Amtrak - What am I missing?

[mydisneyobsession]

I have seen many references to Amtrak being less expensive then flying. I have a family of 2 adults and three kids, and I've priced out trips from our home station of Houston to a variety of locations, and most are much more expensive or very close to the same as airfare for the same trip.

What is the secret to making train travel more affordable than plane travel? Any tips from experienced train travelers?

Thanks in advance!

 

[princesspwrhr]

It probably hs to do with location, accomidations and travel destination. We're a family of 5 also (sometimes 6 if we bring a friend) and everytime I price out the train, it ends up the same price one way as round trip airfare. Then for Disney you also have to factor in rental car or towncar service to Disney.

 

[Planogirl]

I've priced it from both Houston and Dallas and it's very expensive and takes forever too. I think that it's a better deal in the east.

 

[happily single]

Its not a better deal in the east. I've priced out several options, including the autrotrain, and even with an aaa discount its always more expensive then flying, plus it takes 2 days or so whereas a direct flight is 4 hours

 

[NotUrsula]

I have seen many references to Amtrak being less expensive then flying. I have a family of 2 adults and three kids, and I've priced out trips from our home station of Houston to a variety of locations, and most are much more expensive or very close to the same as airfare for the same trip.

What is the secret to making train travel more affordable than plane travel? Any tips from experienced train travelers?

To split your question, the secret to making train travel more affordable is to live near a major city on the east coast.

The secret to making it more affordable than advance-purchase airfare for long-distrance travel simply doesn't exist.

AmTrak works best for short regional trips between cities, especially cities on the east coast. Also, for the most part, a last-minute trip by train is going to cost less than a comparable last-minute trip by air, but it still won't normally be *cheap* by any means.

Add in the lost income and additional food costs that come out of adding on travel days, and US train travel is almost never less expensive than traveling by air, provided that you were able to plan the trip at least 30 days in advance.

That said, I love travelling by train, and I use it whereever possible when in Europe or traveling between cities on the East coast. For shorter trips it is sometimes worth it to me to pay more for a train, because it can be more convenient as long as I'm traveling on a dedicated rail corridor.

PS: As an example, I just priced a trip from Alexandria, VA (outside DC) to NYC-Penn Station on April 5th. Amtrak happens to have a special that day, so the fare is $66 (the most expensive fare that week on this route is $135). Airfare on the same route (National to LaGuardia, to minimize ground transportation costs) is no less than $177 that day, and that is before taxes and fees, which are much higher on airfare.

For fun, I also priced Houston to Dallas, tomorrow. On Amtrak that is $63 (but takes nearly 9 hours), while by air, the same trip (from Hobby to Love) is $163 (but takes one hour). However, if I price the same trip for April 27th, the train is still $63, but the plane is $49. See what I mean?

 

[rvchat]

Its not a better deal in the east. I've priced out several options, including the autrotrain, and even with an aaa discount its always more expensive then flying, plus it takes 2 days or so whereas a direct flight is 4 hours

i to agree as it's more $ than flying from northeast. what the heck? So confused as to why train travel in the usa costs more than airfare?

and takes 12x as long! sounds pretty fishy and not to mention the fact that I think it'd also be 'greener' than flying......

 

[scrapquitler]

I have seen many references to Amtrak being less expensive then flying. I have a family of 2 adults and three kids, and I've priced out trips from our home station of Houston to a variety of locations, and most are much more expensive or very close to the same as airfare for the same trip.

What is the secret to making train travel more affordable than plane travel? Any tips from experienced train travelers?

Thanks in advance!

I've checked it out many times and this is all I can say....IF you are going somewhere that has convenient train service from point A to point B AND there is no airline that flies conveniently without multiple connections from point A to point B, then MAYBE you can save money using Amtrak, but it is certainly going to cost you in time.

I wanted to go from CT to Chattanooga TN once about 15 years ago. There was no good way to fly from here to there. Flights ended up being some ridiculously high price with two connections. Amtrack was much less expensive (about 1/3 of the price) BUT I had to train from CT to NY, change trains in NY, take an overnight train to Atlanta (25 hours total), then take a bus from atlanta to chattanooga. Sure I saved about $500 but it took me two extra days on the round trip. But I had to sleep sitting up in a crowded train, eat the crappy food and have no shower.

I would never want to take the train any distance with children. To me, it's just not worthwhile. I'd rather fly and have an extra day at each end of my vacation.

HOWEVER, for short trips (like a day trip to New York City from here in CT), MetroNorth's train is definitely a good priced ($28 round trip peak) and convenient way to travel .

 

[camikey]

I took the autotrain last year and loved it. It was my daughter and I. We did not go to Disney, but rather Sarasota. The autotrain lets you off about a half hour fro0m Disney. Kids go for half price and if you are taking your car it is worth it. You do not have to rent a roomette. For me when I consider parking my car at the airport, renting a car when I'm there it works out better. Yes, it takes longer, but you can pack as much as you like without baggage charges. The autotrain leaves at 4 and arrives by 9:30 AM. We actually arrived at 8:30 going down and 7:30 coming back.

This year we are cruising and going down a couple days early to do two parks and then after heading to Sarasota.

 

[DawnM]

From Charlotte, NC to Orlando, FL $550 R/T for all 5 of us, but it takes 22 hours each way!

And then we would need a vehicle while there, adding another $200 or so for a car rental.

Driving is about $300 R/T in gas, we have our own car, and it takes us about 9 hours each way!

Dawn

 

[NotUrsula]

i to agree as it's more $ than flying from northeast. what the heck? So confused as to why train travel in the usa costs more than airfare?

and takes 12x as long! sounds pretty fishy and not to mention the fact that I think it'd also be 'greener' than flying......

It is "greener" than flying, no question.

The answer as to why it's more expensive is that not enough people take the trains on most routes, so there is no longer any economy of scale. (It was different 70 years ago when most people took trains and very few people flew.)

Unlike roads, train tracks are not paid for the government, so passenger trains have to share tracks with freight to keep costs down, and the freight has the right of way on most corridors, which makes train travel slower and thus even less popular in most parts of the country.

To show you how things have deteriorated, it takes longer now to go from Denver to Chicago by train than it did in 1934.

 

[rvchat]

It is "greener" than flying, no question.

The answer as to why it's more expensive is that not enough people take the trains on most routes, so there is no longer any economy of scale. (It was different 70 years ago when most people took trains and very few people flew.)

Unlike roads, train tracks are not paid for the government, so passenger trains have to share tracks with freight to keep costs down, and the freight has the right of way on most corridors, which makes train travel slower and thus even less popular in most parts of the country.

To show you how things have deteriorated, it takes longer now to go from Denver to Chicago by train than it did in 1934.

Well ofcourse not enough people take the train! At these pRICES!!!!!! Airplanes are not paid by the government either. ?

 

[NotUrsula]

Well ofcourse not enough people take the train! At these pRICES!!!!!! Airplanes are not paid by the government either. ?

But airports are heavily subsidized, and airlines pay exactly zero for the air traffic control system, which is hugely expensive to run.

Yes, I know AmTrak is subsidized; today there would be no passenger service in most of the country if it were not. However, AmTrak has only existed since 1970 -- before the Interstate system was built, passenger rail was completely private and mostly made a profit (although I'll admit that up until the mid-1960's a good chunk of that profit came from contracts to transport the US Mail -- contracts which now go to trucking companies on those government-owned and property-tax-free interstate highways. Railroads have to pay property taxes on their track right of way, an expense trucking companies don't have.)

The fact is that since the late 1950's, state and federal governments in the US have openly favored private motor vehicles and air transit over intercity rail travel. Trains ARE more efficient than either one at moving large numbers of people from point A to point B, but in the days of cheap fossil fuels, no one really cared that much about that. What really destroyed our rail system was a myopic insistence that trains continue to serve small communities after the Interstate system was built; they thought that trains were competing with cars. By the time the passenger rail companies realized that wasn't true, it was too late to save the industry. If the rail industry had realized 60 years ago that their real competitors were airliners, then we wouldn't be nearly so messed up.

IMO, the best reform would be to redesign the system so that trains take over the majority of express inter-city travel on routes of less than 500 miles, mostly eliminating short-hop air flights of less than 90 minutes duration. That would greatly reduce the load on our crowded airlanes and improve on-time air performance, while at the same time elimnating a lot of driving, because a lot of people now drive on trips of less than 6 hours when they would rather take a common carrier.

 

[Minniemouse07]

We are a family of four.

Generally we fly from Philly to MCO...and use DME so no car rental. I have always firmly been in the "I'd rather fly for 3.5hrs than spend 2 days of my vacation in the car."

That all said, we are doing a long (2wk) trip this summer that includes 2 separate nights with the ILs (local to WDW), 1 day at Kennedy Space Center, 1 night at Port Canaveral, 5 nights on the Dream, and 5 nights at WDW.

With all of that we realized we are going to need local transportation and it couldn't be a sedan (we'll have too much crap w/ us for 14 days).

Decision was made to drive.

The trip is 18hrs of driving and we know us...can't drive overnight. Dh is fine but I'm just not a good night driver and it doesn't work for us. That means an overnight hotel stop each way.

When I budgeted out driving (including gas - mid January prices, meals and hotel), it came out to be just under $850.

We then looked at the Auto Train. Coach seats (no upgrades to a family bedroom) for the four of us and our oversized vehicle (minivan) it was $890.

The AT includes dinner, snacks, and a continental breakfast. We would leave PA around the same time on day 1 and arrive in Sanford (just northeast of WDW) at 9:30am on day 2... about 8-10 hours before we would arrive if driving!

That decision didn't take long!

I should also throw into the mix that we priced Southwest and it would have been around $1200 for all four of us to fly...with another $100 or so for off site airport parking for the van.

So lets compare... $850 to drive, $890 to take the Auto Train, and $1200 to fly!

I need to also add that we booked the Auto Train 7mo out... since then the price has gone up another $70 and I understand it will continue to do so as we get closer.

...and a family bedroom was $400 each way at the time we booked, doubling the cost of the trip - which is why we opted out of it. Now the family bedroom is close to $700 EACH way. No way at all we will do it now!

 

[luvmy3]

It must really depend because I found airfare to be 3X (and some airlines were 5X)more than what I'm paying for Amtrak for our Spring Break trip. (We aren't going to WDW). Granted, it will be an entire day of traveling for us, but even with the extra night in the hotel we still save over $1000 by taking the train.

 

[Ava]

NotUrsula, I agree with everything you've said on this thread. Train travel in the US is best for short trips between major cities. Especially if you won't need a car at your destination, the train is a great way to travel.

We take Amtrak several times a year between NYC & Baltimore, where my parents live, and it works really well for us for now. We don't own a car (which I know is a foreign concept to most people in the US but pretty normal in NYC), and to rent one for several days would be a good bit more expensive than the train. Plus with the train we don't have to deal with I-95 traffic. That said, once we have baby #2 we'll probably have to start renting a car. My parents don't have a vehicle big enough for 3-4 adults + 2 carseats so we'd need a rental when we get there anyway, not to mention having to lug 2 carseats on the train.

I hate cars in general, I wish public transportation in the US was better so I'd never need to use a car. I traveled all over Europe by train after college; the train system there is amazing.

 

[SuzanneSLO]

It s also great in coastal California between San Luis Obispo and San Diego, with Anaheim in the middle. Unlike WDW, we never need a car at DL, so that makes the choice even easier. Flights to LAX form our town are around $300 RT or the train is as low as $55 RT.-- Suzanne

 

[KigerKat]

I've been confused by this, as well. I have always wanted the experience of traveling somewhere by train, but there really aren't any savings over flying so I can't see the point in it other than perhaps someone is too afraid to fly.

I just priced out a roundtrip ticket for 1 adult from Atlanta to Washington, DC. = $236. The same dates flying is $239. For another $3, I'll save a ton of travel time. It just doesn't seem worth it.

 

[Chelley00]

I priced Indianapolis to Orlando last October. Even after factoring in gas, food and an overnight hotel stop on the way down, it was $600 more expensive to take the train for 28 hours than driving it in 17 hours. Crazy.

 

[Vijoge]

I love riding the train. I ride because I enjoy it. Not everything people do is done because it's the less expensive or the fastest way. Train travel is always slower than flying and quite often slower than driving. It's frequently more expensive than flying or driving, too. But it's a totally different experience than driving or flying and one a good many people love. It's also not for everyone.

 

[nunzia]

Well.. for us it is cheaper..one way about $65 from Alb to Fullerton..then kids are half price. I guess if you find killer deals you can fly cheaper..I just paid, with all fees, $134 on Southwest for my DH to fly the same distance. Yes, it takes forever, but I find it a much nicer way to get somewhere if you have the time and if the journey is an experience as well as the destination.
I put in October dates from Houston to LA for Southwest at the cheapest fares ...$187 ( getaway rate as opposed to regular rate of $472), for a grand total of $2,023. I then went to AMTRAK and put in the same 2 adults and 3 kids in October and the total was $952 for all..if you are AAA then the rate is $856.