U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: Which city should I visit?
Chicago 63 58.88%
LA 44 41.12%
Voters: 107. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread Start New Thread
Old 04-15-2011, 10:54 PM
22 posts, read 43,942 times
Reputation: 21


Which city offers more in terms of things to do, culture, entertainment, transportation, interesting sights etc? I'm looking to visit one of these cities this summer from July 27-30 and I'm wondering which would offer more in terms of the overall experience. I am coming from Toronto. Thanks.

Old 04-16-2011, 12:07 AM
940 posts, read 1,733,700 times
Reputation: 732
I'm from LA -- GO TO CHICAGO.
LA is a terrible place to visit. You cannot even begin to appreciate this place in a visit, and most people end up disliking their trip. LA doesn't make it easy... it's a really hard city to get to know and nothing is obvious. This makes it an endlessly fascinating/rewarding city to live in, but visiting is a bad idea for most people. You'll spend most of your time trying to get to places that turn out to be incredibly underwhelming, spending your money on crap food in crap places...

LA offers more to do than Chicago, but it's much more difficult to access. Unless you know someone who can actually guide you around LA, go to Chicago, you'll enjoy your vacation much more and it'll most likely feel like a real vacation--i.e. relaxing!
Old 04-16-2011, 09:19 AM
Location: Washington, DC NoVA
1,105 posts, read 1,942,159 times
Reputation: 775
there are more well known things to do in la but chicago is a cooler place to actually walk around. kinda depends on what you're interested in and if you want to be able to walk around all the time. altough the sprawl in la is overstated, it's actually pretty dense in most areas but the problem is that a lot of the attractions are spaced out in different areas of the city. you can walk around hollywood, santa monica, beverly hills, and venice beach but you need to drive to get between those places. i personally would think la would be a more fun place to visit for someone from toronto because chicago kind of feels like toronto. la would be a totally different experience. some people go to la and the trip goes great, some people go to la and the trip sucks. usually those who hate their trips to la are the well educated types who think they're too good for everything that's not san francisco, new york, or boston and the people who know how to have a good time, are more creative, and like music and tv will love la. if you love entertainment, then you'd probably automatically love la because there's so much to see with film sets, theaters, and celebrities if you're lucky. plus the scenery around la crushes the scenery around chicago.

the architecture is better in chicago, the skyline huge, the chicago river is really cool, its got cool neighborhoods, the lakefront is really nice, the food la can't match, if you like the blues chicago's hard to beat since there are blues clubs all over.

Last edited by CelticGermanicPride; 04-16-2011 at 09:47 AM..
Old 04-16-2011, 10:38 AM
Location: Chicago
721 posts, read 1,568,772 times
Reputation: 449
Two completely different places to visit. Chicago is more of a "big city" type of vacation, where you look at museums and gawk at skyscrapers. In the summer there is the Lake, but a lot of people don't associate beaches with Chicago.

L.A is the opposite.
Old 04-16-2011, 10:55 AM
1,806 posts, read 3,369,084 times
Reputation: 870
I grew up in Chicago and live in L.A. Go to Chicago for a vacation. Nothing beats summer in Chicago. There is so much to do. Museums, the buildings, concerts. The downtown night life is excellent. As the other posters said, Chicago is more tourist friendly. In LA, everything is spread out and you will spend half your time going from one place to another. In Chicago, all the touristy things are concentrated in a small area of the city and it is easy to navigate. Plus Chicago knows it is a tourist town.

Things to do in Chicago: Field Museum, Cubs game at Wrigley, Grant Park concerts, walk around the Magnificant Mile shopping district, go to the John Hancock building or Sears/Willis? Tower, walk around Lincoln Park, nightlife in River North or Lincoln Park, Lincoln Park Zoo.

*All these attractions are within a few miles of each other and on a nice day, can walk, or take a quick cab ride.

That all being said, I love L.A. way more and plan to spend the rest of my life there.
Old 04-16-2011, 12:57 PM
22 posts, read 43,942 times
Reputation: 21
Is LA transportation as bad as people say it is? I wont have a car so I'll be 100% reliant on buses and trains to get around. I know that Chicago's transportation is amazing so I wouldn't have to worry about that. Plus I might even just drive there anyways. Thanks.
Old 04-16-2011, 01:10 PM
Location: Near L.A.
4,114 posts, read 9,200,555 times
Reputation: 3340
LA could use some real improvement in the public transportation department, although they are slowly expanding their light rail and subway.

Chicago could use some real improvement, too. Although their system is much more extensive within the city limits, the El looks like it's about to fall to the ground. High taxes don't always mean high quality.

Chicago, nonetheless, is a much more compact and user-friendly city as far as tourists are concerned. I'd pick Chicago as great city to visit...but I'd pick L.A. as a better city to live in.
Old 04-16-2011, 01:16 PM
1,806 posts, read 3,369,084 times
Reputation: 870
As long as you stay near a hotel on the Red Line in Chicago, you can access virtually all tourist destinations from the Red Line.

In LA, there is no possibility of utilizing just one line of public transit although I have heard the Santa Monica Blue Bus does cover most of the tourist locations, but check on the availability of it.

Traffic in both cities is horrendous. LA has more clogged freeways (highways) and Chicago's surface streets are more jammed.
Old 04-16-2011, 11:22 PM
31 posts, read 53,922 times
Reputation: 20
totally LA what are you going to do iin chicago

reasons for LA are-

disney california adventure
universal studios
Knotts bery farm
six flags magic mountain
griffith observatory
getty center
getty villa
better weather
rodeo drive
downtown LA
griffith park
santa monica
SM pier
LA Zoo
Aquarium of the pacific
Ports o' call
Port of LA
Santa calalina Island
take Cruises
paramount studios
warner bros tours
LA helicopter tours

no question LA
Old 04-17-2011, 06:20 AM
1,806 posts, read 3,369,084 times
Reputation: 870
The problem with the above list, although quite extensive, is the lack of ability of getting to each place because they are spread out so far apart. Even with a rental car, driving to each place will be a nightmare b/c LA simply isn't tourist friendly.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.

Closed Thread

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top