Route for Rutland, VT to Fryeburg, ME in big rig

From what I can see and know (which is somewhat incomplete), that looks like a perfectly reasonable route.

Another not unreasonable option would be to take 4 over to 91N and take NH 112 (the Kanc) over. It looks to be about the same distance and time, though the Kancamagus in practice would likely make it a bit slower, particularly this time of year with all the leaf peepers. It is a beautiful drive, though.

Sitting in Fryeburg as I type this. Came over from Central Vermont.

If you can make your way to 91 North you can take 302 to 112(Kancamangus) or stay right on 302 to Conway/North Conway.

Or take 93 north to Lincoln,NH and head over 112.

Both are beautiful drives but have their issues with traffic this time of year. No low bridges or other obstructions.

Thanks for the replies.

How is the Kancamagus Highway for a big motorhome towing a car? I know it's a scenic drive, and scenic is usually not a good fit for us.

On the map, I see some serious switchbacks. And would we be the most hated people in New Hampshire for slowing everybody down? We have Texas plates, and never have gotten used to the icy stares we get from drivers in Colorado. :)

And we're not going to have time to drive 112 in the car, so getting to do it in the motorhome is very appealing, but only if it's not going to be more stressful than it's worth.

I was on the Kanc just a few weekends ago. I don't think it would be a particular problem for you. There's only one or two really sharp switchbacks, and they're well marked with "slow down" sorts of signs. RVs of all descriptions and tour busses regularly go over it, and a number of the various pull-offs have parking for large rigs. (By the same token, at least one or two are marked for cars only with good reason.)

This time of year, nobody is going to be going super fast over it because everybody is going to be on it, moseying along, and looking at the leaves. You would not be making great time even in a car.

As s1214 mentioned, 302 is also a pretty drive, and not quite so curvy. I prefer the Kanc, but both are lovely.

Rice wrote:
I have a 40-foot motorhome towing a car and I'm going from Rutland, Vermont, to Fryeburg, Maine, this weekend. I'm prepared for slow and hilly, but I don't want to encounter any low overpasses I can't get under, or other real obstacles to an RV that is almost 13'6" high and 60 feet long.

The most direct looks to be US 4 to Danbury, NH, and then an assortment of roads (104, 25, 16, 302) eventually to Fryeburg. Is there a particular reason that wouldn't be a good route for me?

Everything else, like trying to utilize some interstate, looks like a significant addition to the mileage at no real time savings (especially since I don't go all that fast on interstates anyway).

Thanks for your help.

No problem with your route, we have gone that way many times with our 5th wheel which is 13'2". I have also gone over the Kanc but IMO your route is better. The worst part is we are expecting 600,000 leaf peepers this weekend so be prepared to sit in traffic (or go real early). Your route has some of the prime roads for peepers.

We ended up traveling yesterday (Thursday), and took I-91 to Wells River and then 112 across. Y'all were right--it's not bad in a big rig.

Except there's a wide-vehicle detour about 4 miles in (eastbound) from where 112 splits off from Hwy 302. It's a terrible road with trees that haven't been trimmed well (even though it's a detour for buses). That goes for about 2 miles and then connects with 116, which is newly paved and smoooooth, for about 3 miles before merging back in with 112.

I'm not a foliage expert, but there was lots of color down along the creek, and since it was Thursday the traffic wasn't terrible.

Thanks for letting me know that was even an option.