Surfliner bicycle policy

Of course the topic of bikes on trains is not new, this article is relatively new and caught my eye. I couldn't find any posts relating to but if this is a repost, my apologies in advance. I've ridden amtrak quite a bit in the NEC, but I've never been on it in CA. A lot of my train trips include my bike*. Despite my bike-on-train experience, I feel I am an outsider to the topic of this article in no small part to the angry tone of it. I am curious what you folks with broader amtrak experience think of bikes on amtrak, and the tone of the author. Is this as big a deal as the author implies?

Article:

http://la.streetsblog.org/2013/05/07/amtraks-pacific-surfliner-adopts-wildly-anti-bicycle-policy-starting

For reference, some Amtrak verbiage on bikes:

http://www.amtrak.com/servlet/ContentServer?c=AM_Accommodation_C&pagename=am%2FLayout&cid=1241210575921

additional, similar verbiage on bikes:

http://www.amtrak.com/special-items

The commuter lines near me (and bus lines as well) have similar policies Those who have ridden amtrak broadly across the country - are bikes viewed differently on some lines? I've only once had a problem with my bike, and that one time had nothing to do with amtrak. I'd say my personal experience with using my bike on a train was really positive. Some of the more on-topic comments are interesting as well.

"my bike*" - My bicycle is a folding one that fits within Amtrak's definition of a "true folding" bike. As a biker I am connected to the topic, even though I would not be directly impacted by a $ surcharge for a bike.

The bikers do seem to be ticked, though luckily there will be more bike capacity in the future. I do somewhat wonder if this is somewhat attempting to shift bicycle commuters off to Metrolink which has dedicated bike cars.

Capitol Corridor is easy. It's 6 per coach car and there are at least 3 coach cars (the most I've seen is 5). I have seen cases where it's full up, and the conductors will let people keep their bikes downstairs and not in the racks. I've never seen a case where bike passengers weren't allowed to board.

Now Caltrain is another matter, but primarily because they have higher use. When they're running the Bombardier Bi-levels, they have less bike storage space and I've seen cases where passengers with bikes were denied boarding.

There was one time I freaked out when I saw a cafe car door open and I hopped in with my bike. The conductor told me I wasn't supposed to be there and let me out and back in at the next station. I was told that the door was not supposed to open.

I realize I was a bit vague above, so I will clarify my reaction to the article. A large factor in me deciding to use a folding bike on the train is the mobility option. I *feel* rude when I bring a full sized bike on a train. I cannot imagine commuting every day on amtrak with a full sized bike. I suspect very few people would. Am I incorrect in thinking a commuter using amtrak would consider a folding bike a no-brainer? If it was only a couple rides, why would anyone have an issue with getting a pass for their bike?

WinNix said:

I realize I was a bit vague above, so I will clarify my reaction to the article. A large factor in me deciding to use a folding bike on the train is the mobility option. I *feel* rude when I bring a full sized bike on a train. I cannot imagine commuting every day on amtrak with a full sized bike. I suspect very few people would. Am I incorrect in thinking a commuter using amtrak would consider a folding bike a no-brainer? If it was only a couple rides, why would anyone have an issue with getting a pass for their bike?

Click to expand...

I see regular bike commuters on every train riding Capitol Corridor. Nobody feels awkward about it, and there are people dressed like they're out for a Sunday bike ride in lycra and cleated bike shoes. Some of the bikes are also mucho expensive.

I have met a fellow passenger who rides a folding bike only, but says that it's because her employer doesn't allow full-sized bikes inside their buildings.

Firstly, as was repeatedly pointed out in the comments to the linked story, the author is dead wrong that a bike reservation for the Surfliners can't be done online. I knew the Amtrak website handles bicycle reservations because the Illinois and Missouri trains already have them and I've seen the bike "button" when making an online reservation.

Sure enough, when I did a test booking in late June from LA to Santa Barbara, and another LA to San Diego, each Surfliner departure (that is, not an Am-bus and not the Coast Starlight) had an "Add Bike to Trip" icon, and clicking it opens a little pull-down tab to "Add $5 per bicycle." Adding a bike to a particular train and then adding that train to the "shopping cart" indeed adds $5 to the total for the transaction.

Secondly, the Illinois and Missouri trains charge $10 per bike. Heck, even the Cascades trains, serving several bike-friendly cities, charge $5 for a bike reservation. And on the Northeast Corridor, you could send a bike as checked luggage on 66/67 to certain cities. Meanwhile, the Michigan trains don't take bikes at all because (1) they don't take carry-on bikes, reserved or unreserved, and (2) have no trains with checked luggage where one can box-up and check a bike. :wacko:

Thirdly, the author and commenters spinning this as an anti-bike decision either outright ignore or discount the commenters who note that (1) the trains in general and the bike racks in particular are getting fuller, and (2) some people actually prefer $5 plus certainty that you can board this train with your bike versus free with a chance that you or your bike will have to be left behind. Utterly ignoring Amtrak's eternal shortage of cars, even in California, they whine that Amtrak is being anti-bike -- rather than rationing or managing its capacity re. all passengers -- by not taking all comers for free.

I particularly loved this comment:

Dear Amtrak, I was so looking forward to taking the Pacific Surfliner (and bringing my bike with me) to the first-ever CicloSDias ciclovia event in San Diego in August. I mean, the last time I went to San Diego, I rode the same train and brought my bike with me and had a wonderful time. But because apparently you don't really want me to bring my bike with me anymore, I'm just going to drive there with my bike. Hope you're happy. Love, Elson.

Click to expand...

So (1) Amtrak taking paid reservations that guarantee a bike slot in advance is proof that Amtrak "do[es]n't really want me to bring my bike anymore," and (2) driving to and from San Diego is cheaper than the Surfliner fare you were already willing to pay + $10 round-trip?!? :blink: Meanwhile, I'd love to take my bike on the train from Chicago to the Apple Cider Century ride in New Buffalo, MI, rather than drive the distance, and I'm more than willing to pay the $20 extra round-trip for the privilege. However, because the Michigan trains don't take bikes, period, I can't. That's "don't really want me to bring my bike," pal!! In short, cry me a river.

Thanks for all the informational corrections.

One point: it appears that the Michigan trains actually do allow true folding bicycles -- in fact, it seems that *every* train allows them.

All trains allowed folding bikes if they can fit as luggage in the racks, which most do. The policy is reasonable given the amount of bikes, especially on weekends and Friday afternoons. The main issue is for Rail to Rail, 10 trip, and monthly customers, who will now have to make a separate reservation for their bike and find a way to pay for it.

I am a regular Surfliner rider and a cyclist and was disappointed with both the tone and the misinformation in that blog post. It was obvious that the post's author and many of the commenters are not frequent Surfliner riders and were unaware of the bike rack situation on this Amtrak line. I attempted to offer my experience and point of view in my rather lengthy comment which you can read there.

FYI the Surfliner cars have bike rack space for three bikes per regular coach car. (I thought these cars were the same as the California cars used on the CC, but a poster above mentioned those cars had six slots per coach.) These are official bike racks and conductors force passengers to remove luggage if they are placed in that space. Unfortunately, there are only two regular coach cars per consist, so a total of six bikes per train. In such a cycling-friendly area, demand far outstrips supply on this route. Of course, you can always box your bike and check it in on/at those trains/stations that offer checked baggage service.

I guess the difficult part of the new policy is that a free service now costs $5, and it isn't clear what that $5 goes to. If the reservations were free, some people will make tons of reservations without actually travelling on those trains, so I understand the need for some deterrent.

Anyway, as a rider who only occasionally brings a bicycle onboard, I welcome the new reservation system.

It appears that Amtrak has decided to drop the $5 fee for a reservation to bring a bike onboard the Pacific Surfliner. Starting on June 1st you'll still need to add a bike to your ticket (only one bike per passenger)... but the reservation will be free.

I have no skin in this game, but I think if I was a bicycle rider who pays to take my bike aboard the other Amtrak routes that charges for

bicycle reservations, I'd start raising a stink.

Agreed, I don't mind a $5 (I think that's optimum) reservation fee and an incentive to make people cancel their bike reservation and avoid people no-showing with their bikes. I've only taken my bike (except on the Lake Shore Limited in a box) on the Carl Sandburg and gladly paid the $10 fee. I would have hated having the unknown about if my bike would get on the train (like the current California first come first serve system) with the possibility of being denied boarding and stranded in Kewanee Overnight.

While I realize that the average passenger is probably completely unaware of this, for those here please do keep in mind that Amtrak California (Caltrans) sets the policies & fares for these trains; not Amtrak.

AlanB said:

While I realize that the average passenger is probably completely unaware of this, for those here please do keep in mind that Amtrak California (Caltrans) sets the policies & fares for these trains; not Amtrak.

Click to expand...

True enough, but that won't stop passengers on other routes from complaining about the inconsistencies. OTOH, there are LOTS of inconsistencies in

services and amenities across the various corridors/products/equipment types operated under the Amtrak brand, so I suppose this is simply in keeping

with that, um, tradition. [it's also true that the Surfliners serve far more daily commuters than say the Cascades or the Illinois trains]

Nathanael said:

Thanks for all the informational corrections.
One point: it appears that the Michigan trains actually do allow true folding bicycles -- in fact, it seems that *every* train allows them.

Click to expand...

calwatch said:

All trains allowed folding bikes if they can fit as luggage in the racks, which most do.

Click to expand...

Amtrak's site does say that folding bikes are allowable & can be stored "only in luggage storage areas at the end of the car (or, in Superliners, on the lower level). You may not store bikes in overhead racks."

According to Amtrak's site, folding bikes may be up to 48" long x 36" high x 15" wide. That seems awfully big for the Superliner luggage area. I assume Amtrak has included their measurements for a reason - IIRC, the Superliner luggage area consists of 3 shelves that are roughly 48" wide and perhaps 36" deep & 24" tall. So, it seems like one person's folding bike would pretty much take up one whole shelf, or a third of the luggage space for that car. I like the idea of taking a folding bike with me on a trip, but between the bike and our luggage, it seems like we'd take up half of the car's luggage space! That just doesn't seem right.

For reference, a normal checked bag can't "exceed 50 lbs. (23 kg), 75 linear inches (length + width + height). A folding bike would weigh less than 50 lbs, but 48" x 26" x 15" would be 89 inches.

Secondly - do they ever check these things? If you happened to have a folding bike that was an inch or two longer in any one of these dimensions, are they ever going to measure it?

This morning I saw a full-sized folding bike on BART. It wasn't folded, but it had 26" wheels and wasn't one of those tiny things that folded into something that might fit in a large suitcase. I think folded it might have been just around the folding bike limits for Amtrak. Most folding bikes with tiny tires have handlebars that fold down and might be about half the size. I actually looked up the specs on several Dahon bikes, and my full sized steel racing bike actually weighs less. It may not look like a lot of material, but the folding mechanism actually adds weight.

BCL said:

This morning I saw a full-sized folding bike on BART. It wasn't folded, but it had 26" wheels and wasn't one of those tiny things that folded into something that might fit in a large suitcase. I think folded it might have been just around the folding bike limits for Amtrak. Most folding bikes with tiny tires have handlebars that fold down and might be about half the size. I actually looked up the specs on several Dahon bikes, and my full sized steel racing bike actually weighs less. It may not look like a lot of material, but the folding mechanism actually adds weight.

Click to expand...

I don't have a folding bike yet, but the hard part (at least for meeting Amtrak's limits) seems to be the width - Amtrak only allows 15" wide when folded. Many that I've looked at are 15"-17" wide. However, they're significantly shorter than 48" in length - usually only 33" or less. I just wonder if, when the luggage space is nearly full, the car attendants or Conductor would become sticklers about luggage size.

D.P. Roberts said:

BCL said:

This morning I saw a full-sized folding bike on BART. It wasn't folded, but it had 26" wheels and wasn't one of those tiny things that folded into something that might fit in a large suitcase. I think folded it might have been just around the folding bike limits for Amtrak. Most folding bikes with tiny tires have handlebars that fold down and might be about half the size. I actually looked up the specs on several Dahon bikes, and my full sized steel racing bike actually weighs less. It may not look like a lot of material, but the folding mechanism actually adds weight.

Click to expand...

I don't have a folding bike yet, but the hard part (at least for meeting Amtrak's limits) seems to be the width - Amtrak only allows 15" wide when folded. Many that I've looked at are 15"-17" wide. However, they're significantly shorter than 48" in length - usually only 33" or less. I just wonder if, when the luggage space is nearly full, the car attendants or Conductor would become sticklers about luggage size.

Click to expand...

A typical Dahon folds to about 12". They also have tiny clown bike sized tires.

BCL said:

A typical Dahon folds to about 12". They also have tiny clown bike sized tires.

Click to expand...

True, but not all of their models fold to be under 15". And Dahons fold to be smaller than many others - I've seen some folding bikes that are 17" wide.

I'm just curious as to whether Amtrak car attendants are ever sticklers about luggage sizes. I do remember a guest poster here a few weeks ago claiming that her luggage was prohibited without even a measurement. There's probably more to the story than that, but I'd hate to be about to get on a train (especially a return trip) only to find out that my bike luggage was too big.

I would assume they would let you check it as a bike in a bike box, but if you're getting on a train that's about to depart, there probably isn't time to hunt down a bike box and all that.

D.P. Roberts said:

BCL said:

A typical Dahon folds to about 12". They also have tiny clown bike sized tires.

Click to expand...

True, but not all of their models fold to be under 15". And Dahons fold to be smaller than many others - I've seen some folding bikes that are 17" wide.
I'm just curious as to whether Amtrak car attendants are ever sticklers about luggage sizes. I do remember a guest poster here a few weeks ago claiming that her luggage was prohibited without even a measurement. There's probably more to the story than that, but I'd hate to be about to get on a train (especially a return trip) only to find out that my bike luggage was too big.

I would assume they would let you check it as a bike in a bike box, but if you're getting on a train that's about to depart, there probably isn't time to hunt down a bike box and all that.

Click to expand...

As you wish.

I once saw a woman directly exiting the Coast Starlight with a full-sized guitar case. There was zero chance that thing was under the 28" length carry-on size limit.

I've also taken my kid's full sized stroller on board the CS as well as the San Joaquin, with said child as a ticketed paying passenger at least two years of age . That thing is 4 ft long folded. The Amtrak carry-on guide seems to state that a stroller is allowed (implied to be exempt from carry-on size limits) and not considered as part of the 2-piece carry-on limit if it's for a child under two. On the CS the conductor checked us in and even helped us find a place to stow the stroller. On the SJ the conductor knew we were the only passengers boarding at the station and must have known my kid wasn't an infant.

http://www.amtrak.com/carry-on-baggage
Infant Items

Passengers traveling with infants under the age of two will be allowed additional infant items (strollers, diaper bags) that will not count towards the carry-on baggage limit.

Click to expand...

For the most part I don't think they'll become sticklers for being exactly within the carry-on size rules as long as it's not inconveniencing anyone or the passenger isn't pissing off anyone (especially the conductor).

I don't have a folding bike yet, but the hard part (at least for meeting Amtrak's limits) seems to be the width - Amtrak only allows 15" wide when folded. Many that I've looked at are 15"-17" wide. However, they're significantly shorter than 48" in length - usually only 33" or less. I just wonder if, when the luggage space is nearly full, the car attendants or Conductor would become sticklers about luggage size.

Click to expand...

Just out of curiosity, I checked the specs for a wide range of 20" wheel folders and I couldn't find any that violated the 15" width. The closest at 14.5" was a Citizen Miami, the bottom of the line of a lower priced brand. My wife and I have a Dahon Mu P8 and a Speed P8 which come in at 30 x 25 x 11.7 and 31 x 26 x 12 inches, respectively.

I'm not talking about "full size" folding bikes with 26" wheels. I never considered them and personally I wouldn't carry them aboard Amtrak except in an emergency. But even two popular ones that I check were 35 x 28 x 12 and 37 x 31 x 14.

But even if you were to find one 17" wide, you could shave off that 2" by taking off a pedal. Not an ideal solution for everyday commuting, but fine for traveling. So I wouldn't worry about car attendants or Conductors being a stickler about size.

Besides, just because the luggage rack is full, that doesn't mean you have a problem. The bike is a legitimate piece of luggage per the rules and, as far as I know, Amtrak doesn't sell standby tickets. I've had a sleeping car attendant put ours in the handicapped room when it wasn't occupied, another ask if he could put it in the ski locker (of course), and I once asked one if he would put it in the ski locker (of course). The only problem we ever had was when we were boarding a SWC sleeper at LAX. The SCA told us to take them to the transdorm (the next car), I suppose because the luggage rack there would be almost empty. Unfortunately, the conductor met us at the door and said we couldn't bring them on board. I said its a folder. He said no bikes, no way, no how. I just smiled, not saying a word, because I knew he had just created a problem for himself which he would have to solve. Within less than a minute he said give them to me, and then put them in the ski locker in the sleeper we had originally tried to board.

Bottom line: go for it.

A typical Dahon folds to about 12". They also have tiny clown bike sized tires.

Click to expand...

I hope the "They" refers to the Dahon product line, not the typical Dahon. I'll cut you some slack if you are talking about one of their 16" wheel models. But I take serious offense if you are talking about 20" ones. Even the teen ages say "cool bike" :mellow:

PaulM said:

I don't have a folding bike yet, but the hard part (at least for meeting Amtrak's limits) seems to be the width - Amtrak only allows 15" wide when folded. Many that I've looked at are 15"-17" wide. However, they're significantly shorter than 48" in length - usually only 33" or less. I just wonder if, when the luggage space is nearly full, the car attendants or Conductor would become sticklers about luggage size.

Click to expand...

Just out of curiosity, I checked the specs for a wide range of 20" wheel folders and I couldn't find any that violated the 15" width. The closest at 14.5" was a Citizen Miami, the bottom of the line of a lower priced brand.

Click to expand...

I have been considering a Citizen bikes, and only 2 of their 5-6 models fit the standard. I know Dahon is higher end, so I went to their site & clicked on "All Bikes". The first two bikes listed, the Anniversary model & Anniversary replica, are 15.4" wide, and those are 20" wheels. I then clicked randomly on other bikes, and it does look like most of the models with 20" or smaller wheels meet Amtrak's standard, but many of the folding bikes with 24" or larger wheels don't.

So, you certainly can't say that all folding bikes fit Amtrak's standards. The real question is what would happen if a car attendant or conductor actually checked your bike - and more practically, whether that would ever happen.

The bike I've taken on the train with me many times is a Dahon Vitesse D7hg (20" wheels). No amtrak employee has ever given me a hassle about it. One time, a drunken passenger made fun of it and called it a toy.

PaulM and D.P. Roberts - I am very certain my wife's 16" wheeled D3 folders well within the luggage limits. I don't have the measurements on me, but I'd be really surprised if my (larger) Vitesse did not fold down well within the luggage dimension limits as well. Brompton bikes have similar dimensions as do Bike Fridays, but those are a little longer. I do not know anything about CItizen bike dimensions. I think the only dimension that comes close to being a litmit is the width being 15", and if it has an internal hub it wont be a problem.

Images of the vitesse folded vs unfolded http://reallywww.dahon.gr/images/bikes_large/Vitesse_D7HG_l.jpg

I almost forgot, BCL - Dahon sells a full sized 26" folding frame bike ("Jack"). The dimensions are 12.6" × 35" × 29" I am sure other full sized 26"ers have similar specs.

My 20" bike folds down to 11.3" x 31.2" x 25.7"

You think this guy could get on Amtrak?



I think the bike is fine, but the rest of the getup might flag him as a security risk.