Amtrak CA had a pretty bad October

[Swadian Hardcore]

Of course any Amtrak passengers to RNO will probably be on the CZ because the bus-train combo is $10 more expensive, which is a significant difference considering the CC dosen't even have reclining seats. I really don't know why people still ride the train here when the roads are clear, Amtrak needs to NOT be five times more expensive than the bus while so much slower.

Besides, my frequent 2-day runs to SF would be totally impossible on Amtrak, which requires me to spend a full day each way trying to get there and back. That's major issue for me which would not be solved by more trains unless they provide an overnight train like SP's old Sierra.

Image probelms are one thing, but Spirit Airlines has a terrible image and still makes money and carries lots of passengers. Besides, old dog's nicer than Spirit.

 

[SubwayNut]

Only three of the Greyhounds stop in Truckee, Colfax and Roseville and although the Reno to San Francisco fare is $12.00 the Truckee to S.F. fare is $35.00 even though the trip is shorter, there is no web only special!!!

 

[Anderson]

There are a couple of issues with expanding Thruway service on a major scale:
-First, Amtrak doesn't have the money to buy a massive pile of buses.
-Second, if Amtrak ran a lot of their own buses, Greyhound and the other bus operators would likely throw a fit at the possibility of government-subsidized competition.
-Third, there's a chance that PRIIA 209 would restrict the operation of additional buses without state support.
-Fourth, there's a risk that some genius in DC could decide to push to bustitute much of the LD network.

 

[Bus Nut]

I think the bigger issue, Anderson, with Thruway service is purely regulatory. Years ago, a deal was struck with the then-regulated Greyhound/Trailways not to issue Amtrak Thruway tickets without a rail portion, so as not to undercut the private market with a subsidized operator.

But Greyhound pushed for and got deregulation years ago. It's the wild west for bus service now. And as a result, Greyhound has dropped miles and miles and miles of rural routes. There's nobody left standing BUT the government (in this case, state government) to provide vital ground transportation links.

It's time to change the rules to reflect the current reality--that private ground transportation services exist to "skim the cream" (that means operating non-stop between major city pairs)--and allow Thruway to expand into a partially subsidized rural bus network which can do bus-only direct ticketing.

I'm not working about the "geeeenyuses" in DC because buses can't replace multi-day LD first class service, and they aren't more economic than rail for high volume corridors. With 51-58 seats/coach, buses are ideal for moderate distance, lower volume rural connector services (that feed into higher volume trunks and urban multimodal centers).

 

[Anderson]

I think the bigger issue, Anderson, with Thruway service is purely regulatory. Years ago, a deal was struck with the then-regulated Greyhound/Trailways not to issue Amtrak Thruway tickets without a rail portion, so as not to undercut the private market with a subsidized operator.

But Greyhound pushed for and got deregulation years ago. It's the wild west for bus service now. And as a result, Greyhound has dropped miles and miles and miles of rural routes. There's nobody left standing BUT the government (in this case, state government) to provide vital ground transportation links.

It's time to change the rules to reflect the current reality--that private ground transportation services exist to "skim the cream" (that means operating non-stop between major city pairs)--and allow Thruway to expand into a partially subsidized rural bus network which can do bus-only direct ticketing.

I'm not working about the "geeeenyuses" in DC because buses can't replace multi-day LD first class service, and they aren't more economic than rail for high volume corridors. With 51-58 seats/coach, buses are ideal for moderate distance, lower volume rural connector services (that feed into higher volume trunks and urban multimodal centers).

There's a halfway point here, too: In theory, why couldn't Greyhound and Amtrak simply agree to interline on one another's websites? Ignore Bolt Bus for a moment, but it would seem to make sense that Greyhound (which, as you note, has been dropping lines for years in rural areas...I pulled up a map, and Greyhound is so sparse in the west that I've got to wonder if they wouldn't leap at the chance to drop some of their remaining (and in some cases, partly redundant...there are, for example, three lines between Denver and Salt Lake City) lines while maintaining some semblance of connectivity via Amtrak? Even if the interline wasn't 100%, a partial interline would seem to be better than nothing.

(Map: http://extranet.greyhound.com/Revsup/schedules/sa-50.pdf )

 

[The Journalist]

Of course any Amtrak passengers to RNO will probably be on the CZ because the bus-train combo is $10 more expensive, which is a significant difference considering the CC dosen't even have reclining seats. I really don't know why people still ride the train here when the roads are clear, Amtrak needs to NOT be five times more expensive than the bus while so much slower.

It looks like you found an outlier on those fares-the CZ is almost always more than the bus/train CC combination; they don't want too many short-distance passengers on the long-distance trains. The fact that they can charge that much and still get ~100k riders between the Ambuses and the trains shows just how badly viewed Greyhound is in this market, which is cheaper, faster, and doesn't usually need transfers. It'll be interesting to see what the Ambus figures are when a full year of Megabus has been going, particularly now that they're stopping in Reno proper as well as Sparks.

Only three of the Greyhounds stop in Truckee, Colfax and Roseville and although the Reno to San Francisco fare is $12.00 the Truckee to S.F. fare is $35.00 even though the trip is shorter, there is no web only special!!!

Now that's just weird.

 

[Paulus]

There are a couple of issues with expanding Thruway service on a major scale:

-First, Amtrak doesn't have the money to buy a massive pile of buses.

-Second, if Amtrak ran a lot of their own buses, Greyhound and the other bus operators would likely throw a fit at the possibility of government-subsidized competition.

-Third, there's a chance that PRIIA 209 would restrict the operation of additional buses without state support.

-Fourth, there's a risk that some genius in DC could decide to push to bustitute much of the LD network.

Just have Amtrak contract out with Greyhound, CouchUSA, etc. to run the buses for them (as they already do). No need to purchase the buses, no complaints from the bus companies. PRIIA would only be an issue if the buses don't cover their own costs, but that's incredibly easy for a bus connection to do unless you don't count the rail fare in the buses favor.

 

[SubwayNut]

That Greyhound map is old too! I know about five years ago Greyhound for example dropped all buses stopping in Santa Fe (the Denver to ABQ ones just roll on through on the highway), its still on the map (but nowhere in the referenced timetable).

Intercity Bus service in the rural intermountain is terrible, and most regular transit service as well.

 

[Swadian Hardcore]

That Greyhound map is old and outdated. Greyhound used to run three routes betwene Denver and SLC. They cut all but the Wyoming route, then later restroed the US 40 through Craig. That bus runs through to Reno and I've taken it many many times. Great ride for a bus.

Here's the facts about Greyhound fares:

Reno-Sacramento: $8 weekdays, $10 weekends and Friday.

Reno-Oakland/San Francisco: $10 weekdays, $12 weekends and Friday.

If you're going to Truckee or someplace with higher fares (less competition), then just buy a ticket to Reno and get off at your stop, the driver dosen't care.

Schedules are:

5xDaily to SFD, three express, two locals. Expresses stop at Sacramento and Oakland, locals stop at Truckee, Colkax, Roseville, and sometimes at Suisun City.

Greyhound ridership is going up at an extremly fast pace because they have bought a new bus every two days. Right now most buses out of Reno are D4505, with some 102DL3 and G4500.

Sorry, I know I just talked a lot about buses but I just wanted to clear up some confusion and errors in the above posts.

 

[pebbleworm]

I won't take the bus until the Cyclops comes in to service:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Big_Bus_Cyclops_1.jpg

Just too many memories of the graydog in the 1980s...

 

[Swadian Hardcore]

I won't take the bus until the Cyclops comes in to service:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Big_Bus_Cyclops_1.jpg

Just too many memories of the graydog in the 1980s...

Yeah, the 1980s, back when Teets was pushing his drivers over the edge. Strikes were prevelent, drivers were angry, fighting and dissent was common.

This is 2013 and I do have a thick bus record from right here in Reno. If you're ever taking a dog here, just ask me.

 

[ALC Rail Writer]

Does Greyhound have WiFi on these routes?

 

[Anderson]

You've indirectly raised an advantage the train has over driving: The ability to peck away at a computer or surf on a tablet. Honestly, given the choice between three hours driving or four on a train, I know I'm not the only one who would pick the longer time because I can actually enjoy myself on the train.

 

[Nathanael]

That Greyhound map is old and outdated.

The unfortunate thing is that Greyhound has not issued a new map since 2010.

 

[Anderson]

That Greyhound map is old and outdated.

The unfortunate thing is that Greyhound has not issued a new map since 2010.

Greyhound seems to go to pains to keep its routes a bit of a secret.

 

[dlagrua]

Fares going up, American's salaries continue to decline. Not a good combination for business going forward.

 

[Swadian Hardcore]

Fares going up, American's salaries continue to decline. Not a good combination for business going forward.

Great point, Diagrua. That $40 I save each way will be put towards my planned rail trips in China. Great country for railfans, I took on a Chinese name because the locals were amused that some American guy (me) would be so interested in trains.

Does Greyhound have WiFi on these routes?

Yes, on the Reno-San Francisco route, the D4505s have Wi-Fi and power outlets. These buses were just delivered in October 2013. All buses from Reno now have Wi-Fi, excpet emergency fleet shortages. It dosen't work very well in the middle of the desert or on US Route 40's Berthoud Pass, but it works well around the more populated areas. The previous G4500 was a very bad bus, but G4500s are mostly goners now!

That Greyhound map is old and outdated.

The unfortunate thing is that Greyhound has not issued a new map since 2010.

Hey, check this out! An updated, detailed, reletively accurate map of all intercity buses in the USA: http://www.aibra.org/pdf/usmap.pdf. Note that it includes Amtrak train service as well.

I'm not threadjacking this time, the conversation basically shifted to buses from the start.

 

[ALC Rail Writer]

Yes, on the Reno-San Francisco route, the D4505s have Wi-Fi and power outlets. These buses were just delivered in October 2013. All buses from Reno now have Wi-Fi, excpet emergency fleet shortages. It dosen't work very well in the middle of the desert or on US Route 40's Berthoud Pass, but it works well around the more populated areas. The previous G4500 was a very bad bus, but G4500s are mostly goners now!

That is a good selling point, if I lived there I'd be tempted. Though I don't travel on busses if I don't have to, all those electronics won't fix the tiny seats.

Out here Greyhound runs a terrible operation. Old contracted busses, limiting reduced schedules. Amtrak gets me to and from Chicago in less time and for less money. (Canton-Washington on Greyhound is $72.50 and takes over 12 hours, Amtrak ALC-WAS is 9 hours and only $55). Also they have terrible arrival times, sure I get to leave Canton in the day time but I don't like the idea of being dropped off in a DC bus terminal at 4AM. The opposite is preferred, a red-eye train with a mid-morning/afternoon arrival into a major metro is much more preferable.

And nothing gets me more excited to eat than twenty minutes in a West Virginia rest stop (labelled a "meal" stop). No thank you.. for my money (and tax subsidy) I'd rather watch my hamburger get unceremoniously nuked in front of me.

 

[Nathanael]

Thanks, Swadian, I've been looking for one of those for a while.... but what it does NOT show is what the actual bus routes are -- i.e. when you have to get off and change buses. I know people who have sworn off bus travel forever due to an unexpected change of bus at some random restaurant in the middle of nowhere.

 

[Nathanael]

Fares going up, American's salaries continue to decline. Not a good combination for business going forward.

Except that gas prices and the prices of cars and car insurance are going up too... so we are likely to see less travel overall, but more of it by train/bus.

 

[Swadian Hardcore]

Thanks, Swadian, I've been looking for one of those for a while.... but what it does NOT show is what the actual bus routes are -- i.e. when you have to get off and change buses. I know people who have sworn off bus travel forever due to an unexpected change of bus at some random restaurant in the middle of nowhere.

I know the transfer points, if anyone wants to go from anywhere to anywhere by Greyhound I should be able to provide lots of help. Not so sure about the pleathora of other operators.

I don't understand why Greyhound is so bad in Canton, they seem pretty good in Cleveland. Greyhound dosen't contract any buses in that area, so I'm dumbfounded. Do you mean allied buses?

 

[ALC Rail Writer]

It's because there's only one line going between Cleveland and West Virginia that runs through Canton. If you want to transfer to anything you have to ride the bus to Cleveland first, meaning all your connections are going to be afternoon or evening buses out. There used to be lines between Cleveland, Columbus and Cincinnati with stops in Akron, Canton and Dayton but no more (said line hit over 80% of the Ohio metro area). It's not just rural areas where Greyhound pulled out of--the fact remains that one dinky little stop in ALC serves the Akron-Canton-Youngstown metro area with faster and cheaper fares to New York, Washington and Chicago.

 

[ALC Rail Writer]

Of course CAK regional airport provides much faster service for less than twice the price of Greyhound or Amtrak and has sane arrival and departure times. But let's not add yet another dimension to this conversation.

But lest we think I'm all about Amtrak, no I think a restoration of intercity bus service would be a boon to Ohioans especially since Amtrak is, for the moment, incapable of getting past politics to run day trains here.

 

[Swadian Hardcore]

Anyway, back on topic, don't you guys think that Sacramento-Reno is not a good train corridor? Reno dosen't have that much people and the economy is driven by lots of gambling. Those big Sierra Nevada mountains are bad terrain for trains, making them slow, while buses make good headway. I think this route is a great bus route and a terrible train route.

I know the Reno Fun Train is very popular, but remember, it's the Reno Fun Train! It's not for everyday travel! Amtrak needs to work on the Central Valley, where the situation is suitable for trains.

 

[jebr]

Anyway, back on topic, don't you guys think that Sacramento-Reno is not a good train corridor? Reno dosen't have that much people and the economy is driven by lots of gambling. Those big Sierra Nevada mountains are bad terrain for trains, making them slow, while buses make good headway. I think this route is a great bus route and a terrible train route.

I know the Reno Fun Train is very popular, but remember, it's the Reno Fun Train! It's not for everyday travel! Amtrak needs to work on the Central Valley, where the situation is suitable for trains.

With the current track situation, yes, the bus is more feasible than the train (4 hr 47 minute train vs. 2 hr 20 minute bus.) I don't know if the track can be improved at a reasonable enough price to make it speed-efficient.

That being said, I could see an overnight train, where speed won't matter as much, be somewhat popular. Maybe not in the SAC - RNO market (2.5 hours isn't long enough for most people to take a longer trip during sleeping hours over a daytime bus,) but in an SFC/EMY - RNO market it could do well.

Of course, there are people who will take the train despite it being much slower, and people traveling for leisure probably don't prioritize time as much as business travelers. Amtrak would just need to get the price right on it.