Wow. The food menus have really changed

[The Chief]

Thanks BillH for the clarification you offered on train names The Chief vs. The Super Chief. As my SN attests, I may be sensitive to that.

In an earlier reply you also clarified correctly about the single unit diner on The Super, as well as the rest of the SFe fleet. On the Super, my understanding is all the Turquoise Room meals were prepared in the Dining Car kichen, and carried to the Turquoise Room.

My dad told me Nos. 17-18 (Super) and 19-20 (the Chief) used to sometimes stop and take on freshly caught rainbow trout in La Junta when available. All the fruits and vegetables and dairy were top shelf and fresh. Those guys knew how to cook delicious dishes, from sunrise to moonrise.

Santa Fe's meals may have been the best in the West. I'm pretty sure AT&SF is the origin of the famous Railroad French Toast. Now, pass that flat iron steak. HA!

 

[TVRM610]

I'm not faulting the designers of the Turquoise Room here, it was designed to be a "Private" dining room that celebrities could use to entertain. So it was designed to be small, intimate, and private. But to criticize the design of an Amtrak dining car vs. the Turquoise Room seems crazy.

I'm not commenting on the menu here, obviously the menu is far superior, and I'm positive the food quality was out of this world on the Chief.

I do not mean to be overly picky here. But I note that you say Chief instead of Super Chief. Could be you are just cutting it short and saving space. Just like saying Century instead of 20th Century Limited or Eagle instead of Texas Eagle.

Indeed I was simply shortening it. Since I was referring to the Turquoise Room I assumed it would be obvious that I was only referring to the Super Chief.

I can only hope that no one mistakenly assumed I was referring to the current Southwest Chief and booked a ticket based on the "far superior menus and out of this world food quality" I mentioned. :hi:

 

[Bill Haithcoat]

When I was a kid I usually traveled with mother. Daddy was subject to motion sickness and did not travel much.

Point is, mother and I got kind of conditioned to how good the train food was. But two times daddy took a chance on traveling with us and him not being so used to it, was overwhelmed by how good train food was.

Daddy also did not like coffee but he had some on the train, loved it, and spent the rest of his life drinking coffee. Of course he never found any as good as what he had sampled on the train.

 

[dlagrua]

I was born in the 1950's and my family never traveled far except for some occasional 50 mile car trips. As one who has never sampled the prime of railroad cuisine, this whole post evokes a curiosity about how it once was. We can talk about the old menus that had the fancy appetizers, surperb meat, fish, poultry entrees, salads and luscious deserts but reality is todays Amtrak menu (which in most cases is very good but not gourmet quality).

 

[Shawn Ryu]

First of all.. Amtrak still uses White Tablecloths in all full service dining cars, they are just disposable on most trains.

It's not really a tablecloth so much as a giant paper napkin over a cheap plastic table. Reminds me of a McDonalds on wheels with waitstaff. I do agree however that the menu isn't the primary problem I have with Amtrak's meal service, it's the poor quality and low nutritional value of the food itself. I eat out all the time but if I was ever served an Amtrak grade meal at anything but a fast food location I'd promptly send it back and leave.

I agree if we are talking about service on trains like Cardinals where they just microwave frozen food.

But really how is food on other services any worse than restaurant foods?

 

[Ispolkom]

Daddy also did not like coffee but he had some on the train, loved it, and spent the rest of his life drinking coffee. Of course he never found any as good as what he had sampled on the train.

Why is it that train coffee is so good? When stationary, I'm not particularly fond of Green Mountain Coffee Roasters coffee, but there's nothing as good as that first mug of it in the Empire Builder's diner as we clatter west past Devil's Lake.

I liked reading the Broadway Limited's menu. I had to look up "orange and pineapple macedoine," only to be disappointed to find that meant fruit cocktail. On the other hand, I'd be very happy to get a white Bordeaux or a Chateauneuf du Pape in an Amtrak diner.

I agree with those who suggest that it's unfair to compare Amtrak fare to what you got on the Super Chief. We live in fallen times, and a better comparison might be what the Twin Star Rocket served, or the Mainstreeter. In any case, I think that the consistency of Amtrak diner food has improved over the past, say, five years. Even the Cardinal can serve a perfectly fine pot roast (though stay away from their microwaved French toast), and some of the specialty dishes on the real diners (the buffaloaf, the chipotle pork and rice, some curry dish on the Silver Meteor) have been pretty tasty. It's not fine dining, but it is fairly consistently palatable.

 

[TVRM610]

First of all.. Amtrak still uses White Tablecloths in all full service dining cars, they are just disposable on most trains.

It's not really a tablecloth so much as a giant paper napkin over a cheap plastic table. Reminds me of a McDonalds on wheels with waitstaff. I do agree however that the menu isn't the primary problem I have with Amtrak's meal service, it's the poor quality and low nutritional value of the food itself. I eat out all the time but if I was ever served an Amtrak grade meal at anything but a fast food location I'd promptly send it back and leave.

I agree if we are talking about service on trains like Cardinals where they just microwave frozen food.

But really how is food on other services any worse than restaurant foods?

Does the Cardinal have any microwaved entree's? I thought it was all Convection Oven like the Diners for the dining car menu.

And as far as every other diner except the Cardinal goes, no difference between Amtrak food and a chain like Applebees. Those restaurants get frozen food that is heated in convection ovens, and a few items that are "grilled" to order like steaks. Same as Amtrak. The quality of Amtrak food has everything to do with the "chef." If you care about how the food goes out, it's gonna taste good.

The problem is not the quality of the food, or the kitchen. It is the consistency in the chefs. And yes, dining cars are inconsistent with the quality of food preparation.

 

[Devil's Advocate]

I agree if we are talking about service on trains like Cardinals where they just microwave frozen food. But really how is food on other services any worse than restaurant foods?

Amtrak's burgers on trains like the SL and TE are dry, bland, and tasteless in my view. I can find a much better burger at any of hundreds of restaurants in my home town any day of the week. Even the national chain restaurants should be able to beat Amtrak's dismal food service without even trying.

And as far as every other diner except the Cardinal goes, no difference between Amtrak food and a chain like Applebees.

I'm not an expert on generic chain restaurants but if Applebees really can't beat Amtrak food then that's a rather damning statement in my view.

The quality of Amtrak food has everything to do with the "chef." If you care about how the food goes out, it's gonna taste good. The problem is not the quality of the food, or the kitchen. It is the consistency in the chefs. And yes, dining cars are inconsistent with the quality of food preparation.

I actually find Amtrak food to be extremely consistent. Which makes sense since Amtrak uses sources and preparation methods specifically selected to give the exact same result every single time regardless of who's making it. People who warm frozen food in convection ovens have no business being called "chefs" in my opinion.

 

[AlanB]

The quality of Amtrak food has everything to do with the "chef." If you care about how the food goes out, it's gonna taste good. The problem is not the quality of the food, or the kitchen. It is the consistency in the chefs. And yes, dining cars are inconsistent with the quality of food preparation.

I actually find Amtrak food to be extremely consistent. Which makes sense since Amtrak uses sources and preparation methods specifically selected to give the exact same result every single time regardless of who's making it. People who warm frozen food in convection ovens have no business being called "chefs" in my opinion.

Today it is indeed very consistent and for exactly the reasons that you've stated. At one point just a few years ago that was not the case; things could vary quite widely and wildly depending on the whims of the chef. I'm not sure if it's still true or not, but back then Amtrak actually went to culinary schools to recruit chefs for the dining cars.

Now I can't speak to whether it was the older chefs or the new, younger ones that were least consistent. Frankly, I rather suspect that there were good chefs and bad chefs in both groups. Pretty much like anything in life and in any company, there were those who took pride in their work and tried to do a good job and those who were there to collect a paycheck.

It was a combination of that wildly varying quality and the reduced costs from doing things the new way that led to the current style of doing things. Of course even now the care & enthusiasm of the chef can still lend itself to a slightly better product or just an ok product for the passenger/customer.

One thing that I will say is that even though perhaps some of the chefs wouldn't qualify to work in the finest restaurants, cooking steaks on the grill, omelets, and a few other items still at least qualifies them as a chef.

 

[The Journalist]

I've never had a meal in an Amtrak diner that I didn't like (granted I haven't had all that many) and I'm far too young to have ever been on any of the "Golden Years" trains. These statements may be related...

 

[PRR 60]

Today it is indeed very consistent and for exactly the reasons that you've stated. At one point just a few years ago that was not the case; things could vary quite widely and wildly depending on the whims of the chef. I'm not sure if it's still true or not, but back then Amtrak actually went to culinary schools to recruit chefs for the dining cars.

Now I can't speak to whether it was the older chefs or the new, younger ones that were least consistent. Frankly, I rather suspect that there were good chefs and bad chefs in both groups. Pretty much like anything in life and in any company, there were those who took pride in their work and tried to do a good job and those who were there to collect a paycheck.

It was a combination of that wildly varying quality and the reduced costs from doing things the new way that led to the current style of doing things. Of course even now the care & enthusiasm of the chef can still lend itself to a slightly better product or just an ok product for the passenger/customer.

One thing that I will say is that even though perhaps some of the chefs wouldn't qualify to work in the finest restaurants, cooking steaks on the grill, omelets, and a few other items still at least qualifies them as a chef.

The Amtrak chefs were trained by the CIA*.

I'm willing to bet that many fine restaurant chefs would not qualify to work on Amtrak. Preparing literaly hundreds of meals in a confined space that is rocking and bouncing would send most cooks running for the door. Cooking on Amtrak, even when it is just heating pre-prepared items, is a skill that not many possess.

*CIA, Culinary Institute of America, not the Central Intelligence Agency

 

[dlagrua]

Today it is indeed very consistent and for exactly the reasons that you've stated. At one point just a few years ago that was not the case; things could vary quite widely and wildly depending on the whims of the chef. I'm not sure if it's still true or not, but back then Amtrak actually went to culinary schools to recruit chefs for the dining cars.

Now I can't speak to whether it was the older chefs or the new, younger ones that were least consistent. Frankly, I rather suspect that there were good chefs and bad chefs in both groups. Pretty much like anything in life and in any company, there were those who took pride in their work and tried to do a good job and those who were there to collect a paycheck.

It was a combination of that wildly varying quality and the reduced costs from doing things the new way that led to the current style of doing things. Of course even now the care & enthusiasm of the chef can still lend itself to a slightly better product or just an ok product for the passenger/customer.

One thing that I will say is that even though perhaps some of the chefs wouldn't qualify to work in the finest restaurants, cooking steaks on the grill, omelets, and a few other items still at least qualifies them as a chef.

The Amtrak chefs were trained by the CIA*.

I'm willing to bet that many fine restaurant chefs would not qualify to work on Amtrak. Preparing literaly hundreds of meals in a confined space that is rocking and bouncing would send most cooks running for the door. Cooking on Amtrak, even when it is just heating pre-prepared items, is a skill that not many possess.

*CIA, Culinary Institute of America, not the Central Intelligence Agency

I was in a Superliner kitchen two years ago and it has enough room for up to 3 chefs to do their thing. The Heritage diners are a bit more cramped but not much more than they were back in the day.

 

[Bill Haithcoat]

There may be differences of opinion about how much "better" food may have been in the past. And thinking it might have been better on trains like the Super Chief and 20th Century Limited than lesser trains.

But it is pretty clear there was more variety in the past and much more in the way of regional specialties.

 

[TVRM610]

Today it is indeed very consistent and for exactly the reasons that you've stated. At one point just a few years ago that was not the case; things could vary quite widely and wildly depending on the whims of the chef. I'm not sure if it's still true or not, but back then Amtrak actually went to culinary schools to recruit chefs for the dining cars.

AlanB, the food is not consistent now either. Just last month (Feb.) I rode round trip on the Silver Meteor. The "Dinner Special" on both trains was the Mahi Mahi with Cajun "sauce." On the Southbound Train, the Fish was served on the flat plate, with rice, and veggies on the side. The Cajun sauce was served on the side in a bowl. On the Northbound train, I ordered the same dish, and it was served in a bowl (kind of a plate bowl combo, they usually use it for the pasta dishes). The fish was sitting on top of the rice, the rice had the sauce on top of it. There were also no vegetables served. While the ingredients were the same, these two dishes were prepared and served in 2 entirely different ways. The second way, being a much smaller overall portion. This example to me, is the very definition of "inconsistent."

This past summer when I rode the City of New Orleans to connect to the Capitol, I noticed the same type of inconsistencies.

 

[jphjaxfl]

Thanks BillH for the clarification you offered on train names The Chief vs. The Super Chief. As my SN attests, I may be sensitive to that.

In an earlier reply you also clarified correctly about the single unit diner on The Super, as well as the rest of the SFe fleet. On the Super, my understanding is all the Turquoise Room meals were prepared in the Dining Car kichen, and carried to the Turquoise Room.

My dad told me Nos. 17-18 (Super) and 19-20 (the Chief) used to sometimes stop and take on freshly caught rainbow trout in La Junta when available. All the fruits and vegetables and dairy were top shelf and fresh. Those guys knew how to cook delicious dishes, from sunrise to moonrise.

Santa Fe's meals may have been the best in the West. I'm pretty sure AT&SF is the origin of the famous Railroad French Toast. Now, pass that flat iron steak. HA!

Many of the larger railroads had their own farms and ranches for raising food. The Missouri Pacific/Texas & Pacific were famous for their steaks which were produced from cattle on railroad owned ranches in Texas. Many railroads had Dining Car Specialties that they were famous for ie: Northern Pacific's huge Idaho baked potato which was a meal in itself. Some travelers chose their railroad to travel based on their Dining Car experiences.

 

[AlanB]

Today it is indeed very consistent and for exactly the reasons that you've stated. At one point just a few years ago that was not the case; things could vary quite widely and wildly depending on the whims of the chef. I'm not sure if it's still true or not, but back then Amtrak actually went to culinary schools to recruit chefs for the dining cars.

AlanB, the food is not consistent now either. Just last month (Feb.) I rode round trip on the Silver Meteor. The "Dinner Special" on both trains was the Mahi Mahi with Cajun "sauce." On the Southbound Train, the Fish was served on the flat plate, with rice, and veggies on the side. The Cajun sauce was served on the side in a bowl. On the Northbound train, I ordered the same dish, and it was served in a bowl (kind of a plate bowl combo, they usually use it for the pasta dishes). The fish was sitting on top of the rice, the rice had the sauce on top of it. There were also no vegetables served. While the ingredients were the same, these two dishes were prepared and served in 2 entirely different ways. The second way, being a much smaller overall portion. This example to me, is the very definition of "inconsistent."

This past summer when I rode the City of New Orleans to connect to the Capitol, I noticed the same type of inconsistencies.

That's more about presentation and not the quality and taste of the food, which is what I was talking about.

Regardless that second cook decided to go above and beyond what he/she was supposed to do.

 

[had8ley]

Today it is indeed very consistent and for exactly the reasons that you've stated. At one point just a few years ago that was not the case; things could vary quite widely and wildly depending on the whims of the chef. I'm not sure if it's still true or not, but back then Amtrak actually went to culinary schools to recruit chefs for the dining cars.

Now I can't speak to whether it was the older chefs or the new, younger ones that were least consistent. Frankly, I rather suspect that there were good chefs and bad chefs in both groups. Pretty much like anything in life and in any company, there were those who took pride in their work and tried to do a good job and those who were there to collect a paycheck.

It was a combination of that wildly varying quality and the reduced costs from doing things the new way that led to the current style of doing things. Of course even now the care & enthusiasm of the chef can still lend itself to a slightly better product or just an ok product for the passenger/customer.

One thing that I will say is that even though perhaps some of the chefs wouldn't qualify to work in the finest restaurants, cooking steaks on the grill, omelets, and a few other items still at least qualifies them as a chef.

The Amtrak chefs were trained by the CIA*.

I'm willing to bet that many fine restaurant chefs would not qualify to work on Amtrak. Preparing literaly hundreds of meals in a confined space that is rocking and bouncing would send most cooks running for the door. Cooking on Amtrak, even when it is just heating pre-prepared items, is a skill that not many possess.

*CIA, Culinary Institute of America, not the Central Intelligence Agency

I was in a Superliner kitchen two years ago and it has enough room for up to 3 chefs to do their thing. The Heritage diners are a bit more cramped but not much more than they were back in the day.

Believe it or not the Heritage diners (pre-Amtrak)carried four chefs or cooks in the galley~ the fourth cook was also the dishwasher.

 

[Anderson]

I've only had one questionable meal in my travels thus far: A pasta dish on a Silver in early January, 2007. Since then, I've found that the steak has always been good (I think they use Omaha Steaks as a supplier), and I've found other meals to be quite enjoyable as well. Amtrak food may not be Morton's, mind you, but as far as a meal while I'm en route from A to B, it is very hard to beat.

With that said, I'm wont to launch into a speech right about now on how America has traded quality in so many ways for things that are "cheap" in both senses of the term: Cheap cost, cheap quality. But that is another story entirely...

 

[Bill Haithcoat]

I always enjoyed eating on the train.

My first full cup of coffee was on the train. And it was not even dining car coffee. It was just from a "butcher boy" on a multi stop local from Chattanooga to Memphis.

My first cheesecake was eaten on the Southern Crescent crossing the Potomac at midnight, several hours late.

It can be said that I learned to at least tolerate salads and vegetables on the train since they, after all, came with our meals.

Much has been written on these threads lately about how expensive dining on the train was. I can concur, or at least my parents thought so. IIRC I would typically get a full meal in the diner and mother would take a salad and coffee, something like that. She sensed that it meant "more than just food" for me.

 

[had8ley]

I always enjoyed eating on the train.

My first full cup of coffee was on the train. And it was not even dining car coffee. It was just from a "butcher boy" on a multi stop local from Chattanooga to Memphis.

When I was in boarding school the afternoon train from Pittsfield, MA to NYC had no cafe-diner. A "news-butcher" (I believe Union News had the contract) would get on as they changed engines in Danbury. It was amazing what he lugged around in that box with the wrap around handle. "Hurshey Baarrs, Cwacker Jax, cold drinks, newspapers and even cigarettes and the New York papers. It was even more amazing was how he carried that thing around. I always bought something from him~ it not only seemed special but he would stand by you until you did !!!

 

[TVRM610]

Today it is indeed very consistent and for exactly the reasons that you've stated. At one point just a few years ago that was not the case; things could vary quite widely and wildly depending on the whims of the chef. I'm not sure if it's still true or not, but back then Amtrak actually went to culinary schools to recruit chefs for the dining cars.

AlanB, the food is not consistent now either. Just last month (Feb.) I rode round trip on the Silver Meteor. The "Dinner Special" on both trains was the Mahi Mahi with Cajun "sauce." On the Southbound Train, the Fish was served on the flat plate, with rice, and veggies on the side. The Cajun sauce was served on the side in a bowl. On the Northbound train, I ordered the same dish, and it was served in a bowl (kind of a plate bowl combo, they usually use it for the pasta dishes). The fish was sitting on top of the rice, the rice had the sauce on top of it. There were also no vegetables served. While the ingredients were the same, these two dishes were prepared and served in 2 entirely different ways. The second way, being a much smaller overall portion. This example to me, is the very definition of "inconsistent."

This past summer when I rode the City of New Orleans to connect to the Capitol, I noticed the same type of inconsistencies.

That's more about presentation and not the quality and taste of the food, which is what I was talking about.

Regardless that second cook decided to go above and beyond what he/she was supposed to do.

Well not really... it is how the food was prepared, or put together that effected the taste of the dish. The second dish was so drowned in the "cajun" sauce that you couldn't taste anything but the sauce. The fact that two different dishes that are advertised exactly the same can vary in presentation and taste the way they did to me is inconsistent all the way around.

BUT.. I think you might have originally meant that chef's had more ability to change actual ingredients for instance wrap bacon around a pork tenderloin just because they wanted to prepare it that way. I'm just using that as an example, but if that's what you meant, then yes for the most part the actual ingredients used are quite consistent. Obviously the taste of the food will still vary from chef to chef.

 

[Devil's Advocate]

Well not really... it is how the food was prepared, or put together that effected the taste of the dish. The second dish was so drowned in the "cajun" sauce that you couldn't taste anything but the sauce. The fact that two different dishes that are advertised exactly the same can vary in presentation and taste the way they did to me is inconsistent all the way around.

You're still describing inconsistent presentation, just as Alan has already explained to you.

 

[dlagrua]

If the sauce was mixed in rather than being served on the side that sounds like a mode of preparation to me.