2nd Best US Rail System

Based on rail system alone, what US city has the second best train system? Based on sheer size, I thought it would be nearly impossible for NYC not to win so I assumed it as 1st. Include any train type from streetcar to Amtrak. I would define best by size, frequency, speed, and comfort with size being the most important but use any criteria you feel is necessary.

Chicago's is extensive, and they run it well, even in the snow.

I would also vote for Chicago due to its extensive L/subway network and Metra's routes that reach in all directions (plus the South Shore to Indiana). San Francisco, however, is very exotic with its Caltrain commuter rail, BART heavy rail, streetcars and cable cars. Plus Amtrak's Capitol Corridor on the East Bay side. It definitely ranks third.

This was a hard and close one, between San Francisco and Chicago. However, Chicago gets the better edge, due to CTA's El Train services, Metra commuter lines, unusual railway infrastructures (think belt junction, CONO backup moves into/out of CUS, The Loop, etc), one of the larger railway hubs, among others. San Francisco is a close third, with BART, Cable Cars, Muni light rail, historic streetcars (E and F lines), and Caltrain, but did not get the third, due to not having a direct access to Amtrak trains (Capitols, San Joaquins, California Zephyr, and Coast Starlight), due to having to get to either East Bay or San Jose either by BART or Ambus for the former, and by Caltrain for the latter, whereas in Chicago you have direct access to Amtrak, commuter rail (Metra), and subway (CTA El Train) all within the city limits.

BART is great (I've ridden it). So is the cable car. The one big negative of the city of San Fran is no Amtrak train service and it has been stated that there is no direct connection from the CS to BART.

Philly Amtrak Fan said:

BART is great (I've ridden it). So is the cable car. The one big negative of the city of San Fran is no Amtrak train service and it has been stated that there is no direct connection from the CS to BART.

Click to expand...

The only downside to cable cars is that you need 7 bucks to ride the cable cars, so pretty much you need some cash every time you hop on, or you need to buy Muni Passports (I rode it on a Muni Passport that I got thru CityPass). As for San Francisco to CS, you need to either board the Ambus to either Emeryville to Oakland, or Caltrain to San Jose. I also was affected by a lack of a direct connection between BART and CS. As for BART at SFO Airport to CS (which I sometimes do), you have to go to either SF Caltrain station by BART (SFO->Embarcadero) then Muni (Embarcadero->Caltrain), or to Milbrae by BART (transfer at San Bruno necessary during weekdays) then Caltrain to San Jose. Ambus at Transbay Terminal has a similar routing: BART (SFO->Embarcadero) then Muni (Embarcadero->Folsom), and a short walk down Folsom St. after getting off Muni T or N lines. Riding BART all the way to Oakland to connect to CS is unrealistic. You either have to walk from Downtown Oakland (or ride the buses), get to either Richmond or Oakland Coliseum and ride the Capitol Corridor to either Emeryville, Oakland Jack London Square, or San Jose. As for CZ and San Joaquins from BART, it is easier than CS from BART, as both the CZ and the San Joaquins stop in Richmond. Connections between BART and Amtrak is the easiest for the Capitols, since it stops both at Oakland Coliseum and Richmond.

Philly?

I think that people do forgot that Philly has an extensive commuter rail network, heavy rail subway-elevated, light rail and streetcars.

First Tier - just New York

Second Tier - probably Boston, Chicago, Philadelphia, San Francisco/Oakland, Washington (of these, maybe Chicago wins but I can see arguments for other cities/systems/networks as well)

Third Tier - perhaps Atlanta, Dallas/Fort Worth, Denver, Houston, Los Angeles, Portland, Salt Lake City, San Diego, Seattle (not completely sure about each of those, nor whether to include anywhere else)

SF Bay Area should get honorable mention for having the most number of disjointed transit agencies running things-on-rails in a spectacular clusterf*k of messed up connections.

They have so far-

BART

Caltrain

ACE Train

Amtrak California trains

VTA Light Rail

MUNI Light Rail

MUNI streetcars

Cable Cars

If this is not enough, coming soon-

eBART trains

SMART trains

Beat that, any other city!

Eric S said:

Third Tier - perhaps Atlanta, Dallas/Fort Worth, Denver, Houston, Los Angeles, Portland, Salt Lake City, San Diego, Seattle (not completely sure about each of those, nor whether to include anywhere else)

Click to expand...

You should probably add Miami, San Juan (heavy rail subway) and Minneapolis (two light rail lines plus commuter rail) to this or to a Fourth Tier.

Metra Electric Rider said:

Eric S said:

Third Tier - perhaps Atlanta, Dallas/Fort Worth, Denver, Houston, Los Angeles, Portland, Salt Lake City, San Diego, Seattle (not completely sure about each of those, nor whether to include anywhere else)

Click to expand...

You should probably add Miami, San Juan (heavy rail subway) and Minneapolis (two light rail lines plus commuter rail) to this or to a Fourth Tier.

Click to expand...

Yeah, it was harder to decide quite where to draw the line between what I was calling the Third Tier and either a Fourth Tier or just everywhere else. I was sort of thinking places with more of a network (multiple lines, not quite as comprehensive as the Second Tier but certainly more than the areas with just a couple-ish lines). Obviously it's completely subjective, since I wasn't really using size or ridership or metro area mode-share. Including Houston but excluding Miami/Fort Lauderdale and Minneapolis/St. Paul was probably a mistake.

Philly Amtrak Fan said:

BART is great (I've ridden it). So is the cable car. The one big negative of the city of San Fran is no Amtrak train service and it has been stated that there is no direct connection from the CS to BART.

Click to expand...

San Francisco is somewhat a special situation because the Bay Area is generally decentralized. San Francisco itself is 49 square miles at the tip of a peninsula.

As far as a CS to BART connection, that's possible in Oakland right now with the free downtown shuttle. That might be possible in the future if a BART station gets built at Diridon. A couple of the options for San Jose are to put it in an intermodal station.

http://www.vta.org/bart/stationsphaseII

Boston could go in the fourth tier. While it's quite extensive, it's a poorly-run, antiquated, and poorly maintained excuse for public transit. Just yesterday, for example, an Orange Line train went up in smoke during the rush hour. And if you read comments from folks there about their recent schedule changes, it's not very positive. I don't ride the system much, but on one inbound trip from up north, the engine ran out of gas. That's pretty unacceptable in any rail operation. Another time, more recently, a rush hour train ahead of us broke down, and our train had to push it to its destination. The whole show is generally shoddy--and sometimes shady, I dare say.

That's a good point about reliability, dependability, and consistency of service. Both MBTA and WMATA seem to be in serious states of decline - not entirely unlike CTA maybe 20ish years ago. (Mismanagement? Underinvestment? Combination of the two?) I guess, to me, it seems that WMATA is in a worse situation that MBTA.

I would agree with that assessment, Eric. We might want to add cheating to your above list of questions.

At least the CTA and MBTA have the excuse of having ancient, comparatively, systems, Washington's is newer and in the national capital - it shouldn't have been allowed to deteriorate as it has.

Metra Electric Rider said:

At least the CTA and MBTA have the excuse of having ancient, comparatively, systems, Washington's is newer and in the national capital - it shouldn't have been allowed to deteriorate as it has.

Click to expand...

This is true. And *some* of MBTA's problems will be ameliorated when new cars, already ordered, are delivered and start running on the Orange and Red Lines.

You can't make this stuff up:

http://www.masstransitmag.com/news/12273818/t-replaces-officials-after-billing-errors-cost-600000

Eric S said:

Metra Electric Rider said:

At least the CTA and MBTA have the excuse of having ancient, comparatively, systems, Washington's is newer and in the national capital - it shouldn't have been allowed to deteriorate as it has.

Click to expand...

This is true. And *some* of MBTA's problems will be ameliorated when new cars, already ordered, are delivered and start running on the Orange and Red Lines.

Click to expand...

It sounds like some of their problems are on the commuter lines too..

Yes, I gave two personal examples in an earlier response.

While not U.S., I almost think Toronto ought to be on the list, as it's the most significant comparable to a lot of major U.S. systems.

Metra Electric Rider said:

At least the CTA and MBTA have the excuse of having ancient, comparatively, systems, Washington's is newer and in the national capital - it shouldn't have been allowed to deteriorate as it has.

Click to expand...

WMATA is in the unique position of being dependent on funding from several different jurisdictions that aren't known for their ability to cooperate and get along. Properly funded, the agency could have done much better.

Eric S said:

Metra Electric Rider said:

At least the CTA and MBTA have the excuse of having ancient, comparatively, systems, Washington's is newer and in the national capital - it shouldn't have been allowed to deteriorate as it has.

Click to expand...

This is true. And *some* of MBTA's problems will be ameliorated when new cars, already ordered, are delivered and start running on the Orange and Red Lines.

Click to expand...

The same can be said about WMATA with the arrival of the 7000-series cars.

People forget about Cleveland, OH as well. Very extensive network of light and heavy rail trains, Amtrak, buses.

peter

I figured Cleveland fell into my "everywhere else" fourth tier, although I wouldn't necessarily argue against someone putting it in the third tier instead.