31 ms·
Amtrak from Boston to NYC is a pleasant experience but it is very slow and expensive. Even with getting to and from the airport, the plane is faster. The fastes
by menloparkbum 18y ago
Amtrak from Boston to NYC is a pleasant experience but it is very slow and expensive. Even with getting to and from the airport, the plane is faster. The fastest ground transport between the two cities is the Chinatown bus and it only costs $10.
I'm all for more trains but as someone else pointed out, SF to LA is a weird route. Once you get to LA, what do you do? Rent a car? The other direction makes more sense but I wonder if there are many people who actually go from LA to SF on a regular basis. I actually do, and it only costs $40 on Virgin America and hardly anyone is on the plane.
It would make more sense having high speed rail going from SF->PDX->SEA->VAN... at least once you get to those cities you can get around without a car.
- jrockway 18y agoIt would make more sense having high speed rail going from SF->PDX->SEA->VAN... at least once you get to those cities you can get around without a car. Yes, very good point. Even only connecting Portland / Seattle / Vancouver would be fine. That is a short enough distance for rail to be competitive, and there is definitely demand on that route. (Last time I needed to go from Seattle to Portland, flying was actually cheaper than Amtrak. And the flight was out of Boeing Field, so there was no security to deal with.)