Oh, I think a discussion about all my interchanges is better done on my collection page like you said. If you go to the collection page, there are three tabs visible at the top. One is for leaving comments.

@vsvg.scattered. Thanks for all the feedback! There are many variables to making interchanges. Some people like them as realistic as possible, some as compact as possible. I try to go somewhere in between, while taking CS gameplay into account. Some service interchanges could be a lot smaller for instance, but then traffic stopping and waiting for a traffic light might end up all the way onto the highway I believe it defeats the purpose of said interchange. The most compact 4-directional free-flow system interchange I made is the SRI (Spiral Ring Interchange). It's basically a Turbine, but with a slightly different road connection making it smaller.

Possible Ranking Criteria
1 Sprawl - zoneable space forfeit
2 Some Head On Crossings, just merges, neither head-ons nor merges
3 Lane mathematics or not
4 Some sharp corners or all sweeping bends
5 Lanes*length and Lanes*Levels*Length. I've never calculated them, though, as it gets hard. But they help comparatively.
If I get to it, #6, making it smooth and pretty boosts #4 as well.

There are definite trade-offs between 1 and 4, although 2 and 3 are solvable in pretty much every space constraint where an interchange fits.

MaxFX,
I looked at your collection and I was and am troubled by your statement "Intersections are Big". "Some Intersections are Big", that is true, but not all. I couldn't see where to comment on the collection, so I hope you'll see this, and I can chop it down or delete it after you get a chance to ponder.

Things you might want in your collection for performance and variety:
+a No-Weave Double Y (low-merge, TM:PE can force no merge)
+a Compact stacked interchange that fits mostly within the rights-of-way, minimizing or even (almost) eliminating sprawl.
+a reasonably compact stacked interchange that takes Pinavia and Turbine off the table, unless someone wants to build a replica stadium and can spare the space and the concrete,
+a reasonably compact service interchange that can start as a simple diamond, and grow with the needs

Thank you MaxFX.
I love this intersection because of its minimal "sprawl", the occupied spaces outside the right-of-way for the highways. The number of zoneable squares lost to an intersection is a key criteria (or should be) for intersection selection.

In three quadrants the sprawl is nil. In the fourth it's not bad, but remember to divide it by 4 when comparing, and then the bonus is only one quadrant is impacted.

I got frustrated by the weaving (like in cloverleafs) that could mess-up traffic. So I made a non-weaving variant.