[N] Roads in Norway • Veier i Norge

[Paddington]

[Verso]

Man, that's cute!

[54°26′S 3°24′E]

Originally Posted by AmiDelf

It takes about 10 hours with car from Bergen to Oslo. Same from Oslo to Trondheim and Oslo to Stavanger.

With a bit luck you can drive these distances in 6 hours or so. Some people loves to speedrace over Hardangervidda in the summertime etc. Then it takes shorter time.

Norway roads:
2 way roads without yellow stripe: 40%
2 way roads with yellow stripe in the middle: 30%
2 way highway with yellow stripe in the middle: 10%
4 way expressway: 10%
4 way highway: 10%

E6 for example, is a 2 lane road from Finmark to Trondheim. From Bergen to Oslo it`s only 6% is highway .. From Oslo to Stavanger only 20%, From Oslo to Trondheim 25%

If you want to drive between Stavanger and Bergen and Trondheim etc. Then its no highways at all. Maybe 2% as Bergen and Stavanger got some short 4 lane highways.

There is no doubt that Norwegian highways are crap by any standard, but especially when thinking about our GDP and the large need for good infrastructure we have in this 2000 km long country at the edge of the world.

However, Amidelf, you are exaggerating a bit here.

Firstly, you write highway when you probably mean motorway/freeway. (Small English course is given at the end of this message. ) And yes, there is a high way running along the Norwegian coast from Stavanger to Trondheim (E-39), although there are still many ferries and it is very narrow and winding at places.

Secondly, even with my mother in law in the back seat I would not need 10 hours between Oslo and Trondheim, more like 6 hours with mostly legal non-stop driving using the fastest route E6-Rv 3-E6 (Østerdalen). However, only roughly 10 % is actually motorway, with another almost 20 % being expressway. They have just started to upgrade most of the expressway to motorway, though.

To the fundamental question, why Norwegian roads are so bad, and probably will remain bad for years to come, the answer is quite complex, and I will have to wait to give a complete answer to that, but it has a lot to do with priorities, both among politicians and the public. However, it is a misunderstanding that building roads in Norway is particularly expensive. Granted, we do have to dig a lot of tunnels (current length of Norwegian tunnels roughly 850 km I believe) and build a lot of bridges (current total bridge length roughly 450 km?) to build good roads, and the fundations also have to be a lot deeper than further south due to the frost and because water tend to stay close to the surface many places. However, building roads are cheaper at desolate places, and cost per km in Norway is just a little bit over the European average, and much lower than for instance Denmark or UK. On the other hand, we need a lot more km per capita in Norway than those countries.....

Today's norsk-English course:
highway=hovedvei, f. eks. europavei, riksvei eller fylkesvei
freeway/motorway=motorvei (tidligere motorvei klasse A))

[AmiDelf]

This is how it is!

small road - road with white stripes on the sides. Lots of them in Norway
normal road - normal roads with yellow stripes in the middle
expressway - 4 lane road. Something in between avenue and highway class A. You have them in Oslo. Like Ring 3.
highway class B - normal roads with yellow stripes in the middle, but with highway ramps on and off to the road. no traffic lights etc.
highway class A - 4 lane road. 2 lanes in each direction

then we have:
avenues - 2 or 4 lane roads. With either tram in the middler or just grass. Some sections between Svinesund and Oslo. Have blocks in the middle dividing the road. Makes it impossible to bypass.

There is no highway from Stavanger to Trondheim. Its normal road. Lots of small road parts and as you say ferries.



An International highway sign, found mainly in Europe denoting the start of special motorway restrictions to a section of highway.





This is a typical class B highway. Sometimes it have 2 + 1 lane without divider, other times it got.

A two-lane freeway or two-lane expressway is a freeway or expressway with only one lane in each direction, and usually no median barrier. It may be built that way because of constraints, or may be intended for expansion once traffic volumes rise.

[ChrisZwolle]

Originally Posted by Verso

Man, that's cute!

Never seen Lombard Street in San Francisco?

[Alex Von Königsberg]

By the way, Lombard street looks cool only from that perspective, but if you get to drive it, there will be nothing ordinary (except the slope of the descent/ascent) about it.

[54°26′S 3°24′E]

Originally Posted by AmiDelf

This is how it is!

small road - road with white stripes on the sides. Lots of them in Norway
normal road - normal roads with yellow stripes in the middle
expressway - 4 lane road. Something in between avenue and highway class A. You have them in Oslo. Like Ring 3.
highway class B - normal roads with yellow stripes in the middle, but with highway ramps on and off to the road. no traffic lights etc.
highway class A - 4 lane road. 2 lanes in each direction

then we have:
avenues - 2 or 4 lane roads. With either tram in the middler or just grass. Some sections between Svinesund and Oslo. Have blocks in the middle dividing the road. Makes it impossible to bypass.

There is no highway from Stavanger to Trondheim. Its normal road. Lots of small road parts and as you say ferries.



An International highway sign, found mainly in Europe denoting the start of special motorway restrictions to a section of highway.

<some (mostly Norwegian) highway pictures
This is a typical class B highway. Sometimes it have 2 + 1 lane without divider, other times it got.

A two-lane freeway or two-lane expressway is a freeway or expressway with only one lane in each direction, and usually no median barrier. It may be built that way because of constraints, or may be intended for expansion once traffic volumes rise.

I suggest you consult a dictionary if you do not believe me (after living several years in English-speaking countries) when I say that the word "highway" just means a main road in English, as opposed to your driveway or residential street, and that it could have any standard, gravel even. Or as Merrian-Webster defines it:

Main Entry:
high·way
Pronunciation:
\ˈhī-ˌwā\
Function:
noun
Date:
before 12th century
: a public way; especially : a main direct road

I don't think there were many motorways back in the 12th century. There is by the way nothing called "Motorvei klasse A" or "Motorvei klasse B" anymore, they are called "Motorvei" and "Motortrafikkvei". This was due to the realization that Motorway "class B" was really not a motorway as most countries defines it, but it could pass as expressways. Most of them has a shoulder though, so I am not sure if your last picture is really "motortrafikkvei" or expressroad. The new definitions are quite similar to what you find in Sweden ("Motorväg" and "Motortrafikled" if I am not mistaken). As you point out, there are also some roads, mostly urban, that are not classified as motorways, but which are dual carriage (4 lanes or more with seperated traffic) and motorway-like intersections, like Østre Aker vei, Ring 3, some parts of E-18 and the Vålerenga tunnel road in Oslo, and the E6 going past Trondheim. In most countries these would probably be called motorways, so it would probably be right to call them highways with motorway characteristics.

I think the original meaning of "Avenue" is a road lined with trees. In the English speaking world of today it is however used in street names for any street, usually residential. The word has nothing to do with Norwegian highway standards whatsoever.

[AmiDelf]

You can say what you want. But I found my sources on Wikipedia. So whatever you think and I think. We have different opinions about this. I have been in English speaking countries also.

Highway is as much as a motorway. So dont tell me any fuzz about whats right or wrong here ;p

[54°26′S 3°24′E]

I am just trying to help you out so people actually can understand what you are writing. Not that I consider wikipedia as an authority (neither should you, keep to dictionaries and real encyclopedias), but wikipedia presents these roads as examples of highways:


Now, are these motorways? Of course, all motorways are highways, but far from all highways are motorways.

Edit: Now I understand what you mean. You are thinking about the motorway sign. Well, it says that the sign is an International highway sign for motorway, just like this is an international highway sign for bumpy road and this is an international highway sign for cattle on the road. You get it?

To confuse you guys even more: Here are the official profiles as of 2007 to be applied in new projects on the main (i.e. interregional) highways in Norway:

S1: ADT< 4 000, 60 km/h

(S1: 4 000 < ADT 12 000, 60 km/h) & (S2: ADT < 4 000, 80 km/h) & (S3: ADT < 4 000, 90 km/h)

S4: 4 000 < ADT < 8 000, 80 km/h, expressway (motortrafikkvei)

S5: 8 000 < ADT < 12 000, 90 km/h, expressway (motortrafikkvei)

Passing lane for S5

Passing lanes in both directions for S5

S6: ADT > 12 000, 60 km/h

S7: ADT > 12 000, 80 km/h, motorway

S8: 12 000< ADT < 20 000, 100 km/h, motorway

S8: ADT > 20 000 , 100 km/h, motorway (there are talks about increasing the speed limit to 110 km/h for these roads)

ADT numbers are to be estimated 30 years ahead of time (i.e. 30 years life time is used), but the prognoses they are using have been notorious in the past in underestimating the traffic growth, and are more an expression of political wishful thinking than reality. For high traffic roads (i.e. in Oslo, Stavanger, Bergen and Trondheim) more than 4 lanes are of course considered. The lower classes, i.e. S1, S6 and S7 are to be used only in urban areas or other places where there may be environmental or other restrictions. There are of course also many other differences between the standards, but there is no point in going into detail here...

The problem is, that a very small percentage of the current Norwegian roads keep to this standard, and with the current funding, it will take 50 years to get there.

[Maxx☢Power]

54°26′S 3°24′E is right, a highway is just any road that's the main road between two destinations. It can be a normal, two-lane road or it can be a full-on motorway with restricted access and grade-separated intersections.

Not that it matters, the roads and most other transport infrastructure in Norway are still shit.

[Verso]

Originally Posted by 54°26′S 3°24′E

all motorways are highways

I even think it's possible to say that not ALL motorways are highways, if there's a motorway that really isn't important. Now, you probably wonder why they would build a motorway, if it's not important. Well, I don't have a clue, but it may happen (and I'm sure there's plenty of examples like this in the world) that a motorway just became unimportant after a while, or maybe because of some unusual event.

[ChrisZwolle]

I don't think there are a lot of completely useless motorways. However i'm not sure why the hell they build the A571 and A573 near Bad Neuenahr in Germany. The roads don't even connect with it's parent number (A5 or A57).

[Verso]

^ I certainly wouldn't call these two 'highways'. About that street in SF: I think I've already seen it, but probably just once, and I didn't know where to put it.

[TheCat]

I don't think any of the posters have been 100% right about the word "highway". The official definition is indeed any road. However, the common usage of the word differs significantly from place to place. In the US and Canada, the words "freeway" and "highway" are often used to refer to motorways. In Toronto, if people say they will "take the highway", it means that they will take the motorway, even though we also have a network of provincial highways, most of which are not motorways. We also have some expressways in the city that function as streets but have names such as "Highway 7". But still, if one uses the word "highway" without specifying a specific highway number, the meaning is "motorway" (in Toronto, it usually means a 400-series highway). The word "motorway" is actually not used at all in North America, and I never heard it used here, nor have I ever used it in speech, except for this forum.

[Alex Von Königsberg]

Even in different US states people refer to highways/freeways differently. In California, almost everyone refers to motorways as "freeways", but I have heard that in the East, they almost exclusively use word "highway" for both ordinary highways and motorways. Even in Washington, they sometimes call I-90 a highway. In British Columbia, locals told me to take "Highway 1" when they meant Trans-Canada Highway which is in fact a motorway in Vancouver Metro area.

[ChrisZwolle]

I usually refer to "motorways" as in freeway, autopista, autobahn, expressway etc. So roads or highways with motorway-standards. In US topics, i'd rather use the word Freeway or expressway, since the word "motorway" isn't used in the United States.

I refer to other roads as "highway" or just "road".

[x-type]

i use motorway (i prefer british english) for autobahn.
highway is for me more important road, something like some kind of arteria, which connects some larger distances. it is not neccesserly a motorway (autobahn).

[54°26′S 3°24′E]

Originally Posted by TheCat

I don't think any of the posters have been 100% right about the word "highway". The official definition is indeed any road. However, the common usage of the word differs significantly from place to place. In the US and Canada, the words "freeway" and "highway" are often used to refer to motorways. In Toronto, if people say they will "take the highway", it means that they will take the motorway, even though we also have a network of provincial highways, most of which are not motorways. We also have some expressways in the city that function as streets but have names such as "Highway 7". But still, if one uses the word "highway" without specifying a specific highway number, the meaning is "motorway" (in Toronto, it usually means a 400-series highway). The word "motorway" is actually not used at all in North America, and I never heard it used here, nor have I ever used it in speech, except for this forum.

Well, it's no news that people may be a bit sloppy when they talk. It doesn't make it right though. I think the cause of much of the confusion regarding this, is that an important part of the US highway network, the interstate highways, per definition are freeways. But still the majority (federal, state and county highways) are generally not freeways. BTW, can you call a toll road a freeway? (The places I have lived in the US have had no toll roads). After all, they are not free, and these projects in the US are usually for some reason called either parkways (although they are no good neither for use as a park or parking) or the even more mysterious turnpike. Well, to avoid any confusion I will stick to motorway regarding Norway at least...

[54°26′S 3°24′E]

This is the 30 year (!) plan of the Norwegian high way authorities regarding the motorway network:

Red roads will be at least 22 m, whereas yellow will be 19 m. However, as I said, it will take 50 years to get there with the current funding (including upgrade of the gray roads to one of those standards

Currently, the sorry state of Norwegian highways is this:

Roads indicated in red are interregional highways ("stamveger") with less than 7 m width!

This map shows points or stretches with less than 6 m width!

There are of course some people that push for a little bit more than the road authorities. A group called bilaksjonen and some people behind the site bedreveier.no are pushing for this motorway network in Norway:
.
They call it "The double Y", and is roughly 2000 km long. So far the only supportive party however is the rightwing "Fremskrittspartiet", and unfortunately the rest of their policies are shit

The problem in Norway is that investment in roads are not seen as an investment, but an expense. I think Norway should now really focus on their transport infrastructure, both roads and railway, so that we can save more lives and be less dependent on air transport. Hardly any nation flies more than Norway today.

Well that was the plan and an ambition. What about the dreamer? Well, I found this on the internet:

Clearly, this is a wet dream of any Norwegian freeway fantast! The coastal road Stavanger-Bergen-Trondheim will be very demanding to build (currently I believe there are 7 ferry crossings on this road), but would probably result in a quite spectacular road. Local politicians are by the way already pushing to remove at least three of these ferries, but I can come back to that later. Personally, I don't think I would have prioritized quite like that guy. For instance, one of the most important interregional roads in Norway today, the Rv 3 which is the road the trucks use between Oslo and Trondheim and beyond, is with all the other freeways in place still a normal two-lane road!

[AmiDelf]

This image is saying stamveg and not motorvei. I think your out in the woods talking about whats wrong or not. People usually use the words that they feel is right. There might be grammar talks everywhere.. but almost no one uses them.

People understands each others and thats whats most important. To try to learn adults how to write or talk is just wrong. People talks in different ways. Lech Walensa in Poland is critisized for having bad Polish, but the others who dosent care about that, but rather what he have done for eastern Europe etc. It dosent matter.

Let people learn by themself.