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.
SD easily. SD is so much easier to get around than LA. In SD you can see everything you need to see in a long weekend. In LA, you can get to certain places, and have certain experiences, but you’re really only going to get a sliver of what LA is if you only visit for a long weekend.
This is not a knock to LA’s offerings, just a knock to LA’s horrible layout. I think it’s definitely the more amazing city of the two. But it’s just hard to see all of what LA has to offer in a short amount of time. When you take a bite out of anything, you want to taste all, or at least most, of what it has to offer. SD does that. With LA, you have to take like 5 bites before you get it.
The 4 Light rail lines and 2 subway lines have made it much easier to traverse LA, and is used by tourists and locals alike. The addition of the Crenshaw light rail Line to LAX (2020 Opening) will make it even easier.
Via the Red line subway you can access DTLA, Dodger Stadium, Griffith Park Observatory, Hollywood/Highland (Walk of Fame), Hollywood Bowl and Universal Studios.
Via the Expo light rail you can access DTLA, LA Live, Staples Center, USC, LA Memorial Coliseum, Calf Science Center, Natural History Museum, Banc Of California Stadium, and downtown Santa Monica
The Blue line light rail connects DTLA to downtown Long Beach.
You can actually travel from Pasadena (Gold Line) to Santa Monica (Expo Line) using LA Metro Rail, without ever getting in a car.
Please plan an itinerary in which you accomplish "everything there is to see and do in SD can be done in 1 or 2 days" I want to see specifics about what exactly you accomplish and how much time you spend at each attraction.
The SD zoo alone is worth a full day. What a ridiculous assertion. Is there something in the water in LA that I'm unaware of? I always thought SD had the worst water in the country...
I realize the SD Zoo is a popular attraction, but I've seen caged animals in Zoo's throughout the country and it's just not my thing. Nor is Sea World. Balboa Park is nice and so is Coronado and the Port of San Diego. I've been to Old Town, it's OK, and I've even taken the trolley to Tijuana. What am I missing?
Last edited by Angelino19; 10-13-2019 at 08:55 PM..
I don't really think like a traditional tourist, or even urbanist necessarily, so I could honestly, if the need arose, spend much longer in each of these cities fully taking in everything they have to offer. That being said, I think for the common tourist, LA's urban stretches wouldn't necessarily be on the radar. Just general impression. My personal opinion is that is a major loss on their part, as I do think as a whole package Greater LA may be more interesting even than Greater SF. But in terms of where tourists actually go... I don't think they see it that way. Urban LA probably has more of a PR problem among average Americans than any major city in the county, and thus is probably the most underrated of the Top 10 cities, at least in terms of urbanism.
The assertion of a month or more in LA, whilst only a day or two in SD however... is simply a biased statement honestly IMO. Even when not accounting for major tourist destinations (which I don't really tend to hit all of/prioritize anyways), there's plenty of interest in the city and surrounding communities.
I don't really think like a traditional tourist, or even urbanist necessarily, so I could honestly, if the need arose, spend much longer in each of these cities fully taking in everything they have to offer. That being said, I think for the common tourist, LA's urban stretches wouldn't necessarily be on the radar. Just general impression. My personal opinion is that is a major loss on their part, as I do think as a whole package Greater LA may be more interesting even than Greater SF. But in terms of where tourists actually go... I don't think they see it that way. Urban LA probably has more of a PR problem among average Americans than any major city in the county, and thus is probably the most underrated of the Top 10 cities, at least in terms of urbanism.
The assertion of a month or more in LA, whilst only a day or two in SD however... is simply a biased statement honestly IMO. Even when not accounting for major tourist destinations (which I don't really tend to hit all of/prioritize anyways), there's plenty of interest in the city and surrounding communities.
I've been to SD many times. It's a wonderful city, but IMO there's just not a whole lot to do there. Having said that, I don't go to SD to experience big city life, I go there because it's very laid back, calm and peaceful. I'll spend a weekend in Santa Barbara and Palm Springs for the same reason.
The 4 Light rail lines and 2 subway lines have made it much easier to traverse LA, and is used by tourists and locals alike. The addition of the Crenshaw light rail Line to LAX (2020 Opening) will make it even easier.
Via the Red line subway you can access DTLA, Dodger Stadium, Griffith Park Observatory, Hollywood/Highland (Walk of Fame), Hollywood Bowl and Universal Studios.
Via the Expo light rail you can access DTLA, LA Live, Staples Center, USC, LA Memorial Coliseum, Calf Science Center, Natural History Museum, Banc Of California Stadium, and downtown Santa Monica
The Blue line light rail connects DTLA to downtown Long Beach.
You can actually travel from Pasadena (Gold Line) to Santa Monica (Expo Line) using LA Metro Rail, without ever getting in a car.
I wasn’t totally knocking LA in my post. The original poster was asking about a long weekend trip. LA is a big city and even if it had really good public transit you still wouldn’t get to see everything you really should in a long weekend. I would honestly say the same thing about New York, Chicago and San Francisco. You need at least a week to get a true taste of those cities.
That being said, LA’s layout does make it even harder to see different areas. I do recognize and appreciate that it has really expanded its rail, but it is still very decentralized. If you’re staying downtown, it’s still difficult to get to a lot of places. That’s not the case in places like NY or Chicago.
And San Diego is somewhat decentralized as well, but downtown is much better connected to the touristy places than DTLA is. And it’s smaller, so you get more bang for your buck if time is the currency.
I think the person is originally from LA or the bay area and is hellbent on proving why the 17th largest metro is just not up to par with the the #2 and #5 most populous regions in the country. While SD may never compete with these regions that have twice or six times as many people, it certainly is no slouch- especially in terms of the number and accessibility of attractions in its central area.
Nope, I'm from Pittsburgh. So you might say I'm also proving that the 17th largest metro is not up to par with the 27th and 32nd largest metro areas (Pittsburgh and Cleveland) in terms of major cultural attractions.
So the reality is that SD isn't even competing with metros that it is nearly double the size of. Yes, I realize SD draws many more tourists than those places, but they are coming for fun in the sun, not Balboa Park.
I actually think San Diego is underrated in a lot of aspects. It just bothers me whenever there is discussion of getting a major attraction its always "oh, we don't want that because we'll become like L.A." (when we pay close to the same COL and have increasingly the same congestion), or when it comes to attracting talent and industry "don't come here, WE FULL" (when there are giant swaths inside city limits that look semi-rural)
Nope, I'm from Pittsburgh. So you might say I'm also proving that the 17th largest metro is not up to par with the 27th and 32nd largest metro areas (Pittsburgh and Cleveland) in terms of major cultural attractions.
So the reality is that SD isn't even competing with metros that it is nearly double the size of. Yes, I realize SD draws many more tourists than those places, but they are coming for fun in the sun, not Balboa Park.
I actually think San Diego is underrated in a lot of aspects. It just bothers me whenever there is discussion of getting a major attraction its always "oh, we don't want that because we'll become like L.A." (when we pay close to the same COL and have increasingly the same congestion), or when it comes to attracting talent and industry "don't come here, WE FULL" (when there are giant swaths inside city limits that look semi-rural)
It sounds like you have some frustrations with San Diego in this regard. Have others noticed this? It would perhaps make sense, as the two do have fundamentally different approaches. What types of "major attractions" has San Diego turned down in the past? Personally, the appeal of San Diego for me is in part great weather and scenery, but also walkable neighborhoods, craft beer, small scale sort of stuff.
I'm not sure San Diego would beat Pittsburgh or Cleveland when it comes to high culture, museum based attractions, etc., but at least by volume, etc., but at same time it's not the worst either. I'd probably rate it middle of the pack overall in the Midwest and West among major cities... but in the south I think the only cities that could really compete with San Diego on it are Atlanta and Houston, maybe New Orleans although outside of National WWII New Orleans isn't really a great museum city.
I realize the SD Zoo is a popular attraction, but I've seen caged animals in Zoo's throughout the country and it's just not my thing. Nor is Sea World. Balboa Park is nice and so is Coronado and the Port of San Diego. I've been to Old Town, it's OK, and I've even taken the trolley to Tijuana. What am I missing?
On one of my last trips to San Diego, even though I had passed thru there many times en route to Tijuana, I decided to hit a few museums in Balboa Park. Right in the middle of the Park, I lit up a cigarette, on a big grassy area, and someone came up to me to tell me I couldn't smoke in the entirety of Balboa Park. If that wasn't enough to drive me back across the Border!
Oh man, thats right. I was thinking maybe someone could use the internet to crowd source information and get advice from an L.A. suburbanite that way.
I forgot, in 2019 the only way to get advice from someone is knowing them personally.
Thanks for catching that.
You're probably overestimating how many people actually do that; come to sites like these. There's also probably a reason you don't have a ton of people telling them to take transit to all these different spots.
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.
If that wasn't enough to drive me back across the Border!
