New Menus on California Zephyr

Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum

Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Jan 17, 2010
Messages
4
Has anyone tried the new menus on the Zephyr? I heard they changed them, but is it for the better?
 
We aren't ignoring you, no one here knows anything about a new menu on the CZ - not knowing anything has never stopped me
 
I haven't tried the food from the latest menu, but it hasn't changed all that much from the prior one, so I'd say that it's probably about the same as it was 6 months ago.
 
We were on the California Zephyr in October-hubby had the Mahi Mahi, said it was good but a bit dry.

I had Pork Tenderloin which was pretty good too, but also a bit dry.
 
We were on the California Zephyr in October-hubby had the Mahi Mahi, said it was good but a bit dry.I had Pork Tenderloin which was pretty good too, but also a bit dry.
If the Zephyr was using a CCC (like they were on our last trip) instead of a diner, I would expect the food to be a little dryer, as well as the dining car crew being a little cranky. :cool: Still, the meals weren't bad at all with the old menu. As has been said, I'd expect the new menu to be quite similar, and quite tasty. I think Amtrak does a pretty good job serving good meals, considering the limited space they have to work in.

I'm reminded of one dinner I had on the City of New Orleans. I don't remember the name of the entree, but it was supposed to be a favorite Cajun recipe. I liked the taste of it, but the presentation was awful. It looked to me that it had already been found undigestable to a monkey. :lol: The memory still makes my wife and I break into laughter. The complete dining experience was delightful, but that plate full of an unknown substance was just a hoot. :p
 
We were on the California Zephyr in October-hubby had the Mahi Mahi, said it was good but a bit dry.I had Pork Tenderloin which was pretty good too, but also a bit dry.
If the Zephyr was using a CCC (like they were on our last trip) instead of a diner, I would expect the food to be a little dryer, as well as the dining car crew being a little cranky. :cool: Still, the meals weren't bad at all with the old menu. As has been said, I'd expect the new menu to be quite similar, and quite tasty. I think Amtrak does a pretty good job serving good meals, considering the limited space they have to work in.

I'm reminded of one dinner I had on the City of New Orleans. I don't remember the name of the entree, but it was supposed to be a favorite Cajun recipe. I liked the taste of it, but the presentation was awful. It looked to me that it had already been found undigestable to a monkey. :lol: The memory still makes my wife and I break into laughter. The complete dining experience was delightful, but that plate full of an unknown substance was just a hoot. :p
It was the regular diner.

Loved the story about the unrecognizable food! There are times when we have gone to dinner and got something very strange looking!
 
I'd just sit down and cry if there were a CCC on the CZ if I were riding it! If there's a train on the system that needs a full diner and sightseer lounge, this is it with both the Sierra's and Rocky Mountains on the route for daytime viewing.
 
Wow thanks for all the replys, but I don't know what CCC means. We too have had some very strange looking meals, but they usually taste decent.
 
Wow thanks for all the replys, but I don't know what CCC means. We too have had some very strange looking meals, but they usually taste decent.
The CCC (Cross Country Cafe) was a poorly thought out hybrid of a lounge and diner that some incompetent or committee @ Amtrak thought up a few years ago! Far too many of these "Hybrids" were cooked up, then they were assigned to the City of New Orleans which mostly runs without a lounge to replace a real diner and to the Texas Eagles to replace the real diner. In the case of the City they serve an all day menu that is basically the lounge snack menu and in addition the three sit down meals (breakfast/lunch/dinner). It is 1/2 diner with a couple of three seat booths that we call Mafia seats and several regular 4 place tables. No-one really likes them. The other half sells the snack food and has like 4 tables to serve as a "lounge". The Eagles have a real Sight Seer Lounge that has the snack car downstairs so the CCC serves as just the diner with the three meals, same set up. Occasionally you see them on other trains when a diner or lounge is bad ordered, once in a while even two of these crappy cars which is not good! :angry:
 
The CZ is supposed to have a regular diner and it uses the national menu. It has its specials, and the standard Amtrak half-chicken and butchers choice steak. Fresh cooked steaks have returned.
 
Wow thanks for all the replys, but I don't know what CCC means. We too have had some very strange looking meals, but they usually taste decent.
The CCC (Cross Country Cafe) was a poorly thought out hybrid of a lounge and diner that some incompetent or committee @ Amtrak thought up a few years ago! Far too many of these "Hybrids" were cooked up, then they were assigned to the City of New Orleans which mostly runs without a lounge to replace a real diner and to the Texas Eagles to replace the real diner. In the case of the City they serve an all day menu that is basically the lounge snack menu and in addition the three sit down meals (breakfast/lunch/dinner). It is 1/2 diner with a couple of three seat booths that we call Mafia seats and several regular 4 place tables. No-one really likes them. The other half sells the snack food and has like 4 tables to serve as a "lounge". The Eagles have a real Sight Seer Lounge that has the snack car downstairs so the CCC serves as just the diner with the three meals, same set up. Occasionally you see them on other trains when a diner or lounge is bad ordered, once in a while even two of these crappy cars which is not good! :angry:
Hmm... well here is a less judgemental view...

A few years ago Amtrak was told by Congress that they needed to eliminate some of the costs of money losing food service cars on its LD trains. Amtrak developed the CCC (Cross Country Cafe'), tested one car in regular service, and then converted several superliner diners into this Lounge/Diner Configuration.

The general idea was to create a multi-purpose car that could serve as a Diner or Lounge seperately on popular Long Distance trains if needed, OR be used as both a Diner and Lounge Car for trains with a smaller passenger load like the City of New Orleans, and the Texas Eagle.

The car is, in my opinion, absolutely beautifully designed. Pictures can be seen here... http://www.americabyamtrak.com/aba/Amtrak_..._Prototype.html

According to Jim (pun intended) "no one likes" the tables, funny, I didn't see anything wrong with them.. and actually I did like them.

The food I've been served on the CCC cars however is a step-down from the normal dinning car food. I'm not sure why this is, perhaps bad luck.

I also think that the CCC car has never been used as originally planned.... It seems to be used more as a Dinning Car that happens to sell snacks rather than a true Diner/Lounge.

Either way... the CCC car is a decent idea in my opinion, but has some flaws in day to day use. Amtrak really shouldn't be blamed for thinking outside of the box to please Congress. I think if it was run the way it was envisioned.. it could be very sucesful.
 
Perhaps I was too harsh on my Washington brothers and sisters, it was an attempt to compromise and as the old saying goes: "neither fish nor foul" was the result. You are the first person Ive run into that likes them and even you admit the food is not up to snuff compared to a real diner. As a regular rider of the CONO I have to say that as a lounge they are unsatifactory too small/inadequate windows, the snack bar side is too crowded when the train is full ( believe it or not this train can get very crowded), the OBS are really happy the Sightseer Lounge is back. On the Eagle the CCC as a diner is not adequate in place of a real diner. When the daily train starts, whenever that may be (hope it's soon), a real diner from CHI-LAX will really be great, I think anyone that rides these trains will agree even if they dont like the resulting compromise on the route and train that is the result! As Bob Dylan said: "to each his own", mine is a real diner and sight seer lounge. (I dont like the cafe/lounge cars on the single level LD trains either, same reasons! <_<

Also I'll admit the prototype pics look much better than the actual execution, the seats look lots more comfortable and the lighting is MUCH better!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Also I'll admit the prototype pics look much better than the actual execution, the seats look lots more comfortable and the lighting is MUCH better!

Actually, the problems in term of the seating was small tables, too curvy seats, etc. The current CCC atleast has right sized tables, but they had to change the seating layout around a bit to make it work.
 
I'd just sit down and cry if there were a CCC on the CZ if I were riding it! If there's a train on the system that needs a full diner and sightseer lounge, this is it with both the Sierra's and Rocky Mountains on the route for daytime viewing.
We didn't sit down and cry, but we certainly were stunned. Granted --- it was because of an "equiment failure" of the regular diner, and the CCC was all Amtrak had to fill in as a substitute. The sightseer lounge was still there, and the CCC was only being used as the "diner." It was not being used as a lounge or cafe. Still, having been on the EB a few days earlier we could see the contrast quickly, as the EB had a full diner.

I want everyone to understand that I'm not complaining about the CCC itself. While the CCC is a poor passenger seating substitute for a full diner, it's much better than NO diner. :cool: And truthfully, the food wasn't all that different on the EB using a full diner, and the Zephyr using the CCC. We didn't go hungry at all, and we were still on a train. The reservations for the meals were "scattered" on the Zephyr due to seating capacity, but I think that the OBS crew may have been taken by surprise.

We'll take Trains 5 & 6 agin, with no hesitation. We're sure the food will be similar with the new menu, if not almost identical.
 
I'd just sit down and cry if there were a CCC on the CZ if I were riding it! If there's a train on the system that needs a full diner and sightseer lounge, this is it with both the Sierra's and Rocky Mountains on the route for daytime viewing.
We didn't sit down and cry, but we certainly were stunned. Granted --- it was because of an "equiment failure" of the regular diner, and the CCC was all Amtrak had to fill in as a substitute. The sightseer lounge was still there, and the CCC was only being used as the "diner." It was not being used as a lounge or cafe. Still, having been on the EB a few days earlier we could see the contrast quickly, as the EB had a full diner.

I want everyone to understand that I'm not complaining about the CCC itself. While the CCC is a poor passenger seating substitute for a full diner, it's much better than NO diner. :cool: And truthfully, the food wasn't all that different on the EB using a full diner, and the Zephyr using the CCC. We didn't go hungry at all, and we were still on a train. The reservations for the meals were "scattered" on the Zephyr due to seating capacity, but I think that the OBS crew may have been taken by surprise.

We'll take Trains 5 & 6 agin, with no hesitation. We're sure the food will be similar with the new menu, if not almost identical.
As a former Amtrak OBS staffer, but more importantly now, as a paying passenger, having just "experienced" the CCC twice in the last two days, I can YELL this: While the layout is not bad for a modified lounge, it SUCKS as a diner. They lost HOW MANY seats when they installed those dorky 3-tops, that almost force you to stare at the table X the aisle.. YUCK< YUCK< YUCK!

If I NEVER get on a CCC again (working as a diner) It will NOT be too soon for me.

The food COULD BE great in either a CCC or traditional Superliner diner. ALL the equipment is there......... btw, we all know it's usually a matter of the staff, and the "chef" on the CONO (this sound sooooooo petty) KNEW how to cook grits, while the "chef" on the CL, well, "Hello Mr. Yucky Warm Cereal.........."
 
I'd just sit down and cry if there were a CCC on the CZ if I were riding it! If there's a train on the system that needs a full diner and sightseer lounge, this is it with both the Sierra's and Rocky Mountains on the route for daytime viewing.
We didn't sit down and cry, but we certainly were stunned. Granted --- it was because of an "equiment failure" of the regular diner, and the CCC was all Amtrak had to fill in as a substitute. The sightseer lounge was still there, and the CCC was only being used as the "diner." It was not being used as a lounge or cafe. Still, having been on the EB a few days earlier we could see the contrast quickly, as the EB had a full diner.

I want everyone to understand that I'm not complaining about the CCC itself. While the CCC is a poor passenger seating substitute for a full diner, it's much better than NO diner. :cool: And truthfully, the food wasn't all that different on the EB using a full diner, and the Zephyr using the CCC. We didn't go hungry at all, and we were still on a train. The reservations for the meals were "scattered" on the Zephyr due to seating capacity, but I think that the OBS crew may have been taken by surprise.

We'll take Trains 5 & 6 agin, with no hesitation. We're sure the food will be similar with the new menu, if not almost identical.
To be fair... the CZ never has a "full service" diner like the EB has. The EB runs with extra staff that permits fuller seatings, quicker service, and extras like linen tablecloths, real china, and glassware. The EB also has a few more "cooked on-board" items than other trains. While the CZ's normal diner is a bit more classy than the CCC, some of the differences you mention would have been there anyways. Most notably the "scattered" reservations should have had nothing to do with the seating capacity, but rather this is necessary on most LD trains due to limited staff, again the EB has extra staff, permitting fuller seatings, and faster serving times.
 
Perhaps I was too harsh on my Washington brothers and sisters, it was an attempt to compromise and as the old saying goes: "neither fish nor foul" was the result. You are the first person Ive run into that likes them and even you admit the food is not up to snuff compared to a real diner. As a regular rider of the CONO I have to say that as a lounge they are unsatifactory too small/inadequate windows, the snack bar side is too crowded when the train is full ( believe it or not this train can get very crowded), the OBS are really happy the Sightseer Lounge is back. On the Eagle the CCC as a diner is not adequate in place of a real diner. When the daily train starts, whenever that may be (hope it's soon), a real diner from CHI-LAX will really be great, I think anyone that rides these trains will agree even if they dont like the resulting compromise on the route and train that is the result! As Bob Dylan said: "to each his own", mine is a real diner and sight seer lounge. (I dont like the cafe/lounge cars on the single level LD trains either, same reasons! <_<
Also I'll admit the prototype pics look much better than the actual execution, the seats look lots more comfortable and the lighting is MUCH better!
"One thing I've learned from Americans is this word 'Compromise,' when there is an argument you compromise and then no one is happy" - Italian Film Director Alberto Dante'

Yes I agree Jim... I would MUCH prefer a separate lounge and diner, for that matter I wish we could have sleeper lounge's like the PPC on more trains. But when I consider what Amtrak had to work with, it seems like a clever enough idea. I didn't have any issue with the comfort of the seating... I've even sat in both types of booth configurations and never had a problem with it. I do remember the lighting being a bit intensely bright at night though.

I think ultimately the cars could be great for certain situations... and I think it was clever to think up a car that can sub as both a lounge or diner if needed. Again, if the car was used properly, on certain routes, I think it could be a winner. Since that hasn't happened.. its kind of so-so.

As for the Single Level Diner Lite cars... I'm not so fond of those. The booth set-up in those cars is bizarre to say the least, and since it lacks a grill... can't really replace a full diner like the CCC can in terms of food prep. Plus.. I don't like how the kitchen is so open. But it seems to serve its purpose ok.
 
I'd just sit down and cry if there were a CCC on the CZ if I were riding it! If there's a train on the system that needs a full diner and sightseer lounge, this is it with both the Sierra's and Rocky Mountains on the route for daytime viewing.
We didn't sit down and cry, but we certainly were stunned. Granted --- it was because of an "equiment failure" of the regular diner, and the CCC was all Amtrak had to fill in as a substitute. The sightseer lounge was still there, and the CCC was only being used as the "diner." It was not being used as a lounge or cafe. Still, having been on the EB a few days earlier we could see the contrast quickly, as the EB had a full diner.

I want everyone to understand that I'm not complaining about the CCC itself. While the CCC is a poor passenger seating substitute for a full diner, it's much better than NO diner. :cool: And truthfully, the food wasn't all that different on the EB using a full diner, and the Zephyr using the CCC. We didn't go hungry at all, and we were still on a train. The reservations for the meals were "scattered" on the Zephyr due to seating capacity, but I think that the OBS crew may have been taken by surprise.

We'll take Trains 5 & 6 agin, with no hesitation. We're sure the food will be similar with the new menu, if not almost identical.
As a former Amtrak OBS staffer, but more importantly now, as a paying passenger, having just "experienced" the CCC twice in the last two days, I can YELL this: While the layout is not bad for a modified lounge, it SUCKS as a diner. They lost HOW MANY seats when they installed those dorky 3-tops, that almost force you to stare at the table X the aisle.. YUCK< YUCK< YUCK!

If I NEVER get on a CCC again (working as a diner) It will NOT be too soon for me.

The food COULD BE great in either a CCC or traditional Superliner diner. ALL the equipment is there......... btw, we all know it's usually a matter of the staff, and the "chef" on the CONO (this sound sooooooo petty) KNEW how to cook grits, while the "chef" on the CL, well, "Hello Mr. Yucky Warm Cereal.........."
I'll NEVER debate with a former OBS staffer about what "is" or what "could be" on an Amtrak train. :lol: You guys paid your dues, and you know what's going on better that my wife and I will ever know. I'm just approaching this through the eyes of a person who really likes train travel, and has never been severely disappointed yet.

The only two cars on any train that I've REALLY liked are the PPC in general, and a new (or recently refurbished) sleeper we drew once. Even the PPC had it's flaws, although that was probably a matter of the staff having forgotten something. When I went downstairs to just look at what was down there, one of the entry doors was wide open and there was no staff there, and the train was traveling at speed. I got scared and hustled back upstairs. :huh:

While we were on the CONO, the CCC car did it's job well. The diner part was fine, and the plate full of the unknown substance tasted good. It was the "physical" presentation on the plate that was so humerous. :lol: I didn't much care about where I had to look, 'cuz I was more wrapped up in talking with our other table-mate. (a helicopter pilot on an oil rig) My back was to the window, but what could see behind me since is was nightime? :) During the daytime, the lounge end of the car was never full, although sometimes there was one person sitting at each of the tables. When we entered in that end of the car, at least three people offered to move to another table in order to make room for the two of us.

I can criticize all sorts of things about Amtrak, but I'd just rather ride the train, enjoy the meals, scenery, and the cars, no matter their shortcomings.
 
I recently traveled on the City of New Orleans (12/29-30 CHI-NOL, 1/1 NOL-MEM, 1/3 MEM-CHI), evidently a few days before the Sightseer Lounge was added back on. Southbound, leaving CHI, the lounge portion of the CCC was completely swamped and the attendant seemed to be nearly overwhelmed. I didn't get a great look at the diner portion, but there appeared to be at least a few open tables; however, by the time I reached the counter, the attendant said they would not be seating anyone else in the diner portion.

I should note that the train (at least the coaches) was very full on all 3 legs of my trip.
 
I had a dining car employee on the CZ say, "I usually work the Texas Eagle" and I asked that person, "so whats the CCC like?" and this person hemmed and hawed a bit and then finally blurted out..."a toilet on wheels'! :lol: I prefer the dining car over the CCC anytime!
 
I'd just sit down and cry if there were a CCC on the CZ if I were riding it! If there's a train on the system that needs a full diner and sightseer lounge, this is it with both the Sierra's and Rocky Mountains on the route for daytime viewing.
We didn't sit down and cry, but we certainly were stunned. Granted --- it was because of an "equiment failure" of the regular diner, and the CCC was all Amtrak had to fill in as a substitute. The sightseer lounge was still there, and the CCC was only being used as the "diner." It was not being used as a lounge or cafe. Still, having been on the EB a few days earlier we could see the contrast quickly, as the EB had a full diner.

I want everyone to understand that I'm not complaining about the CCC itself. While the CCC is a poor passenger seating substitute for a full diner, it's much better than NO diner. :cool: And truthfully, the food wasn't all that different on the EB using a full diner, and the Zephyr using the CCC. We didn't go hungry at all, and we were still on a train. The reservations for the meals were "scattered" on the Zephyr due to seating capacity, but I think that the OBS crew may have been taken by surprise.

We'll take Trains 5 & 6 agin, with no hesitation. We're sure the food will be similar with the new menu, if not almost identical.
To be fair... the CZ never has a "full service" diner like the EB has. The EB runs with extra staff that permits fuller seatings, quicker service, and extras like linen tablecloths, real china, and glassware. The EB also has a few more "cooked on-board" items than other trains. While the CZ's normal diner is a bit more classy than the CCC, some of the differences you mention would have been there anyways. Most notably the "scattered" reservations should have had nothing to do with the seating capacity, but rather this is necessary on most LD trains due to limited staff, again the EB has extra staff, permitting fuller seatings, and faster serving times.
No, that's not true. Prior to that Congressional mandate a few years ago and the resulting Simplified Dining Service (SDS) and the CCC's, every long distance train in the system had dining car service like the EB still has. The EB and the Auto Train were the only two trains that were never down-graded. Most trains have been slowing having their dining car service improved heading back towards what is still being offered on the EB and the AT.
 
I think ultimately the cars could be great for certain situations... and I think it was clever to think up a car that can sub as both a lounge or diner if needed. Again, if the car was used properly, on certain routes, I think it could be a winner. Since that hasn't happened.. its kind of so-so.
Actually I think that overall the CCC did exactly as advertised on the City of NOL, a train that has for years always seen far less use of the dining car by comparison to other routes. The CCC is weak on the cafe side, both in terms of places for people to sit and in terms of viewing the scenery as compared to a Sightseer Lounge. But the car overall did serve well at its primary purpose, which was to still provide both cafe and diner service, while cutting costs.

The big problem IMHO with the CCC's is that Amtrak converted far too many diners to CCC's, as with the possible exception of the Eagle, no other route plied by Superliners sees dining car patronage at a level for which the CCC is adequate.
 
I'd just sit down and cry if there were a CCC on the CZ if I were riding it! If there's a train on the system that needs a full diner and sightseer lounge, this is it with both the Sierra's and Rocky Mountains on the route for daytime viewing.
We didn't sit down and cry, but we certainly were stunned. Granted --- it was because of an "equiment failure" of the regular diner, and the CCC was all Amtrak had to fill in as a substitute. The sightseer lounge was still there, and the CCC was only being used as the "diner." It was not being used as a lounge or cafe. Still, having been on the EB a few days earlier we could see the contrast quickly, as the EB had a full diner.

I want everyone to understand that I'm not complaining about the CCC itself. While the CCC is a poor passenger seating substitute for a full diner, it's much better than NO diner. :cool: And truthfully, the food wasn't all that different on the EB using a full diner, and the Zephyr using the CCC. We didn't go hungry at all, and we were still on a train. The reservations for the meals were "scattered" on the Zephyr due to seating capacity, but I think that the OBS crew may have been taken by surprise.

We'll take Trains 5 & 6 agin, with no hesitation. We're sure the food will be similar with the new menu, if not almost identical.
To be fair... the CZ never has a "full service" diner like the EB has. The EB runs with extra staff that permits fuller seatings, quicker service, and extras like linen tablecloths, real china, and glassware. The EB also has a few more "cooked on-board" items than other trains. While the CZ's normal diner is a bit more classy than the CCC, some of the differences you mention would have been there anyways. Most notably the "scattered" reservations should have had nothing to do with the seating capacity, but rather this is necessary on most LD trains due to limited staff, again the EB has extra staff, permitting fuller seatings, and faster serving times.
No, that's not true. Prior to that Congressional mandate a few years ago and the resulting Simplified Dining Service (SDS) and the CCC's, every long distance train in the system had dining car service like the EB still has. The EB and the Auto Train were the only two trains that were never down-graded. Most trains have been slowing having their dining car service improved heading back towards what is still being offered on the EB and the AT.
Alan... please tell me what part of my post is not true. Notice I said the CZ never has (as in currently has), not never had. I re-read my post twice and found nothing inaccurate about it.

Correct me if I'm wrong but there is NO difference in the CCC car when used as a diner, or when you have a full diner on the CZ. Everything is the same correct (menu, staff, how the food is prepared, how it is served)? Except the actual design of the car...

What I'm trying to say is there should be no difference to the passenger on the CZ weather it's a CCC or a full diner, except for the actual design of the car.
 
Alan... please tell me what part of my post is not true. Notice I said the CZ never has (as in currently has), not never had. I re-read my post twice and found nothing inaccurate about it.
Sorry, my bad. :( I saw has as had, hence my response.

I was still on my first cup of coffee. :eek:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top