Click on a label to read posts from that part of the world.
Why you should never travel on Acela Express
Last week I took Amtrak's high-speed train service, Acela Express, from New Haven to New York. My options were to take Metro-North, a commuter train which takes a little under two hours to get to New Haven, at a cost of $14.The Acela train saved me about 15 minutes, but guess what, cost $60 more. Totally not worth it. First, the seats were not very big at all. You see, on most commuter trains, unless you're traveling at peak hours, you'll get the whole aisle to yourself. But Amtrak has airplane-style seats, uck right?
The Amtrak trains are also usually packed, since they do not run as often, so I had to deal with that. Plus, even though I was in a silent car, the carriage made a sqeaking sound whenever the train turned (I would advise you to sit in the middle of the car because of this).
I guess I'm not being quite fair, since the New Haven to New York stretch of the rail is the slowest in the Northeast Corridor. But I still advise you to save your money, and just book yourself on regular Amtrak. The seats are essentially the same size and you'll save at least 50%. And so what if you'll get there 15 minutes later, take the time to read a newspaper.
Filed under: Transportation
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Matt Kleiderman Feb 18th 2008 12:46PM
New Haven to New York isn't a very fair comparison. You probably also shouldn't fly that route. But if you're going Boston to New York, then you're more in the Acela sweet spot. 3 hours for Acela and $95 vs. 4.5 hours and $55 for Greyhound (or $20 and Chinatown bus). For the extra $40 you get the shorter ride, a more comfortable sea, and better on-time performance.
Nick Feb 18th 2008 12:54PM
Maybe Mr. Guo should cease travel to the Northeast, as the vast majority of his posts on this area are completely negative. And please spare the hyperbole of the post title - ever ride the Acela to Washington? How about Acela to BWI for business travel to suburban Maryland, to take advantage of airport amenities like car rental, without spending the time and coin to fly there?
The realities of living in a massively populated, almost completely built-out megalopolis like the NYC area seem to pass Mr. Guo by. The trains can't go faster because of ROW restrictions and other rail traffic. They can't be straightened because who's going to give up their property for the new rail? So it becomes what it is: Acela is for those that can afford it and want those seats. Regular Amtrak is for people who don't want to stop every 100 yards like MNR.
If Mr. Guo wants to complain abut having spent $60 for a 15 minute advantage that's clearly spelled out in the timetable, that's his perrogative. I figure that most Gadling readers are smart enough not to make that mistake in the first place.
Austin Hill Nov 19th 2008 11:12AM
I'd have to completely disagree about the Acela trains. When I had to travel between DC & New Haven, I'd regularly take the Acela trains because they were cheaper than flying, way more comfortable, and a joy to ride on. Yes, the regular trains are good too, but I think you're way off mark.
Brian Bagel Nov 19th 2008 1:59PM
Oh please, Acela is a joke. I would avoid Acela simply for the annoyingly loud "ding" sound when you approach a station. The difference in time between NY and DC was about a half hour compared to the standard Amtrak. Great post, thank you.
And don't give me that "it says in the timetable" stuff. The point of this is to give you a review of how the service worked. It could have been possible that somehow the extra $60 was a good investment. But this post informs me otherwise. It does a service and doesn't need scrutiny like that.
Pay the same coin and get business class on regular Amtrak. Far more comfortable and not nearly as annoying.
salome ada Nov 24th 2008 12:49AM
Thanks, friend i have no knowledge about the Amtrak's train & Acela Express and also get the information or you can say the comparison between them with the help of your :- Amtrak's high-speed train service, Acela Express, from New Haven to New York. My options were to take Metro-North, a commuter train which takes a little under two hours to get to New Haven, at a cost of $14.
The Acela train saved me about 15 minutes, but guess what, cost $60 more. Totally not worth it. First, the seats were not very big at all. You see, on most commuter trains, unless you're traveling at peak hours, you'll get the whole aisle to yourself. But Amtrak has airplane-style seats, uck right?
i have also visa or transportation related website so you can check it & find more information about that:-http://www.abhinav.com/aus_live_workvisas.htm
Tom Nov 25th 2008 1:45PM
I took the Acela from Washington to Boston on the 21st. I was very impressed with how quickly it got me from Washington to New York, about 2 1/2 hours. However, as soon as we left New York, it was slow, stop and start, speed up and slow down, and crawl past oceanfront towns and across grade crossings, a poor excuse for high-speed rail. We need to see more rail service like that from Washington to New York...
Jake Dec 1st 2008 3:01PM
FYI Tom there are no grade crossings on the Northeast Corridor.
Nils in Amsterdam Dec 10th 2008 9:50AM
-With the population of the East coast of the US and the amount of people that travel between Boston-NYC-Washington DC and the realatively short distances involved, fast train services should be just the thing.
-I was pleasantly surprised to find that there are actually some sort of speed train service like this. I thought there was none whatsoever!
-To compete with air travel, speed is of course essential, and the ticket price. With air travel finally having to pay the price for polluting the atmosphere competition between air and train are made more equal. Road traffic needs to be given this cost too.
-The investment of building, even upgrading, tracks, etc. for trains is of course huge and needs a very long perspective timewise. Building through densly populated areas, where trains can be economically viable, requires the participation and commitment of political bodies, from federal down to county and city levels. Expropriation would be necessary, but politically tough, for a true high speed link. I think it would be possible, though; if the federal interstate highways were possible to build, this project should be politically possible too.
-A similar project should work in California (like LA-SF).
-These projects should even be in the interest of the airline companies as they would free capacity at congested airports that are politically impossible (or at least hard) to expand further.
Fritz Mar 8th 2009 5:16PM
The problem with Acela is its marginal advantage over the Northeast Corridor line. You paying $60 from New Haven to NYC is silly, of course when you have other decent options. Just like paying twice as much for Acela service over NEC is silly when the price of the latter is half and the time difference is under an hour. However I will be getting from NYC to Wilmington for $52 without much hassle. I could take a Chinatown bus to Wilmington for $30 or so or a Chinatown bus to Philly and then SEPTA to WIlmington for about $20 but with three suitcases the train is much simpler. Our biggest problem is that we did high speed rail on the cheap. We don't truly have high speed and didn't even eliminate some grade crossings between New Haven and Boston. We need real high speed rail that can sustain an average speed of at least 125mph. From Paris to Marseille on the TGV is a little over 3 hours for a greater distance than from DC to Boston. That's what we need and then people will really start taking the train.
Douglas Gray Sep 4th 2009 3:09PM
The longer the trip, the more time you save on ACELA. Why does he go from "the trip from NY to New Haven is not worth the extra money" to "Why you should never use ACELA?"
DC to NYC in 2 1/2 hours is pretty good.