in this immediate area, but when I bought my GPS, it kept telling me to go to Broadway to go west and I thought it was crazy and ignored it since I knew where I was going. Mostly I never looked at the map even. Finally I was looking around at the second intersection I went through and there was a Broadway sign. Locally the road is just Old Highway 20. Where Broadway came from I still don't know. Another place that street names are a pain is for instance the bypass around Oklahoma City from I35 S to I40 W. It has several names and if you don't get it just right, it's hard to find. The reason Congress numbered the highways way back when was to provide consistency which names sure don't do.

I see that we all have our own preferences to what we like to see on our GPS unit. I believe that when we are all traveling in unfamiliar areas all we have to go by is signage, maps, and GPS instructions. If the GPS agrees with the signage in the particular area that would be great. It is comforting to see a route sign or street name that corresponds to what the GPS is telling you. I have many times come to an intersection that GPS tells me to turn onto a named road with no road names signs anywhere but there are route signs well displayed. That is where I am coming from. I believe NAVTEQ needs to field verify such things.

We do have our issues. I mentioned this street and number issue in one of my other posts. At home i do question where my nuvi comes from when it sends me places. Why would it send me down a busy street with traffic lights every block when i can take the Hwy? Dunno, especially when its set to faster time. It also doesn't know when a Hwy changes into a street, as i'm sure most larger towns have a Hwy that leads through town and the hwy number changes to a street name some where along the line. Having said all this...whats important here? For me, at home i don't care since i know where i am going. When traveling i do care that when it tells me to turn at a given corner that the name on the sign is the same name on my nuvi. I don't care if it takes me around one extra corner, since i wouldn't know that anyway and i wouldn't find that a big issue either.

Claudius

Now this makes me appreciate that Ontario shows both the street name and the Road Number, as far as county and regional roads are concerned.

I agree with Ric, and also know there is a need for names as well. If you are in your local area, names are just fine.

While traveling in SC this week I found most roads were named, a real pain as many roads support 2-6 route NUMBERS. Having never been in this locality I need a hawk's eye to catch all the numbers and find what I was trying to travel.

Ric's order of importance, Interstate, state, county etc. is well thought out.

From what i read on a newsgroup, the 911 systems are now requiring street names, not route numbers to avoid confusion for emergency response.

But isn't it annoyinbg when you get routing instructions something like "drive 126 miles on Maple Street", as the units can give no distinction when the road changes from a locally named street name to a highway route number.

Our trips to South West Wisconsin seems that county road numbers have survived. And like someone mentioned, state route numbers overlap quite a bit. Near Mauston & Wisconsin Dells I have traveled on several roads that have 6 SR numbers on the same post.
In Illinois the roads that Jill mentions are not always supported by the signs along the road, at least in the rural counties. Looking at the paper maps sometimes further confuses the issue.
I think the 911 network has caused counties to change the signs to conform to the 911 routing software.

The lower/smaller number takes priority. In the case of routing with GPS whatever the planned route continues on should be used.