Skip to main content

So which SC Shield style do you prefer?

Image
By
We're not the first to show an example of the new SC Highway shield. That honor goes to Alex Nitzman and Justin Cozart. But I finally saw my first new shield on the road this weekend, and amazingly enough, the new shield sits along with an example of the older shield.

So which one do you prefer? (Yes, that's a solicitation for comments.)

Taken on SC 274 South in Lake Wylie, SC.
Labels:

Comments

Unknown said…
Yr Kidding, right?
10:50 PM
Corey Dukes said…
Me likes the new one.
11:02 PM
Anonymous said…
Having just spent three days in Indiana and Illinois, and having thrown web pages together today documenting those travels, I must say I'm sick of the plain white square with black numbers and a state name. Since those are very similar to the old SC design, it's probably a sure bet if you put money on the fact that I much prefer the new shield.

Bonus points for the fact that the lettering is not black.
11:03 PM
Larry Sheldon said…
The pale blue on white against a partly cloudy sky is pretty, but if I really wanted to know where I was and was going at night in fog or rain, I would prefer the crisp black on white that is hard to mistake for the Lions Club meeting time sign.
11:08 PM
Unknown said…
It's certainly an improvement, but it smacks of an adaptation of the Minnesota state route sign design without the extra colors thrown in. I'm itching to see whether the new design will be used on the larger guide signs in the future, like Oklahoma started with the meat cleavers.
11:30 PM
Taralyn said…
If there's one sign I don't want to see while traveling, more than a boring circle, it's a boring square. About time they changed the shield, even if it's just changing the coloring and adding a little bit of decoration.
3:23 AM
Anonymous said…
I definately prefer the new shields. It's about time that South Carolina changed their shields. However, don't look for SC to go changing all their signage quickly. It's a very quirky state. I'm originally from Charlotte, NC and when I was young I remember something about a push to annex part of Mecklenburg county into South Carolina for tax base purposes. SC is bizarre, indeed.

That aside, I don't care for the blue and I had hoped one day to see state outline on the shields in both NC and SC. I live in Atlanta now, and I'm a big fan of our state highway shields, as well as Florida and Alabama. That's just the style that I prefer. However, as a sign collector, I'm going to have to snatch up an old style SC shield now.
9:29 AM
Billy said…
My money is on the new one. I believe that now makes 10 states that use color in their state route shields. IIRC the other 9 states are CA, CO, KS, LA, MN, NM, SD, VT, and WY.
6:10 PM
Georgia Road Geek said…
No doubt about it. The new SC state route signs have a helluva lot more personality than the "plain janes" that they've used for several years.

Now when are they going to put them on the BGSes? :)
7:10 PM
Anonymous said…
The new signs look better (anything is better than a plain square). However at night, they are not much different. In fact the first time I saw a blue SC shield, it was my girlfriend who said "what's with the blue shield?" before I even had noticed it. The reflectivity gives the appearance of a plain square in other words.
9:18 PM
Anonymous said…
Anything is better than a boring old square. USH
8:27 AM
US 71 said…
I got to go with the new shield, though black/white would be a little easier on the eyes IMO.
1:13 PM
Bob Malme said…
Well, being originally from MA where a state route shield that has more than a number, and sometimes a letter in a square is seen as ostentatious, it's a hard choice. I guess the new one gets my vote, since it is unique and is a different from the color you see on most state signs.
6:20 PM
WFY said…
Meh. What SC really needs is cardinal directions on top of the shields.
1:38 PM
Anonymous said…
I like the new sign much more than the old bland ones. I lived in SC briefly (& NC too), but now live in CA. I always though the old signs were boring.
5:23 PM
Anonymous said…
I agree with cyamamoto101: The old sign must be one of the most bland road signs in the country. Go New - Go Blue!
3:53 AM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Route 75 Tunnel - Ironton, Ohio

By
In the Ohio River community of Ironton, Ohio, there is a former road tunnel that has a haunted legend to it. This tunnel was formerly numbered OH 75 (hence the name Route 75 Tunnel), which was renumbered as OH 93 due to I-75 being built in the state. Built in 1866, it is 165 feet long and once served as the northern entrance into Ironton, originally for horses and buggies and later for cars. As the tunnel predated the motor vehicle era, it was too narrow for cars to be traveling in both directions. But once US 52 was built in the area, OH 93 was realigned to go around the tunnel instead of through the tunnel, so the tunnel was closed to traffic in 1960. The legend of the haunted tunnel states that since there were so many accidents that took place inside the tunnel's narrow walls, the tunnel was cursed. The haunted legend states that there was an accident between a tanker truck and a school bus coming home after a high school football game on a cold, foggy Halloween night in 1
Post a Comment
Read more

Porter-Parsonsfield Covered Bridge - Maine

By
  Spanning over the Ossipee River on the border between Porter in Oxford County, Maine and Parsonsfield in York County, Maine is the 152 foot long Porter-Parsonsfield Covered Bridge. The Porter-Parsonsfield Bridge is built in a Paddleford truss design, which is commonly found among covered bridges in the New England states. The covered bridge is the third bridge located at this site, with the first two bridges built in 1800 and 1808. However, there seems to be some dispute for when the covered bridge was built. There is a plaque on the bridge that states that the bridge may have been built in 1876, but in my research, I have found that this bridge may have been built in 1859 instead. That may check out since a number of covered bridges in northern New England were built or replaced around 1859 after a really icy winter. The year that the Porter-Parsonsfield Covered Bridge was built was not the only controversy surrounding its construction. There was a dispute over building and maintain
Post a Comment
Read more

US Route 299 and modern California State Route 299

By
US Route 299 connected US Route 101 near Arcata of Humboldt County east across the northern mountain ranges of California to US Route 395 in Alturas of Modoc County.  US Route 299 was the longest child route of US Route 99 and is the only major east/west highway across the northern counties of California.  US Route 299 was conceptualized as the earliest iteration of what is known as the Winnemucca-to-the-Sea Highway.  The legacy of US Route 299 lives on today in the form of the 307 mile long California State Route 299.   Featured as the cover of this blog is the interchange of US Route 101 and US Route 299 north of Arcata which was completed as a segment of the Burns Freeway during 1956.   Part 1; the history of US Route 299 and California State Route 299 The development of the State Highways which comprised US Route 299 ("US 299") and later California State Route 299 ("CA 299") began with 1903 Legislative Chapter 366 which defined the general corridor of the Trinit
Post a Comment
Read more