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.
Status:
"“If a thing loves, it is infinite.”"
(set 4 days ago)
Location: Great Britain
27,187 posts, read 13,477,157 times
Reputation: 19518
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by lieqiang
I'm sorry you misunderstood my question. Have you taken a luxury bus or train in Asia? Which country was it, and were you able to explore both options?
Yes, there are countries where both rail and road are poor. Which brings one to the two options which are both slow, and the reality that sometimes there are luxury buses that offer better seating and are just as fast as the trains.
I have explored every option both in my own country, Europe and Asia.
I have been on numerous tedious bus journeys as well as rail journeys and I much prefer the latter.
As I mentioned above the train also had the added advantage of just gliding in to the centre of the city (downtown) rather than having to deal with the heavy traffic that many cities experience.
European railways use water jet trains to blast leaves from the tracks and put treatments on tracks.
In terms of snow, there are snow plough trains and gritting, just as there are in relation to roads.
In terms of Acela it's being upgraded and hopefully will now be faster.
Trains in most European countries do go faster than road vehicles and stations tend to be in city centres, meanng city centre to city centre travel.
Buses/Coaches often have to wait in city traffic jams to get in to cities, this further slows down journey times.
There are some great train jorneys in the US and you have travelled on quite a few of them, however the problems with US Train travel are largely down to underfunding and a lack of investment rather than due to buses being a better mode of transport.
Train transport can be expensive in other countries, although if you book in advance it is usually far cheaper.
Again train reliability is down to the system being neglected in the US in favour of the air travel and the roads, and this is also down to geography and demographics.
Train travel is much more reliable in Europe and parts of Asia, and the experience of enjoying a nice meal, a glass of wine or a beer on a train is far superior to a bus.
Furthermore most buses are fairly eager to cram passengers in, in order to generate as much profit as possible, so luxury buses with larger seats and other facilities are going to be more expensive, just as the Megabus Gold Service was in the UK.
Personally I have always found the train to be a much more pleasurable travelling experience than the bus, and even the overnight ferry which isn't face has far superior facilities than most forms of transport including a nice cabin with tv and shower. Sleeper trains although not as fast as high speed trains also provide a much better standard of travel and in many countries there are some reasonable prices for the sleeper or couchette. The Japanese sleeper train video I posted earlier in the thread is really interesting in this respect.
Airlines were great in their heyday but they have lost a lot of their glamour and have become subject to ever greater security and unpleasant incidents of over booking or air rage.
This is my personal opinion but I think it's shared by people in Europe and parts of Asia, and the bus is generally seen as foir those who can't afford the train. It also should be noted that young people can apply for a 16-25 rail card, this allows reduced travel with a 1/3rd off all rail fares the UK and discounted fares across Europe Europe. There is a similar 1/3rd concessions for the elderly and disabled.
Various things:
—I’ll believe it when I see it re improvements to Acela Service. It has been pretty much since inception grossly overpriced and no more reliable than the regular service that parallels it. They after all run along the same tracks.
—The kinds of things you describe regarding track treatments happen (though not always in timely fashion) with plowing and not at all regarding water treatments in the US as far as I know. Every time there’s a snowstorm, it usually takes a day or two for service to return to normal. Service through areas affected by leaf fall just slows down in season.
—If you buy far ahead enough, you can often get a decent discount in tickets, though not always. Discounts for other classes of folks can apply in theory, but one often gets boxed out of such fares when purchasing. It’s not very consistent.
—The answer to whether it’s faster to take the train versus driving in the US is “it depends.” On some routes, it’s actually comparable. And if there’s a bad rail delay, all bets are off.
—Buses in the US can be affected by traffic, though most bus companies appear to have alternate routes available if traffic looks like it’s going to be bad. I’ve taken buses in the Northeast several times and the route between New York and Boston for one can vary a lot depending on traffic along the route.
—It’s true that some US bus stations are located well outside the city center (Montgomery AL, Lexington KY, Fredericksburg VA, Charleston SC, Sacramento CA), which is indeed worthless. Unfortunately that’s also true of some Amtrak stations, including Olympia WA, Charleston SC, Savannah, and Richmond VA’s primary station at Staples Mills. And some major cities, such as Columbus OH, Nashville TN, Louisville KY, Boise ID, and Baton Rouge LA have no Amtrak coverage at all.
—No question that underfunding and lack of investment are major reasons Amtrak has problems, and that’s likely to continue. But that doesn’t change the fact that train travel in the US is horribly unreliable compared to bus service. Like I said, traveling by train in the US is notably more pleasant. But if I want to reliably get there in the US, I’ll usually opt for the bus because I, you know, want to make sure I actually get there. I get the impression train travel outside the US is far more reliable — it certainly seems so in Europe, in my experience.
I have explored every option both in my own country, Europe and Asia.
Really? Then you know the bus from Bangkok to Chiang Mai is faster than the train, yet claimed the train was 2-3x faster. You know the seats in 3 across luxury buses in Vietnam are nicer than the train, yet claimed the train seating is nicer.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brave New World
I have been on numerous tedious bus journeys as well as rail journeys and I much prefer the latter.
That's great you prefer the train, but your preference doesn't magically make what you were saying true. I know you prefer trains and are being strangely stubborn in their defense but I think it's been pretty well proven the train option isn't always faster nor is it always with better seating.
Walk five feet off the beaches and Florida suddenly becomes one of the ugliest states in the country.
Las Vegas is a soulless, cheap hellhole founded by gangsters to attract mouth-breathing knuckledraggers in search of their cut-rate Roman orgy. Nobody with an IQ higher than a rhesus monkey should visit Las Vegas more than once voluntarily.
New Orleans is little more than a few sleazy blocks on Bourbon Street broken up by some decent restaurants. Outside of that, it's one of the most dysfunctional places in America. It's essentially Jersey City with a little bit of panache to it.
Portland, Oregon, tries just a little too hard to be weird. It's less eccentric and more enamored with the idea of being eccentric. When you have to coin a slogan that says, "Keep Portland Weird," you know the weirdness just isn't all that authentic. Plus it's just kind of nasty around the riverfront.
Southern California beaches are pretty mediocre. And LA is just godawful.
Last edited by MinivanDriver; 10-07-2018 at 05:20 PM..
Status:
"“If a thing loves, it is infinite.”"
(set 4 days ago)
Location: Great Britain
27,187 posts, read 13,477,157 times
Reputation: 19518
Quote:
Originally Posted by lieqiang
Really? Then you know the bus from Bangkok to Chiang Mai is faster than the train, yet claimed the train was 2-3x faster. You know the seats in 3 across luxury buses in Vietnam are nicer than the train, yet claimed the train seating is nicer.
No I didn't I said it was two to three times faster using high speed rail, something Thailand is planning.
I also couldn't care less about the seats on a bus, it's still a bus and the train in most countries is still a lot better.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lieqiang
That's great you prefer the train, but your preference doesn't magically make what you were saying true. I know you prefer trains and are being strangely stubborn in their defense but I think it's been pretty well proven the train option isn't always faster nor is it always with better seating.
The vast majority of people in the US use cheap buses such as the Greyhound or Megabus, and not some swanky coach. Indeed if trhey had the money they would be flying and not taking the bus.
I know the megabus very well, because it's not American, it started in the UK and is owned by British company Stagecoach, they also own the Coach USA and Coach Canada brands. Megabus is bad enough in the UK, but in the US you have to pay to reserve seats and have big child like orange numbers on the seats, furthermore the UK is a lot smaller and I don't even like travelling by bus in the UK or Europe, never mind for days on end in the US. In terms of National Express it is better than most National Express and Eurolines are much better than most Coach/Bus companies, however it's still not a patch on getting the train in countries with a half decent train service.
No I didn't I said it was two to three times faster using high speed rail, something Thailand is planning.
Ahhh so we agree that your general statement about trains being 2-3 faster than buses wasn't true, it actually came with the massive caveat of "somtimes" that you forgot to type.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brave New World
N
I also couldn't care less about the seats on a bus, it's still a bus and the train in most countries is still a lot better.
For same price I'd wager most countries one can take a luxury bus with bigger more comfortable seats that recline farther.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brave New World
The vast majority of people in the US use cheap buses such as the Greyhound or Megabus, and not some swanky coach. Indeed if trhey had the money they would be flying and not taking the bus.
I thought were talking about which had better options for a given route, not what people can afford. All I'm saying is all these absolute statements you're making about trains having better seating and being faster are false, because it depends on the route and what's available.
If you want to eliminate luxury coach buses as an options because the majority of passengers don't use them, you might as well eliminate passenger rail service in the US as well. Either way when did this disagreement become just about USA?
Ahhh so we agree that your general statement about trains being 2-3 faster than buses wasn't true, it actually came with the massive caveat of "somtimes" that you forgot to type.
For same price I'd wager most countries one can take a luxury bus with bigger more comfortable seats that recline farther.
I thought were talking about which had better options for a given route, not what people can afford. All I'm saying is all these absolute statements you're making about trains having better seating and being faster are false, because it depends on the route and what's available.
If you want to eliminate luxury coach buses as an options because the majority of passengers don't use them, you might as well eliminate passenger rail service in the US as well. Either way when did this disagreement become just about USA?
Status:
"“If a thing loves, it is infinite.”"
(set 4 days ago)
Location: Great Britain
27,187 posts, read 13,477,157 times
Reputation: 19518
Quote:
Originally Posted by lieqiang
Ahhh so we agree that your general statement about trains being 2-3 faster than buses wasn't true, it actually came with the massive caveat of "somtimes" that you forgot to type.
Unless you have a third world type train system then trains far out preform buses.
Then again buses come at the bottom of my ways to travel, I would much rather take the train, ferry or plane than any bus. The ferry is actually slower but has lots of amenities and you can book a very nice over night cabin.
For same price I'd wager most countries one can take a luxury bus with bigger more comfortable seats that recline farther.
I thought were talking about which had better options for a given route, not what people can afford. All I'm saying is all these absolute statements you're making about trains having better seating and being faster are false, because it depends on the route and what's available.
If you want to eliminate luxury coach buses as an options because the majority of passengers don't use them, you might as well eliminate passenger rail service in the US as well. Either way when did this disagreement become just about USA?
I really don't know what planet you live on but buses in the US are generally not a great experience, and generally consist of some dodgy bus station with people sleeping all over the place and trying to beg people to pay for tickets. Buses are often delayed and overbooked, and the main bus operators are not some luxury service, indeed the biggest oerators are Greyhound and Megabus, wth some other regional opertaors such as Peter Pan.
Lets face it posting some pics of some Japanese buses such as the Willer Express services, does not mean these buses are the norm in the US and in Japan they have a train service that is among the best in the world. The other company you posted LimoLiner does offer a service between NYC and Boston on it's three buses with prices starting at $99, and I think the other pictue is Vamoose Gold as it has a large 'V' on the seat. These services kind of defeat the object of the bus in most countries, however the US rail system seems to be quite poor.
In reality the main attraction of the bus in the US is that it's cheap, very cheap, and it runs on a tight profit margin, the US Greyhound Lines was bought by Britain's FirstGroup some years ago and Megabus is also owned by a British Company called Stagecoach.
Status:
"“If a thing loves, it is infinite.”"
(set 4 days ago)
Location: Great Britain
27,187 posts, read 13,477,157 times
Reputation: 19518
Quote:
Originally Posted by MinivanDriver
Walk five feet off the beaches and Florida suddenly becomes one of the ugliest states in the country.
Las Vegas is a soulless, cheap hellhole founded by gangsters to attract mouth-breathing knuckledraggers in search of their cut-rate Roman orgy. Nobody with an IQ higher than a rhesus monkey should visit Las Vegas more than once voluntarily.
New Orleans is little more than a few sleazy blocks on Bourbon Street broken up by some decent restaurants. Outside of that, it's one of the most dysfunctional places in America. It's essentially Jersey City with a little bit of panache to it.
Portland, Oregon, tries just a little too hard to be weird. It's less eccentric and more enamored with the idea of being eccentric. When you have to coin a slogan that says, "Keep Portland Weird," you know the weirdness just isn't all that authentic. Plus it's just kind of nasty around the riverfront.
Southern California beaches are pretty mediocre. And LA is just godawful.
Good Post and time to move this thread on away from people arguing that the bus is the best way to travel.
Good Post and time to move this thread on away from people arguing that the bus is the best way to travel.
Agreed and I've heard enough about train versus bus travel.
By the way, my IQ is (slightly) higher than a rhesus monkey and I've been to Las Vegas 15 times, but I wholeheartedly agree that it is soulless and attracts a lot of idiots/idiocy.
The idea that Florida is beautiful is in my view perpetuated by the hordes of people in the NY/NJ area who have never been west of the Poconos and have no idea how beautiful the western third of our great country is. Florida is so flat that an ant hill would qualify as a mountain there. Yes, it has some pretty great beaches when your comparison is the Jersey Shore or Long Island, but every time I hear someone in the northeast referring to Florida as a "paradise" I see someone standing in front of me who's never been anywhere that is truly gorgeous. For my money California, Oregon, Washington, Arizona, and New Mexico are all light years ahead of Florida, and those are just the western states that I've recently visited. I don't even think that Florida is the prettiest state on the east coast, as I much prefer Maine. But to each his own.
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.
