Better food city: Los Angeles, Chicago, Washington DC, SF Bay, Philadelphia, Boston, Houston, Atlanta, Dallas, Miami (life, downtown)

[Lizz0rd]

Criteria:

Higher End? Chicago
Mid Range? SF
Lower End? LA
Ethnic Foods? LA
Distinct Local Cuisine? New Orleans
Ingredients? SF

[Sharp Point]

Originally Posted by rah

The amount of Philly boosting going on on this website is quite hilarious at times. It's a good food city, but overall it really isn't better than SF, and I'm not sure it's better than LA either.

As kidphilly said, SF has the edge on diversity of food options, not to mention the close proximity to year-round fresh produce is a big plus. And there are tons of good places at all price ranges, from cheap street food to ultra expensive places with Michelin ratings. The same can be said for LA, though to a lesser extent on the high-end of things.

Philly and BAY boosting.

Don't worry though, it's only City-Data. In the real world someone in Philly wouldn't even care about San Francisco's food choices.

This site has 10 times as many posters from Philly than any other city on this forum.

[OyCrumbler]

I'm surprised that Chicago is beating LA and Philly is beating the Bay Area.

Among those four, it seemed obvious to me that it's the Bay Area, then LA, then Chicago, then Philly. Weird.

[Huge Foodie 215]

Originally Posted by OyCrumbler

I'm surprised that Chicago is beating LA and Philly is beating the Bay Area.

Among those four, it seemed obvious to me that it's the Bay Area, then LA, then Chicago, then Philly. Weird.

For people not from the West Coast, I think it's easier for them to accept Chicago and Philadelphia being better food cities than LA and SF.

Out here, I never really hear much about LA or SF when it comes to food. Again, it has to do with the established nature of CHI and PHI vs. LA and SF.

[graterdaze]

Other, New Orleans!

[Lifeshadower]

Originally Posted by OyCrumbler

I'm surprised that Chicago is beating LA and Philly is beating the Bay Area.

Among those four, it seemed obvious to me that it's the Bay Area, then LA, then Chicago, then Philly. Weird.

Why are you surprised? This is City Data.

Anyways, perhaps LA is not #1 in food, but look what I got for breakfast for $5.50



Nothing beats huevos rancheros in the morning!

[Cowboys fan in Houston]

I would imagine that you can find any type of food in any of the places listed in authentic and top notch quality.

[Lifeshadower]

Originally Posted by justme02

I would imagine that you can find any type of food in any of the places listed in authentic and top notch quality.

Agreed, but this is City Data! Someone HAS TO WIN BECAUSE IF THEY DON'T, THEN THE UNIVERSE WILL EXPLODE!!!!

RAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAWWWWWWWWWRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR RR!!!!

[pgm123]

Originally Posted by kidphilly

I have lived in SF and still visit a few times a year for work and always have a great meal while there. Also the sorrounding areas of SF are better in general than Philly; not saying the sorrounding areas are bad in Philly, they are not but again feel is ahead and to me it is pretty cleanly ahead. I do think Philly is closing the gap pretty quickly but honestly am not sure it will ever surpass. Both are great food cities; and as someone who likes to eat the more the merrier.

When people say San Francisco, are they counting the whole Bay Area? San Francisco alone probably wins. If you throw in Napa Valley and San Jose, then the advantage expands. However, Lancaster County is quite underrated for good quality ingredients and amazing Amish food.

Philadelphia might be the best sandwich city in America. But that's not enough. If we count the whole Bay Area, San Francisco gets my vote as the best after NYC.

Has New Orleans gotten any love in this thread?

[downtown1]

Chicago or the Bay Area could claim the #2 spot. No other city comes close. Well, at least for now!

I voted for the Bay Area since I think it strikes a balance between fine dining & cheap eats.