4 ms·
I think the on-time-ness might depend on the route. I've done the NYC<->Boston trip a lot and it's on time within a couple minutes about 75-80% of the time and
by joemi 3y ago
I think the on-time-ness might depend on the route. I've done the NYC<->Boston trip a lot and it's on time within a couple minutes about 75-80% of the time and on time within 10-20 minutes most of the rest of the time. I've done NYC<->DC fewer times but had roughly the same experience on that stretch.
- inferiorhuman 3y agoI've done the NYC-Boston trip once. The Boston end was underwhelming to put it politely. Back Bay station was just nasty. Even the Wikipedia pictures comment on the haze and air pollution at the platforms. Getting a Charlie card took a few tries across a few stations. Acela? Acela was fine but it's both expensive (presumably because of the demand) and a lot slower than it ought to be. That entire stretch of Metro North(?) tracks through Connecticut? There's no good reason the track is in such poor shape and no good reason to limit Acela to a snail's pace. OTOH Acela still seems to be pretty popular, so perhaps Amtrak can afford to let it rot for a bit. Hopefully not for too long.
- ghaff 3y agoThe alternative to Acela is flying so that’s how the pricing is set. Or take the Regional which is what I usually do with my own money. Or drive and driving into Manhattan is awful b