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.
Hong Kong's MTR has recently overtaken the NYC subway in terms of annual ridership.
The MTR, of course, is newer, cleaner, safer, and faster than the NYC subway. There's platform screen doors at every station. All stations are air conditioned and fitted with escalators and elevators. Stations are placed further apart so the average speed is higher. Most stations have high rise apartment complexes, office skyscrapers, and malls built right on top of them to minimize walking. Most interchanges are cross platform interchanges--so you can transfer between trains just by walking 50 feet across the platform. However, there is no MTR service to many developed areas, including Pok Fu Lam, Happy Valley, Repulse Bay, Stanley, Sai Kung, To Kwa Wan, Sau Mau Ping, South Tsing Yi, meaning you have to switch to bus, although in ten more years, many of the above mentioned places will have MTR service. The MTR also closes for five hours a day, no 24/7 service.
The NYC subway, though, has 24/7 service (the MTR does not). The NYC subway has far more stations than the MTR and in a smaller area (NYC is 302 square miles vs. Hong Kong's nearly 500 square miles). Rail service pretty much blankets everywhere in Manhattan, Brooklyn, Queens, and The Bronx. And while the NYC Subway might be slow, Long Island Railway is much faster than the subway when traveling from Manhattan to Brooklyn, Queens, and the JFK airport.
I would imagine the MTR is more punctual (but is NYC subway really that unreliable?) I would also imagine that the MTR wins on train frequency--two minutes per train on most major lines (but I think that's also true for many NYC subway lines).
I would still go with NYC having the better rail system, for its better coverage and 24/7 service.
OMG, I would have never thought something so obvious would need a poll. As having been to both, Hong Kong's MTR wins by a mile (and more).
You forgot to mention that Hong Kong has the Octopus Card (similar to London's Oyster card), which you can also use in some stores and cafes.
You also forgot to mention that most of Hong Kong's 500 sq mi area is uninhabited (New Territories, etc), but for those areas that are densely populated, they most likely have MTR coverage.
Hong Kong also has much better transfers and station layout. I remember entering a NYC subway station once and had to go out as that entrance only led to the platform going the other direction as what I intended to. I had to go to the other entrance lol. And NYC subway is really not user-friendly for those that are uninitiated. They have several different stations with the same name serving different routes. Some stations of the same name don't even have proper interchanges (you need to leave one and enter another).
And I will take cleanliness over 24/7 service any day.
Just regarding coverage, you have to take to account the size of both metro areas. Hong Kong's landlocked and most of its developed areas are squeezed into long, narrow corridors, so it's much easier to cover all of HK with just a few railway lines.
NYC is much larger in area, and afaik even with so much more rail lines there's still large parts of the metro of 20 million, that aren't nearly as close to a rail line as the most 'underserved' areas in Hong Kong like the ones you mentioned
Hong Kong's just a tiny fraction of the size of NYC's metro, but within that area it's packed to the point where it's even more dense than Manhattan (Kowloon itself is both smaller and more populated than Manhattan). The sheer amount of people packed into a few railway lines... that's why they need such high frequencies.
NYC has basically stopped building new lines aside from the Second Avenue Subway over the past 40-50 years. That alone should disqualify it.
I feel like people are totally unaware of how much the US - including NYC - has fallen behind in terms of public transit compared to the rest of the world.
Hong Kong's mass transit system is too overloaded. Once I waited until the 10th train to board at Admiralty Station during rush hour.
It is even more jam-packed than Yamanote Line of Tokyo's JR where passengers are pushed into the train.
And even at the busiest moment, the stations in lower Manhattan is not as busy as that of Hong Kong's.
But the airport express train is far more convenient in Hong Kong. If you need to go to JFK, you have to board regular subway to either Jamaica or Howard Beach stations and then buy ticket for the skytrain, which is usually long line at the vending machine.
Just to be pedantic, it is the "Long Island Railroad", or LIRR.
Carry on.
Thank you, I slipped, of course I meant NYC subway+PATH+LIRR+Metro North+Skytrain+Staten Island Railway.
But I finally went to NYC in June. Though I only took the subway and PATH (not the other train services), I was impressed (and I have in fact been to Hong Kong 7 times and taken the subway almost everyday every time I went to Hong Kong.)
NYC rail transit beats Hong Kong's MTR when it comes to functionality:
1. 24/7 service (MTR closes down for five hours a day)
2. Train frequency (both about the same, every 2 minutes during rush hour)
3. Express service (MTR has no express service, NYC subway has express service, AND they have LIRR and Metro North which are even faster than the express subway, and LIRR and Metro North can be used for traveling not only to the suburbs but also within NYC city limits).
4. Ridership: MTR has recently beat NYC subway in terms of annual ridership, but add ridership from the LIRR, Metro North, NJ Transit, PATH, and JFK skytrain and NYC is still ahead of MTR. However, I expect MTR, with a faster growing ridership, will catch up in five years.
5. Stations are more densely packed together, which means you'll have to walk less, and take connecting buses less (in Hong Kong, many densely populated areas like Sau Mau Ping, To Kwa Wan, and Southern Tsing Yi have no MTR service, meaning you have to take a connecting bus).
6. NYC train directions are very clear cut: Either you're going to "Downtown/Brooklyn" or, if you're going the other way, to "Uptown/The Bronx." No fuss about having to remember the terminal station of the line in the direction you want to go: In Hong Kong, you'll have to remember whether you want to go to the Chai Wan direction or the Kennedy Town direction on the Island line, for instance.
7. MTR has plenty of cross-platform interchanges, but so does the NYC subway.
8. MTR has a contactless card (Octopus card) that is valid for the entire system as well as on buses.
NYC has a clumsy swipe card (MetroCard), BUT in a few years NYC will have the contactless OMNY card that will be valid on the subway, PATH, LIRR, and Metro North, and MTA buses, putting NYC rail transit payment on equal ground with MTR payment.
MTR beats NYC rail transit when it comes to aesthetics, safety, and comfort:
1. MTR has air-conditioned stations as well as air-conditioned trains. NYC only has air-conditioned subway trains. NYC subway stations get hot in the summer!
2. MTR has platform screen doors to prevent passengers from falling on the tracks, NYC does not.
3. MTR has escalators and elevators in practically every station.
4. MTR has newer trains/trains that have been more recently refurbished, but NYC subway is ordering a whole host of new generation trains, and the Metro North trains look pretty sleek, so NYC is definitely catching up in terms of rolling stock.
NYC subway was actually almost as clean as the MTR; I think we're confusing "cleanliness" with "newness" and aesthetics; of course the MTR is going to look cleaner because it's much newer, but comparing a relatively new NYC subway station (like Hudson Yards) to a relatively new MTR station, both are really just as clean. Likewise, when comparing a new generation NYC subway car to a typical MTR car built in the last ten years, both are just as clean and sleek. It's just that NYC also has some old cars, but even those aren't too dirty.
So yes, NYC rail transit is still, IMO, significantly better than the MTR, because NYC rail transit beats MTR when it comes to function and convenience, while the MTR is better only aesthetically and comfort wise.
Hong Kong's mass transit system is too overloaded. Once I waited until the 10th train to board at Admiralty Station during rush hour.
It is even more jam-packed than Yamanote Line of Tokyo's JR where passengers are pushed into the train.
And even at the busiest moment, the stations in lower Manhattan is not as busy as that of Hong Kong's.
But the airport express train is far more convenient in Hong Kong. If you need to go to JFK, you have to board regular subway to either Jamaica or Howard Beach stations and then buy ticket for the skytrain, which is usually long line at the vending machine.
No, you can board the LIRR (which is much, much faster than the regular subway) to Jamaica.
But the airport express train is far more convenient in Hong Kong. If you need to go to JFK, you have to board regular subway to either Jamaica or Howard Beach stations and then buy ticket for the skytrain, which is usually long line at the vending machine.
I assume by the skytrain you actually mean the Airtrain.
MTR is basically a property company that happens to run a rail line. They make a lot of their revenues from property development around the stations....
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.
