Always looking for my next trip,I tried every day in October and November for the SW Chief and Texas Eagle from LA to Chicago one person senior fare and the lowest fares I could find were $737 for the Chief and $960 for The Texas Eagle. Until recently $899(used to be $600) fares came up for the Eagle and $621 for the Chief. I’ve been riding Amtrak for years,but if this is the new norm my cross country trips will be history. I won’t go Coach.@
Fare Buckets discussion 2023 Q4 - 2024
- Thread starter pennyk
- Start date
Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:
trimetbusfan
OBS Chief
It’s pretty early to be finding low bucket fares for those routes in October and November…
It’$767, not $737 on the Chief. I checked July and August, as well. Seems $767 on the Chief and $960 on the Eagle are the lowest fares now from LA to Chicago. Of course, people will pay it, but as a long time Amtrak rider, personally Amtrak’s fares on a route I have been taking for decades is just too pricey.
I believe its fair to compare First Class Air to Bedroom/Roomette travel. Air fares (not to use a pun) they have also gone off the rails. I don't believe $3800 R/T bucket fares Chicago to Flagstaff are still selling out even in peak season so it appears that Amtrak puts the price out there watches who bites, and then sits back and sees what they can get on the "bid up".
The fares you show reflect the $1 across the board increase for Coach and all Sleepers fares of a month or so ago and will not be shown on the chart until the next substantial fare increase and chart revision.
Because of this all the fares now shown on the chart are $1 less than actual.
Been away a few weeks and have just discovered substantial fare increases on the SWC, TE, SL, CONO and AT. All others are $1 above what's shown on the chart in this thread: https://www.amtraktrains.com/threads/long-distance-train-coach-sleeper-fares-buckets.77062/page-7
While the RailForLess website . . .https://railforless.us/ . . . should ease the task of finding new fares, don't expect an updated bucket chart tomorrow.
While the RailForLess website . . .https://railforless.us/ . . . should ease the task of finding new fares, don't expect an updated bucket chart tomorrow.
Sigh... just tried to use your page, and it returned a white screen, and it's caching the info, so I cannot change the choices and see if it's better.
trimetbusfan
OBS Chief
Yeah the white screen thing affected me too. Only way to rest that was to clear my cache.
trimetbusfan
OBS Chief
Looks like there have also been recent fare bucket price increases on the Silver Star/Meteor and Lakeshore Limited (and possibly other routes as well, but I haven't checked). Might want to update those before you publish the next chart.Been away a few weeks and have just discovered substantial fare increases on the SWC, TE, SL, CONO and AT. All others are $1 above what's shown on the chart in this thread: https://www.amtraktrains.com/threads/long-distance-train-coach-sleeper-fares-buckets.77062/page-7
While the RailForLess website . . .https://railforless.us/ . . . should ease the task of finding new fares, don't expect an updated bucket chart tomorrow.
While checking a booking in June between San Francisco and Newark NJ for Coach senior fare I found that one senior was 231.50 but two seniors was 582. Why??
caravanman
Engineer
It could be a "glitch" in the computer, or maybe only one coach seat on one of the trains was still available in the "lower bucket".
Maybe run the booking test again on a slightly different day to see what that throws up?
Maybe run the booking test again on a slightly different day to see what that throws up?
When I do a search for new fares for a train I usually do about 30 searches on different days at one sitting, then wait until Arrow allows more searches. Prompted by your post, I just completed the search for both Silvers and both Lake Shores and only needed to make estimates for two fares not found.
So there's no glitch - just a simple fare increase. Increases in mid-bucket Roomette fares are 46% for the LSL to BOS, 21% for the LSL to NYP and a paltry 8% for the Silvers. Increases in the accommodation charge for the LSL are 14 & 15 % and 22% for the Silvers.
BTW, the only coach fare I bother with nowadays is the one charged for an additional adult in a Roomette (the one followed by the > symbol on the bucket chart). This "accommodation" fare is usually around middle bucket for a Roomette. Accommodation charges for Bedrooms and Family Rooms are higher.
And just in case nobody's noticed, Crescent fares have also risen.
So there's no glitch - just a simple fare increase. Increases in mid-bucket Roomette fares are 46% for the LSL to BOS, 21% for the LSL to NYP and a paltry 8% for the Silvers. Increases in the accommodation charge for the LSL are 14 & 15 % and 22% for the Silvers.
BTW, the only coach fare I bother with nowadays is the one charged for an additional adult in a Roomette (the one followed by the > symbol on the bucket chart). This "accommodation" fare is usually around middle bucket for a Roomette. Accommodation charges for Bedrooms and Family Rooms are higher.
And just in case nobody's noticed, Crescent fares have also risen.
Last edited:
Yeah, I started to notice it about a month or so ago. I'm done with roomettes and bedrooms on the Crescent. At least until traditional dining returns. Going north, I'll stick with business class on the Carolinian.
An updated bucket chart just got posted here: https://www.amtraktrains.com/threads/long-distance-train-coach-sleeper-fares-buckets.77062/page-7
Some fares only went up $1 but most had hefty increases. Note that CL and SS fares are valid only through about 8 Nov 2024.
Legibility's not the best - just squint harder.
Some fares only went up $1 but most had hefty increases. Note that CL and SS fares are valid only through about 8 Nov 2024.
Legibility's not the best - just squint harder.
Last edited:
One fact I use to determine whether to pull the trigger on a trip or not is the number of rooms available. Since you can reserve up to 8 passengers, I enter 8 with the maximum number of roomettes it will allow, up to 8. I figure if 8 rooms are available out of a limited number, such as 17 on the off season Seattle Builder (13 in the single sleeper, 4 in the transdorm) , or 22 on the New York section of the Lake Shore (11 for sale each of two Viewliners), chances of them reallocating some into lower buckets are pretty good. If very limited, not so much, and I may want to go ahead and purchase.
In evaluating purchasing on my November NYP-EVR trip, I discovered some interesting behavior on how the website handles multiple room requests. On the Lake Shore, it would allow me to book individual rooms up to 5 rooms. On the Builder, however, it limited me to 2 rooms for 2 passengers, but it would allow 4 rooms for 8 passengers, though I couldn't book 4 rooms for 4 passengers. It would not let me increase the room count above 2 for 4 passengers. This interested me and I wanted to find the pattern this represented, since different behavior simply by train seem quite unlikely.
I discovered the following through a series of reservations requests on multiple days, confirming what I thought I saw for my initial request:
1. The website will not allow increases to the room count if the room count would require using inventory in a higher bucket.
2. When the number of rooms requested at double occupancy crosses a bucket jump, all rooms will at the higher bucket price.
The EB had low bucket of 619 for one passenger. I could book two passengers into two rooms, both at 619. but not three passengers into three roomettes. I could book 6 or 8 passengers into 4 roomettes, but at a cost of $1021 per room, which works out to the next bucket up, 684 (1021-337 single rail fare = 684). I concluded that there were 2 roomettes in the 619 bucket, and 2 in the 684 bucket.
The LSL had at least 5 rooms available, all at what I now know to be the $698 mid bucket. I could book 5 passengers into 5 roomettes without a problem.
I confirmed this behavior on several other departures on several other dates. It is consistent.
The good news is you can find some bucket jumps on a given departure. The bad news is since you are limited to 8 passengers on the website, so you cannot check if there up to 8 rooms available if there is a bucket jump in there.
I use room availability as part of deciding if it is time to pull the trigger for purchase or to wait. It is also useful in that, if you find a bucket jump and have a party size that requires multiple rooms, finding where the bucket jump is would let you split the reservation into two and get some of the rooms at the lower bucket rather than all of them at the higher bucket.
I did this as price and availability research, never intending to book multiple passenger reservations. I am sure if you wanted to book a party of multiple passengers into individual rooms across a bucket jump an agent could do it even if the website doesn't allow it. I'd think everything would go to the higher bucket, though.
I know there is a pretty large contingent that advocates just booking when you decide on a trip, whatever the current open bucket, then monitoring and requesting a refund if a bucket drop is discovered. I don't do this, the main reason is, since Amtrak is increasingly following airline style practices, that policy could well disappear unannounced. I'd hate to find a bucket drop on a booked reservation, request a modification to the lower price, only to find that they don't do that any more. Other reasons for my not doing it is I don't want to front the money/points, not inconsiderable at current sleeper fares, and then hope for a partial refund sometime in the future. Plus, not all Amtrak agents are created equal, not all agents know how to modify a reservation without potentially creating an artificial bucket jump by just requesting another room out of inventory and thereby holding two. I am also picky about roomette location and if I have one I like, I don't trust all agents to be able to hold that steady through a modification.
Website behavior changes as Amtrak IT tries to "improve" it, so I don't know how long this pattern will hold, but it's what it's doing now.
In evaluating purchasing on my November NYP-EVR trip, I discovered some interesting behavior on how the website handles multiple room requests. On the Lake Shore, it would allow me to book individual rooms up to 5 rooms. On the Builder, however, it limited me to 2 rooms for 2 passengers, but it would allow 4 rooms for 8 passengers, though I couldn't book 4 rooms for 4 passengers. It would not let me increase the room count above 2 for 4 passengers. This interested me and I wanted to find the pattern this represented, since different behavior simply by train seem quite unlikely.
I discovered the following through a series of reservations requests on multiple days, confirming what I thought I saw for my initial request:
1. The website will not allow increases to the room count if the room count would require using inventory in a higher bucket.
2. When the number of rooms requested at double occupancy crosses a bucket jump, all rooms will at the higher bucket price.
The EB had low bucket of 619 for one passenger. I could book two passengers into two rooms, both at 619. but not three passengers into three roomettes. I could book 6 or 8 passengers into 4 roomettes, but at a cost of $1021 per room, which works out to the next bucket up, 684 (1021-337 single rail fare = 684). I concluded that there were 2 roomettes in the 619 bucket, and 2 in the 684 bucket.
The LSL had at least 5 rooms available, all at what I now know to be the $698 mid bucket. I could book 5 passengers into 5 roomettes without a problem.
I confirmed this behavior on several other departures on several other dates. It is consistent.
The good news is you can find some bucket jumps on a given departure. The bad news is since you are limited to 8 passengers on the website, so you cannot check if there up to 8 rooms available if there is a bucket jump in there.
I use room availability as part of deciding if it is time to pull the trigger for purchase or to wait. It is also useful in that, if you find a bucket jump and have a party size that requires multiple rooms, finding where the bucket jump is would let you split the reservation into two and get some of the rooms at the lower bucket rather than all of them at the higher bucket.
I did this as price and availability research, never intending to book multiple passenger reservations. I am sure if you wanted to book a party of multiple passengers into individual rooms across a bucket jump an agent could do it even if the website doesn't allow it. I'd think everything would go to the higher bucket, though.
I know there is a pretty large contingent that advocates just booking when you decide on a trip, whatever the current open bucket, then monitoring and requesting a refund if a bucket drop is discovered. I don't do this, the main reason is, since Amtrak is increasingly following airline style practices, that policy could well disappear unannounced. I'd hate to find a bucket drop on a booked reservation, request a modification to the lower price, only to find that they don't do that any more. Other reasons for my not doing it is I don't want to front the money/points, not inconsiderable at current sleeper fares, and then hope for a partial refund sometime in the future. Plus, not all Amtrak agents are created equal, not all agents know how to modify a reservation without potentially creating an artificial bucket jump by just requesting another room out of inventory and thereby holding two. I am also picky about roomette location and if I have one I like, I don't trust all agents to be able to hold that steady through a modification.
Website behavior changes as Amtrak IT tries to "improve" it, so I don't know how long this pattern will hold, but it's what it's doing now.
trimetbusfan
OBS Chief
Btw, doing a railforless search tells you exactly how many rooms are at the current bucket (even if the number is higher than 8).
I see the number at current bucket, but not the total. For example, 11/17 correctly shows the 2 left at $619, but does not show the other 2 that are there at $684.
It also won't show departures that actually have available rooms for a larger party when some of which are in a higher bucket. Again, 7(11/17) actually has at least 4 roomettes open, but railsforless skips the date if you have more than 4 passengers (2 roomettes)
I'll try to find departures that have a lot of open rooms and check it out, though. Absolute number of rooms in a bucket without the 8 passenger limit would be very useful.
This is not to be critical of railsforless.us. They've done a fantastic job solving a VERY difficult problem, but it still has limitations.
And, yes, I found one 7(12/19) has 11(!) open roomettes at 860, which is a middle bucket (4th of 8). Also 7(12/28) has 11 open at 1227, which is high/middle (6th of 8). If I were planning those dates, I'd definitely defer purchase.
I ran it for the latest month inventory is open for the Builder (3/13-4/12) and it appears, at least as far as the Builder is concerned, Amtrak is not as super aggressive at initial allocation than they were for awhile, they opened inventory in other than the top couple buckets. With that said, they've added a couple of buckets as well as generally boosting the buckets, so that could be considered just appearances. Up through 3/25, all departures have 5 roomettes at $980 (5th of 8), from 3/26 on, they all have 3 roomettes at $1227 (6th of 8). Just for fun, I ran 3/27 on Amtrak.com and with more than 3 passengers, it jumps to $1308 (7th of 8), but there are 8 available rooms. I can't discern what the bucket jump would be for 3/25 or before, because there are 5 rooms available at current bucket, so 8 people can fit, so I can't force a bucket jump.
The graph is pretty useful, when it gets choppy, that sort of indicates Amtrak has started paying closer attention to those dates.
trimetbusfan
OBS Chief
Here is another example. A coast starlight for next March has 35 roomettes (and 10 bedrooms) at the high bucket. It would be almost certain that this price will drop.
Also, with this information, one can also tell that the consist will likely run with 2 sleepers + a transdorm.
Here's a clearer version of the latest bucket chart:
What puzzles me is the 6 Roomette fares found for the CONO. Other trains have either 5 or 8 sleeper buckets. Maybe it's an error on my part or Arrow or maybe it really does have 6 sleeper buckets.
Would like to know if anyone else has seen that $372 low bucket Roomette for the CONO.
What puzzles me is the 6 Roomette fares found for the CONO. Other trains have either 5 or 8 sleeper buckets. Maybe it's an error on my part or Arrow or maybe it really does have 6 sleeper buckets.
Would like to know if anyone else has seen that $372 low bucket Roomette for the CONO.
The Texas Eagle shows a low bucket at $706 for a roomette if I am reading that correctly. Every date I have punched in, and I did almost every date for the next eleven months shows no lower than $989. Up until a year ago low bucket on the TE was $623, and that fare showed up frequently.
Well, I understand @niemi24s intends the brackets to indicate an inferred price rather ones actually found. Also, the Chief and the Eagle share the same pricing structure and the Chief has more capacity (two sleepers as opposed to one). The Sunset appears to be in the same situation. I ran it recently and there is nothing below middle bucket at all.
I don't dispute your methodology for estimating unknown buckets, but how did you come up with it? Note I am kind of ignorant of statistical methodology.
Thanks.
Over the years I've found that sleeper buckets are in a rough geometric progression, or each higher bucket is some multiple of the previous one. But the ratio between two adjacent buckets is not constant and increases slightly as the values of successive buckets increase.
Using the SWC/TE Roomette fares (above) as an example, the ratio between the top two buckets is 1.140 and between successively lower pairs of buckets the ratio slowly decreases down to the two lowest buckets found is where it's 1.111. Finding the nth root of the ratio of highest to lowest buckets found yields the average ratio of those (in this case) seven buckets. The root in this case is 6 because there are 6 steps between those seven known buckets. The 6th root of 1624 ÷ 796 is 1.126 and 796 ÷ 1.126 = 707.
This same method was used to estimate the 6 buckets not found between and high and low bucket FR on the Auto Train, but here the 7th root of 1199 ÷ 530 was used because there are 7 steps between those two buckets. How did I know those two buckets found were the high and low? By comparison with those on the previous chart.
There a a few other other ways of estimating a missing bucket, and they give slightly different and usually higher values. Perhaps (in this case) 796 ÷ 1.111 = 716 is a better estimate, but it's just an estimate of the SWC/TE low bucket Roomette fare. Until somebody finds the actual low bucket being offered we won't know for sure. But does anyone really need to know for sure? I, for one, am not anal enough to waste time looking for it. And for all we know, it may never be offered - ever!
Years ago, Coach fares rose in an arithmetic progression in which the difference between successive buckets was some fairly constant value. But coach fares now also rise in a geometric progression as seen in those for the Palmetto. Didn't analyze it's BC fares.
Hope this helps.
Using the SWC/TE Roomette fares (above) as an example, the ratio between the top two buckets is 1.140 and between successively lower pairs of buckets the ratio slowly decreases down to the two lowest buckets found is where it's 1.111. Finding the nth root of the ratio of highest to lowest buckets found yields the average ratio of those (in this case) seven buckets. The root in this case is 6 because there are 6 steps between those seven known buckets. The 6th root of 1624 ÷ 796 is 1.126 and 796 ÷ 1.126 = 707.
This same method was used to estimate the 6 buckets not found between and high and low bucket FR on the Auto Train, but here the 7th root of 1199 ÷ 530 was used because there are 7 steps between those two buckets. How did I know those two buckets found were the high and low? By comparison with those on the previous chart.
There a a few other other ways of estimating a missing bucket, and they give slightly different and usually higher values. Perhaps (in this case) 796 ÷ 1.111 = 716 is a better estimate, but it's just an estimate of the SWC/TE low bucket Roomette fare. Until somebody finds the actual low bucket being offered we won't know for sure. But does anyone really need to know for sure? I, for one, am not anal enough to waste time looking for it. And for all we know, it may never be offered - ever!
Years ago, Coach fares rose in an arithmetic progression in which the difference between successive buckets was some fairly constant value. But coach fares now also rise in a geometric progression as seen in those for the Palmetto. Didn't analyze it's BC fares.
Hope this helps.
