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 was in London last March, right before Covid changed everything, and I couldn't get over the dense crowds all throughout the city, and I'm not just talking about the usual areas around Buckingham palace, Oxford street and Picadilly Circus... London is packed throughout...
I'm a native New Yorker, grew up there. I live in Florida now but I go back to visit friends and family 3 - 4x a year. I flew from JFK to Heathrow last March, and I set it up so that I could stay in New York for the week prior, to visit family and have a little fun...
After a few days in London, I came away with the feeling that London is a much more populated city than New York...which is funny, because a decade ago, it felt the opposite; New York felt significantly more populated...but not anymore.
So I decided to look up the most current population estimates for both cities. I used worldpopulationreview.com and a few other sources to check the numbers, and lo and behold my feeling was right. -- New York has actually lost several hundred thousand people over the past number of years and stands at a 2021 population of 8.23 million. London on the other hand has grown tremendously and currently stands at a population 9.425 million; over 1.2 million more people than New York!... And you can really feel it walking the streets and taking public transportation.
If we're talking about metropolitan areas, New York is still larger...but if you're comparing greater London to the 5 boroughs, London is the much larger city....
Location: That star on your map in the middle of the East Coast, DMV
8,128 posts, read 7,547,924 times
Reputation: 5785
Believe it or not, NYC is actually more spread out than people give it credit for. I agree to an extent when putting Manhattan up against London. Overall I think the separate boroughs/bridges/tunnels give NYC a more broken up feeling than London. Central London is an absolute beast when it comes to vibrancy, and it's seamless. London is extremely impressive on all levels, tourist attractions, transit, neighborhoods etc. etc. I also give London an edge on NYC in shopping/retail. NYC may have more volume due to multiple locations of the same stores, but London was breathtaking from a retail standpoint IMO.
The retail in Heathrow airport alone, would be top tier for an entire American metro area.
Last edited by the resident09; 02-10-2021 at 09:35 AM..
Believe it or not, NYC is actually more spread out than people give it credit for. I think the separate boroughs/bridges/tunnels give it a more broken up feeling than London. Central London is an absolute beast when it comes to vibrancy. London is extremely impressive on all levels, tourist attractions, transit, neighborhoods etc. etc. I also give London an edge on NYC in shopping/retail. NYC may have more volume due to multiple locations of the same stores, but London was breathtaking from a retail standpoint IMO.
Well a lot of people. Especially on this forum. Visit Manhattan once or twice and don't realize NYC is a 5 borough city where SFHs and Neighborhoods are more common. Queens and Staten Island especially, which make up 45% of NYCs land area. Then when they boost it as the best city in the world and talk about just 2/3 of Manhattan.. they look dumb.
It's like visiting any city and not looking at what a city is like. Because you visited the most popular/googled tourist neighborhoods.. people go to Boston and say it's a Brownstone city. Well did you leave like the two neighborhoods that have them? Or when people say Chicago is not dangerous or blighted after visiting the Loop and North on the lake. Smh
I love visiting both cities, but could never live anywhere that dense, like sardines in a can. Plus they're extraordinary expensive to boot. There's a tipping point for me where it gets too big/compact and the quality of life starts suffering. NYC and London fit that category. Their sizes, in and of themselves, don't impress me. The quality of the experience is what gets my attention. That quality goes down for me when it's just people on top of people. But, to each his own. Good post and interesting observation of both cities.
Greater London would imply the metro area. Just like greater New York implies the metro area. So of course the greater London area would be bigger than the city proper of the 5 boros of NYC.
NYC's Metro population isn't just larger, I believe it's twice the size of London's.
Regardless if the city proper of London is bigger geographically, which it is by a substantial margin, it's still nothing like NYC. Two totally different animals. And while London is fun and a great city in its own right, NYC definitely feels like the larger, more densely urban, badass, alpha city.
Believe it or not, NYC is actually more spread out than people give it credit for. I agree to an extent when putting Manhattan up against London. Overall I think the separate boroughs/bridges/tunnels give NYC a more broken up feeling than London. Central London is an absolute beast when it comes to vibrancy, and it's seamless. London is extremely impressive on all levels, tourist attractions, transit, neighborhoods etc. etc. I also give London an edge on NYC in shopping/retail. NYC may have more volume due to multiple locations of the same stores, but London was breathtaking from a retail standpoint IMO.
The retail in Heathrow airport alone, would be top tier for an entire American metro area.
100% agree with your assessment. I'm a New Yorker, and I'll always love that town..but I just feel like London is on another level now. -- The vibrancy, the pedestrian traffic, the urban landscape, the history, the shopping, the rail stations and public transportation. London is amazing. It's amazing to think how far that city has come since the 1980s.
Location: That star on your map in the middle of the East Coast, DMV
8,128 posts, read 7,547,924 times
Reputation: 5785
Quote:
Originally Posted by masssachoicetts
Well a lot of people. Especially on this forum. Visit Manhattan once or twice and don't realize NYC is a 5 borough city where SFHs and Neighborhoods are more common. Queens and Staten Island especially, which make up 45% of NYCs land area. Then when they boost it as the best city in the world and talk about just 2/3 of Manhattan.. they look dumb.
It's like visiting any city and not looking at what a city is like. Because you visited the most popular/googled tourist neighborhoods.. people go to Boston and say it's a Brownstone city. Well did you leave like the two neighborhoods that have them? Or when people say Chicago is not dangerous or blighted after visiting the Loop and North on the lake. Smh
Unfortunately this happens with most major cities, as the stereotypes become accepted as common "knowledge" when it actually is the antithesis of that.
Greater London would imply the metro area. Just like greater New York implies the metro area. So of course the greater London area would be bigger than the city proper of the 5 boros of NYC.
NYC's Metro population isn't just larger, I believe it's twice the size of London's.
Regardless if the city proper of London is bigger geographically, which it is by a substantial margin, it's still nothing like NYC. Two totally different animals. And while London is fun and a great city in its own right, NYC definitely feels like the larger, more densely urban, badass, alpha city.
False. That's a misconception that many Americans have. There's greater London, which would be comparable to the 5 boroughs, and then there's the London "metropolitan area," which has a population estimate that goes as high as 18 million.
New York metro, the tri-state area, or the "MSA," has a population of around 21 million. The US also uses a CSA (combined statistical area) population which pulls into account commuting patterns and so forth. That population is around 23 million.
The UK doesn't use a CSA type measurement, but either way, New Yorks MSA population is not even close to twice the size of Londons. New York stands at 21 million, and London 18 million. If the UK were to employ a CSA type measurement, the numbers for London would increase as well.
I was in London last March, right before Covid changed everything, and I couldn't get over the dense crowds all throughout the city, and I'm not just talking about the usual areas around Buckingham palace, Oxford street and Picadilly Circus... London is packed throughout...
I'm a native New Yorker, grew up there. I live in Florida now but I go back to visit friends and family 3 - 4x a year. I flew from JFK to Heathrow last March, and I set it up so that I could stay in New York for the week prior, to visit family and have a little fun...
After a few days in London, I came away with the feeling that London is a much more populated city than New York...which is funny, because a decade ago, it felt the opposite; New York felt significantly more populated...but not anymore.
So I decided to look up the most current population estimates for both cities. I used worldpopulationreview.com and a few other sources to check the numbers, and lo and behold my feeling was right. -- New York has actually lost several hundred thousand people over the past number of years and stands at a 2021 population of 8.23 million. London on the other hand has grown tremendously and currently stands at a population 9.425 million; over 1.2 million more people than New York!... And you can really feel it walking the streets and taking public transportation.
If we're talking about metropolitan areas, New York is still larger...but if you're comparing greater London to the 5 boroughs, London is the much larger city....
Go London! What an epic town...
Ok, doesn’t change the fact that London is still smaller than NYC, and NYC is more dense. Like just because NYC isn’t just Manhattan doesn’t mean that it isn’t suburban outside of that borough lmao. Why are you using Worldpopulationreview.com? It’s called a census, most countries use them. Regardless, New York City’s density is basically double London’s lol. Though population density ofc isn’t the end all-be all of vibrancy.
Anyways, not to knock on London but saying London is bigger than New York is like saying Indianapolis is equal to San Francisco because their city limit pops are similar.
Also, where are you getting this stat that says London’s MSA has a population of 18 million, Eurostar says 14.5 million or so and that’s from 2019.
Location: That star on your map in the middle of the East Coast, DMV
8,128 posts, read 7,547,924 times
Reputation: 5785
Quote:
Originally Posted by kingsdl76
False. That's a misconception that many Americans have. There's greater London, which would be comparable to the 5 boroughs, and then there's London metropolitan area, which has a population estimate that goes as high as 18 million.
New York metro, the tri-state area or MSA, has a population of around 21 million. The US also uses a CSA (combined statistical area), which pulls into account commuting patterns and so forth. That population is around 23 million.
The UK doesn't us a CSA type measurement, but either way, New Yorks MSA is not even close to twice the size of Londons. New York is at 21 million, and London is at 18 million.
True New York metro size is about 18 million, true London metro size is about 14 million or a bit more the size of LA.
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.
