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've been on buses that were far more comfortable than the comparable train option for a long journey. They have only three chairs across, entertainment systems on the seat backs, and recline to a far greater degree for sleeping. No dining car but I'm not really that interested in that anyway, especially for an overnight journey.
You can do better with a sleeper train, but then you're talking an entirely different price level that is sometimes as much as a flight.
Status:
"“If a thing loves, it is infinite.”"
(set 3 days ago)
Location: Great Britain
27,185 posts, read 13,469,799 times
Reputation: 19508
Quote:
Originally Posted by lieqiang
I've been on buses that were far more comfortable than the comparable train option for a long journey. They have only three chairs across, entertainment systems on the seat backs, and recline to a far greater degree for sleeping. No dining car but I'm not really that interested in that anyway, especially for an overnight journey.
You can do better with a sleeper train, but then you're talking an entirely different price level that is sometimes as much as a flight.
Trains are a lot faster than any bus/coach, indeed they are generally two or three times as fast in Europe and Asia, they have buffet cars and shops where you can buy a sandwich, a coffee or even beer and wine, and you can strech your lefs walk along the train and there are numerous toilets.
In many European countries the food served on trains is very good, and the seats are very comfortable, and you can have a table seat.
I don't think many Europeans or indeed those in Asia would agree that buses are better than trains and I have never heard the Japanses tak about their bullet bus or the French about the new TGV bus.
Obviously for longer journeys the plane is the better option, although there are some very good sleeper train services and ferry services also have good overnight accomodation with very reasonable prices.
I would rank bus/coach okay over a short distance, but for longer journeys sitting on a coach for a vast amount of time is not that pleasant and the US has some good train services such as the Acela Express which is probably the most European type service and is high speed, it runs from Washington DC via NYC up to Boston.
There may be other parts of the US where the train services aren't as good, however in most western countries the train is seen as the better option when compared to bus/coach travel.
Most trains are 13 hours, most buses are under 11 hours.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brave New World
I don't think many Europeans or indeed those in Asia would agree that buses are better than trains and I have never heard the Japanses tak about their bullet bus or the French about the new TGV bus.
Have you ever polled anyone or just assuming? To me a 3 across luxury bus beats any train that isn't a sleep car. You have more space, can recline farther, and for a night journey I'm eating right before it starts then sleeping so couldn't care less about a dining car.
The best is the train sleeper car, but otherwise given comparable times it's the bus.
Most trains are 13 hours, most buses are under 11 hours.
Any country with a decent rail system has trains that are far faster than any bus, and a lot of Europe and Asia has a high speed rail system.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lieqiang
Have you ever polled anyone or just assuming? To me a 3 across luxury bus beats any train that isn't a sleep car. You have more space, can recline farther, and for a night journey I'm eating right before it starts then sleeping so couldn't care less about a dining car.
The best is the train sleeper car, but otherwise given comparable times it's the bus.
We had a sleeper bus run by Stagecoach Megabus between Scotland and London but the service was axed due to competition by low cost airlines, sleeper trains and regular train services.
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Independent
On the very last day of operation, 21 May 2017, a one-way berth from Edinburgh to London currently costs £29.50 on Megabus. The lowest overnight rail fare on the Caledonian Sleeper is more than three times as much, at £90. But Ryanair is selling seats that evening from the Scottish capital to Stansted airport for £19.
Most train routes are so fast you don't need to sleep and even on those routed that do have sleepers you can choose a cheaper couchette rather than a cabin.
A train from London to the South of France costs £49 ($65 USD) and takes 6 hours 27 minutes and comes with, a complimentary breakfast and lunch will be served at your seat, and there is also a Café Métropole and onboard bar buffet. Eurostar trains also often have spacious reclining seats and fold-down tables.
Unfortunately, there’s no such thing as bullet trains in the US. The Acela trains in the Northeast are the closest, but they aren’t that much faster than the regular Amtrak service, and the cost difference can be a bit much. True high-speed train service is nonexistent there.
Another problem with train service in the US is that it’s notoriously unreliable. It’s not so much a problem in the Northeast, but elsewhere in the country, it’s trick or treat. Trains can run as much as several hours late, especially with east-west routes. In much of the US, freight trains and Amtrak trains share routes, and the former usually get priority. Buses tend to be more timely — in the US, they aren’t as pleasant, but they’re far more reliable. Train travel is usually a fair bit more comfortable. Amtrak also can be expensive, sometimes not a lot cheaper than flying, while bus travel is usually much cheaper.
Don’t have enough experience traveling in other countries to say definitively.
Any country with a decent rail system has trains that are far faster than any bus, and a lot of Europe and Asia has a high speed rail system.
Right, but this is different than when you were saying trains are 2-3x faster than buses. Clearly it depends. Vietnam, India, Thailand, etc. those countries alone make 1.5 billion people (double the population of Europe) who's trains aren't necessarily faster than buses.
I'm not anti-train here, I've ridden on trains in USA, UK, France, Germany, Netherlands, Belgium, Romania, Hungary, Japan, China, Thailand, Vietnam, etc. and love train travel. I'm just saying all the blanket statements you're making about the glory of trains over buses depend on the situation with buses and trains in the country you're in. There are buses that offer more spacious seating than comparably priced trains.
Bottom line = train is not always better choice than a bus
I would rank bus/coach okay over a short distance, but for longer journeys sitting on a coach for a vast amount of time is not that pleasant and the US has some good train services such as the Acela Express which is probably the most European type service and is high speed, it runs from Washington DC via NYC up to Boston.
Unfortunately, the Acela can cost nearly twice as much as airfare, and take much longer. Washington to Boston is 1.5 hrs by plane, and 6.5 hrs by Acela Express. The only reason I can see for taking the train is if I had a severe fear of flying.
Status:
"“If a thing loves, it is infinite.”"
(set 3 days ago)
Location: Great Britain
27,185 posts, read 13,469,799 times
Reputation: 19508
Quote:
Originally Posted by lieqiang
Right, but this is different than when you were saying trains are 2-3x faster than buses. Clearly it depends. Vietnam, India, Thailand, etc. those countries alone make 1.5 billion people (double the population of Europe) who's trains aren't necessarily faster than buses.
I'm not anti-train here, I've ridden on trains in USA, UK, France, Germany, Netherlands, Belgium, Romania, Hungary, Japan, China, Thailand, Vietnam, etc. and love train travel. I'm just saying all the blanket statements you're making about the glory of trains over buses depend on the situation with buses and trains in the country you're in. There are buses that offer more spacious seating than comparably priced trains.
Bottom line = train is not always better choice than a bus
India has a fairly decent train network, courtesy of the British and the railways are safer than the roads. The railways have been the lifeblood of India since Victorian times and India is currently constructing it's first high speed line.
As for Thailand in partnership with China as well as private money high speed lines are currently under construction and Thanilands rolling stock and rail system is overall fairly decent.
There are alsp numerous countries in Asia that have high spped train and very good public transport and there continues to be substantial investment in new rail infrastructure and high speed rail in many parts of Asia.
Buses do not offer better seating than trains, and you can even get a shower on a sleeper train, and sleepers are reasonably priced.
Last edited by Brave New World; 10-06-2018 at 11:03 AM..
You think seeing a picture of the Parthenon is the same experience as being there? I sure don't.
My trips these days are around food.
You can't taste the food without actually being there.
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.
