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.
I don't think it's a huge difference. It's the difference between flying NYC-London vs. NYC-Rome. Not a deal breaker.
My point is that LA and SF aren't close to one another. There's no reason to think that they would be a "package deal" any more than any other two cities in the US, especially if you want to take the scenic route (I assume most tourists would take the PCH, which is impossible to do in one day).
If you factor in the scenic drive from LA to SF via I-5, as part of the overall tourist experience, then I don't see why you can't package SF with LA. It's similar to driving or taking a train all-across Europe. Folks love traveling and back-packing across Europe, instead of flying from city to city, because it's cheaper, and part of the experience of interacting with folks at the ground level, going town-to-town. CA being as big as it is, can be treated the same way, especially when traveling the scenic PCH driving through scenic coastal town to scenic coastal town. I'd surely package SF and LA in the same vacation.
If you factor in the scenic drive from LA to SF via I-5, as part of the overall tourist experience, then I don't see why you can't package SF with LA. It's similar to driving or taking a train all-across Europe. Folks love traveling and back-packing across Europe, instead of flying from city to city, because it's cheaper, and part of the experience of interacting with folks at the ground level, going town-to-town. CA being as big as it is, can be treated the same way, especially when traveling the scenic PCH driving through scenic coastal town to scenic coastal town. I'd surely package SF and LA in the same vacation.
LOL that's one of the most boring drives in the country, I think you meant PCH.
Yes, it is. It's the exact same thing. Rome is 2.5 hours further than London from the U.S., which is the exact same as the difference between flying from LA to SF compared to LA to NYC.
And obviously the stress of flying is the airport security/transfer/customs/delays hassle, not whether you're sitting in a plane flight 2 hours or 4 hours extra.
LA to NYC is a 5 hour flight. NYC to LA can be up to 5 hrs 45 min. Vs a 1 hour flight from LA to SF. Theres a huge difference, definitely more than 2.5 hours.
A lot of people drive from LA to San Francisco or vice versa in a day, and still see some of the coast off of Highway 1, though sometimes people will take 101 to make it in faster time or combine the two. Highway 101 to LA is a piece of cake(there's a few interesting places on 101 alone), it's really the Big Sur stretch of 1 that can be slow driving. But it's really easy to just take your time and pick a half-way point to stay(like around Hearst Castle/Cambria or Morro Bay). Kind of outside the realm of this thread but there's a lot of stuff to see along the route, it's worth taking a few days to see Monterery/Carmel/Big Sur, Hearst Castle, old Spanish missions, Morro Bay, Santa Barbara, and so on driving down...
Of course you can make down faster if you just go down I-5, but that's a boring drive. (Though no more boring or annoying than flying somewhere.)
@MichiVegas, how far do you think LA and SF are from each other and how close do you think NYC and LA are to each other?
Like Nightscape touched on, flying between LA and SF averages 1h 15m at most; flying between LA and NYC averages 5h at least. That's an average difference of 3.75-4.00 hours.
Travel between LA<-->SF is way faster and easier than LA/SF<-->NYC.
Isn't it only 6-8 hours from L.A. to SF? You guys are making it out to be 12+ hours. Easily done in a day...in my teenager years, me and my family would do trips from Atlanta to Memphis that's almost the exact same distance and would only take half the day or so...
According to Google, it takes 5 hours and 41 minutes to drive from Los Angeles to San Francisco whereas it takes 5 hours and 37 minutes to drive from SF to LA.
Which American city is most worth seeing as a tourist?
Three words; New York City.
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.
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.
Which American city is most worth seeing as a tourist?
