Long.distance trips faster than driving

[MARC Rider]

Sure, Amtrak is faster than driving between New York and Washington, and even the 10 hour run on the Vermonter between Baltimore and White River Junction is faster than driving. (I know, I've done both.) But I've just figured that there are more routes where this is true.

I had to calculate travel comp time from my recent work trip to Savannah. My boss is letting me use driving times as a benchmark for my non standard travel mode because the airline connections available on our corporate discount are so roundabout that you might as well drive.

On Saturday, my door to door time from Savannah to Baltimore on the Palmetto was 14:30. That included gassing up my rental car, driving to the airport to return the car, taxi transfer to Amtrak station, waiting around about 50 minutes before the train left, waiting on a freight train, numerous stops, including 2 smoke stops and a 55 minute layover in Washington, and some slowing just before we switched tracks in various places. Also, the run between Richmond and Washington was at very slow speed. Of a 350 to 400 mile stretch between somewhere in South Carolina and just south of Richmond, my GPS calculated an average speed of 62 mph (100 km/hr for the metric minded.)

According to Google Maps, the same door to door trip as a drive is estimated as being 10 hours. But my experience is that my personal drive time, including restroom and fueling stops, but not meal breaks, is about 1.4 times that given by google maps. Which means 14 hours. I don't know how Google maps figures drive times. Its not like I drive slowly or anything.

So it seems to me that the first steps to competitive rail travel times nationwide is not super expensive 200 mph HSR, but fixing rail corridors so that trains can travel 79 mph more of the time. Also rail corridors need to be realigned so that mileages between city pairs is the same as road mileage. Obviously, that's going to cost a lot.

 

[PaulM]

From Quincy, IL to Chicago Loop according to Google:

via Amtrak 4 hr 23 min (258 miles) typical price $28

via highway 4 h 33 min without traffic (312 miles)

Best air time (to O'hare) 3 hr 3 min. Also best price at $272.

 

[niemi24s]

Also rail corridors need to be realigned so that mileages between city pairs is the same as road mileage.

Considering the grade limitation of steel wheels on steel rails, in many places that may be impossible.

 

[CSXfoamer1997]

I figured Amtrak is faster than driving. And definitely will be if we ever have High Speed Rail in our country, whether for regional or long-distance service.

And I have to admit, the coach seats are comfortable. From what I hear, you can barely move your legs when sitting behind someone on a plane.

 

[capltd29]

I raced the southwest chief once from Flagstaff to Chicago, however I was driving a 16' penske truck and towing my MINI Cooper S behind it. My boyfriend and I were in the truck and my mom was on the Chief leaving flagstaff to help us move into our new apartment in Chicago.

She beat us by about a day. We also stopped at IKEA, and didnt go more than 65, usually closer to 58-60mph. Our route followed the SWC for most of the way until eastern KS. I planned the route intentionally, because I wanted to take a more scenic route than just taking I-40 all the way into OK/TX. I also didn't want to be passed for two days on the interstate like we were standing still in the rental truck. Anyways, we were neck and neck until Lamar, CO where we stopped to stay the first night.

Not exactly the answer to your question, but I think it depends on who is driving. If I'm driving on all interstates in a car and I decide that I don't need to stop then maybe I could beat the train... especially over very long distances... but most people need to stop at least for a little while.

 

[StriderGDM]

It can depend. I'm actually facing a similar question in a few weeks.

I need to be in Alabama (basically on the state line with Georgia).

If I drive, it's 15 hours or so.

If I take the train... closer to 20.

But, if I drive, I may leave the night before and sleep a bit at a rest stop, so now driving is closer to 20.

And I can't work during driving.

But anyway, for me, if it's a day trip only, generally the train is slower. But if it's a trip where it's long enough I'm going to nap/sleep, I figure that time into my travel plans also and count that time.

 

[Lonestar648]

Considering the hassles of getting into and out of most airports, the cattle car attitude of the airlines, and the energy consumed, I had no problem convincing my management to allow me to travel by Amtrak. I was more productive, better attitude upon arrival, many times saved meal and hotel cost and sometimes a day of rental car, so even if the airfare was cheaper they looked at the big picture: I maintained the highest level of customer satisfaction while staying within annual budget guidelines. My customers ranged from Chicago, to Maine, all along the east coast states, all along the gulf states, up either side of I-35 to Canada and back to Chicago. Then I consulted frequently for other PM's in all 50 states and Canada. Though it was impossible to either drive or go by rail all the time, I traveled most of Amtrak's routes as did my team.

 

[lepearso]

I don't have the calculations in front of me, but I recall that it's faster to take the City of New Orleans between Chicago and Memphis than it is to drive.

 

[StriderGDM]

Lonestar, I used to do that when I needed to go to Ann Arbor. I could fly out the night before and pay an extra night for a hotel room. Or, get up super early and fly out and deal with airports.

Or, hop on the LSL in Albany, get a nice relaxing dinner, watch the scenery go by and then sleep until Toledo. Get a cab to the airport rental car location, get my car, drive up to the office and be there before most folks showed up. Either way I got about the same amount of sleep. But it was cheaper for the company and I enjoyed myself more.

 

[PaulM]

I don't have the calculations in front of me, but I recall that it's faster to take the City of New Orleans between Chicago and Memphis than it is to drive.

I was interested enough to check with Google maps because both the old Illinois Central and interstate routes are almost as the crow files.

I57 and I 55: 13 hr 42 minutes

City of NO 20hr 18 minutes

I don't know about you, but I'm not going to drive for 13hr 42 min. So that means a motel along the way, making it no contest in favor of the train.

To be completely accurate the train doesn't follow the "old" IC route the whole way. I'm sure the detour into the Mississippi Delta slows the train down a bit.

 

[PaulM]

I don't have the calculations in front of me, but I recall that it's faster to take the City of New Orleans between Chicago and Memphis than it is to drive.

I was interested enough to check with Google maps because both the old Illinois Central and interstate routes are almost as the crow files.

I57 and I 55: 13 hr 42 minutes

City of NO 20hr 18 minutes

I don't know about you, but I'm not going to drive for 13hr 42 min. So that means a motel along the way, making it no contest in favor of the train.

To be completely accurate the train doesn't follow the "old" IC route the whole way. I'm sure the detour into the Mississippi Delta slows the train down a bit.

 

[chakk]

Pretty much any road trip that requires an overnight sleep stop -- or two, or three -- will be faster by train than car. Don't look for train track routes to be aligned with highways until locomotives can routinely handle trains on 4 and 5% grades. And so roads -- like I-70 in Summit County, Colorado -- have 7% grades.

Greyhound can travel from Denver to Glenwood Springs in 3 hours. Twice as long on Amtrack.

 

[MnMotherMary]

I drove my daughter out to Seattle when she moved there. It took us 3 full days of driving to get there.

I took the train home. Left at 5pm on day 1 and arrived at 8am on day 3. Much better. I told my husband I would never drive through Montana again. Flat and endless. We were able to take the train out to visit numerous times.

 

[SanDiegan]

My rule of thumb is "Faster than driving, slower than flying."

 

[neroden]

When it's on time, the Lake Shore Limited is consistently much faster than driving from upstate NY to Chicago. The Boston-Albany section is much slower, unfortunately. And NYC-west suffers from the fact that there's a more direct driving route.

 

[saxman]

Seems like, in general, the farther the distance, the faster the train is. But with the caveat of driving through big cities. The farther you drive will require meal, fuel, and rest breaks. Houston to New Orleans is a 5 hour drive, but takes 9 hours on the train. Houston to Los Angeles can be driven if you have 2 drivers and don't stop for the night. Otherwise the train will beat you. I guess chalk one up for the long distance train!