Whats worse? 1 hr drive or 1.5 hour train commute

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Capt Caveman

Lifer
Jan 30, 2005
34,543
651
126
Whatever takes longest is worse obviously.
That is time that could be spent doing other things.

???? On the train, you can do things while you can't when driving. Plus, much less stress since you don't have to deal with rush hour traffic.
 

dighn

Lifer
Aug 12, 2001
22,820
4
81
Was the only reason why you didn't like public transportation is because it is too crowded?

there were also the long walks and having to take a bus in addition to the train. and sometimes unreliable bus schedules.

crowding is a big negative to me though. when you can barely find something to hang on to, it's rather uncomfortable.
 

mattpegher

Platinum Member
Jun 18, 2006
2,203
0
71
The problem is usually for a 1 hr drive distance, its not the 1.5 hr bus or train ride but the 15-30 min wait before and the 15 min walk afterward that is the problem. A great deal depends on if you have onsite parking and proximity to public transportation.
During undergraduate, I could drive for 15 min but the bus was 45 min plus a 15 min walk.
As for places like NYC it can really vary.
 
Apr 17, 2003
37,622
0
76
train ride is worse I would think because I don't like working with public transportation deadlines and schedule. But that would also depend if its 1 hr of stop and go traffic driving or not.
 

BarkingGhostar

Diamond Member
Nov 20, 2009
8,410
1,617
136
driving is worse

train you can chill out
Agreed. I rode in a van pool for a couple of years and it was amazing not having to be behind the wheel, always conscious of rush hour traffic, etc. Being able to sit and relax was a great move.

Not I telecommute.
 

randomrogue

Diamond Member
Jan 15, 2011
5,449
0
0
1.5 hour train

The train ride is a train ride. You can read, work, relax etc.

Driving is/can be exhausting. Depending on the time of day a 1 hour drive can turn out to be a 1.5-2 hour drive but the train ride will 90% of the time still be a 1.5 hour train ride.

I'll never understand why someone would want to drive.
 

Imp

Lifer
Feb 8, 2000
18,828
184
106
Train for the same reason I take the subway: so I can fall asleep and not end up in a ditch..
 

SKORPI0

Lifer
Jan 18, 2000
18,500
2,426
136
Depends on the destination, schedule and time I have.

If it is near/walking distance from the Metra/Union Station (Chicago), I'll ride the train to avoid the parking fees (about $25/3 hours).
I can surf the web, sleep or ogle any good looking women. I live walking distance from a train station. House in A, Station in B.

screenshot20111224at831.png



If destination is not near a train station or it's the weekend, I'll have to drive and bear with the traffic/parking fee. :\
 
Last edited:

Triumph

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
15,031
14
81
train if you can walk to/from your train stops. i'd gladly spend that extra hour if i could, just relaxing, reading a book, listening to music, sleeping, etc. all of which i would want to do when i get home after driving anyway. maybe i'd feel refreshed and ready to do things when i got home instead of feeling spent after dealing with traffic like i do.
 

BurnItDwn

Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
26,354
1,863
126
If the train pulled into my driveway at home, and if I worked at the trainstation 1.5 hours away, then I would consider it, however, I would first move so that I wasn't 1.5 hours away from work, and I would move a mile or two away from the train so that I don't hear loud trains all the time.
 

MotionMan

Lifer
Jan 11, 2006
17,124
12
81
driving an hour isn't horrible. What's horrible is if it's a trip that should take 30 minutes but takes an hour.

It is 14.8 miles from my house to my office, all but 0.5 of it on freeway. It has taken me less than 20 minutes late at night or on a weekend.

It normally takes me at least an hour to get to work, a lot more if it is raining.

MotionMan
 

bruceb

Diamond Member
Aug 20, 2004
8,874
111
106
It would depend on several factors for me:

Overall cost of train versus driving.

Train schedule .. can I get in on time and are trains outbound if I get stuck late ?

Where the train station is relative to where I live. Close by to walk if needed ? ?

Do you pay parking at train station or need a permit ? (Some areas do charge or need permit)

Is parking limited at train station ? ? (I know some in NJ are bad)

How far from my office is train ? (would I need subway / bus at this end)

If I needed to get home in an emergency, I would likely drive. Get in the
car and go. No need to wait 10mins or maybe 30 for the next train.

The train ride itself would be less stressful, but maybe not more convenient.
 

jhu

Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
11,918
9
81
Availability of parking is also a concern.

Sometimes, when I have to go into downtown SF, I'll take the BART from Dublin. (California, not Ireland) :p
It's actually faster than driving since traffic across the bridges usually sucks, and there's no parking hassles. However, it's kind of pricey...about $11 round-trip.

Depending on your vehicle's fuel efficiency, the amount of traffic going across the bridges, and the tolls involved to cross the bridges, it's actually comparable/cheaper to take BART.

Google maps says it's 34 miles from Dublin to SF, plus you must cross the Bay Bridge, so that's at least another $5. At current gas prices on a vehicle getting 34 MPG, it's actually a little less to go with BART.
 
Last edited: