Los Angeles vs. San Diego (Visitor Appeal) (cost, comparison, place)
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.
When I go to L.A., my interests are museums, particularly LACMA on Wilshire, which will be accessible soon by subway, and the museums in DTLA, all the other distant attractions are not attractive to me, so need for a car. And I can spend hours in the Last Bookstore in DTLA. And I generally stay at the Red Pagoda Inn in Chinatown.
Santa Monica! Oh please! Doesn't appeal to me at all!
Of the 22 years I spent in Las Vegas, I flew to San Diego 82 times and every time the thought entered my head as to staying in San Diego some night, but it never happened. B-o-r-I-n-g! And, I always ended up at the Villa Zargosa motel in Tijuana. And if you still wish to see Tijuana Au Naturel, you better hurry as there's 2 high rise condo buildings going up on Revolution, which is going to upscale Revolution. I knew that was coming!
Serious question - what's good in Tijuana? Always thought of it as a haven for underage college kids more than anything. Also haven't been for almost two decades.
Serious question - what's good in Tijuana? Always thought of it as a haven for underage college kids more than anything. Also haven't been for almost two decades.
Tijuana surprisingly has quite the food and craft beer/cocktail scene. I went with a friend to a few of his favorite places before/after a soccer game last year and I was shocked beyond belief by what I experienced. It’s definitely not the same TJ I partied at in the 90’s as a teen, although that area still exists as well.
It depends how “urban and adventurous” you are but LA is vastly more varied with potential destinations and fun than San Diego, just by virtue of its massive size as the 2nd largest city in the country. You do have to navigate that size with traffic, distance to other venues and more big city issues such as homelessness and scruffiness in dt areas, but it is a fantastic city if you roll up your sleeves and traverse it avoiding car travel if you can.
San Diego is a much easier and chill area to explore, harder to discover its intrinsic gems and qualities but it’s all there if you have a sense of digging into an area a bit more to discover it. Even if you don’t you have a beautiful, extremely safe city right on the ocean and bay with a compact dt and easily accessible surrounding areas ready for fun, just not as exciting and cool as LA
I see this as a red herring.
If a tourist wanted to see Leimert Park, Long Beach, Marina Del Rey, Woodland Hills and Sylmar on a weekend trip, then yes the size, traffic, and distance would come into effect.
I don't think a typical tourist would have such an itinerary.
Excluding beach activities, there are exponentially more tourist attractions in the core 50 miles of Los Angeles than there are in the entirety of San Diego County. That core 50 miles is serviced by more complete heavy rail subway than San Francisco has in its city limits.
A tourist in San Diego would likely have Balboa Park and La Jolla on his itinerary.
It takes 30 minutes longer using mass transit to make that trip than it would to go from DTLA to Santa Monica.
If a tourist wanted to see Leimert Park, Long Beach, Marina Del Rey, Woodland Hills and Sylmar on a weekend trip, then yes the size, traffic, and distance would come into effect.
I don't think a typical tourist would have such an itinerary.
Excluding beach activities, there are exponentially more tourist attractions in the core 50 miles of Los Angeles than there are in the entirety of San Diego County. That core 50 miles is serviced by more complete heavy rail subway than San Francisco has in its city limits.
A tourist in San Diego would likely have Balboa Park and La Jolla on his itinerary.
It takes 30 minutes longer using mass transit to make that trip than it would to go from DTLA to Santa Monica.
Not true at all. I’ve made that trip from DTLA to Santa Monica because we were planning on getting some drinks and it took forever. I didn’t want to endure that again so we took an Uber back and I guarantee it was more than what it would be from La Jolla to Balboa Park. I wanted to make sure before posting so I just looked and both have nearly identical times on public transportation.
Besides that, most people aren’t gonna want to waste their precious time (especially on a weekend trip) riding busses, trolleys, and subways in Southern California. Most will be renting a car if they plan on covering some distance, or using ride shares if staying within a central area, both of which would favor the proximity of things, and traffic conditions in San Diego.
Excluding beach activities, there are exponentially more tourist attractions in the core 50 miles of Los Angeles than there are in the entirety of San Diego County.
That is an extreme exaggeration. There is not a single 50 square mile portion of LA that has more (or better) attractions that the entirety of San Diego County. Use google earth and measure it our yourself. It's a completely ridiculous assertion.
At most you would capture DTLA to Culver City, Griffith to USC. San Diego County has way better offerings than this sprawling grid mostly consisting of residential neighborhoods.
No one would choose 50 square miles of central LA over all of San Diego County. You'd run out of kitschy attractions within two days. You can only spend so much time at Hollywood or Staples Center.
Serious question - what's good in Tijuana? Always thought of it as a haven for underage college kids more than anything. Also haven't been for almost two decades.
Tijuana has something that San Diego, Los Angeles, San Francisco or Las Vegas will never have, in a million years, a Red Light District.
And Tijuana does have a high quality museum in the Rio District.
And if you're looking for an expansive view of San Diego, go on up one of those steep hills, out of Chapultepec Park and you'll be amazed!
LA is the least interesting big city (talking urban environment here) in the U.S. San Diego *knows* it's not interesting but at least it has the weather and better scenery.
Better scenery? You've never gazed up at the San Gabriel mountains? Snow-capped Mt. Baldy in the winter time?
Tijuana has something that San Diego, Los Angeles, San Francisco or Las Vegas will never have, in a million years, a Red Light District.
And Tijuana does have a high quality museum in the Rio District.
And if you're looking for an expansive view of San Diego, go on up one of those steep hills, out of Chapultepec Park and you'll be amazed!
TJ is no longer great to visit. The crime and seediness is overwhelming. I've had good cheap food there, and that was the highlight.
The redlight district is for suckers and degenerates.
I like both but San Diego suits me better than LA. I will go to visit LA as an add-on to SD but not LA by itself.
Generally what I think.
Its not really a good comparison because of the size difference.
LA has tremendous neighborhoods and amenities, but it comes at the price of traffic and crowds.
I think San Diego is what visitors who have never been think LA will be like.
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.
