The northeast corridor sales they've been doing recently are quite something. I swung NYC to Boston for a mere $16 (usually 10x more, especially on the weekends - and the other way was $20). Even at that price my car had only 3 people left by the time we were in Rhode Island.

It'd be nice if we had something that showed a calendar with prices for each box airline style, though. Someday...

- one personal item, 25 lbs. (12 kg) and 14 x 11 x 7 inches, and

- two carry-on items, 50 lbs. (23 kg) and 28 x 22 x 14 inches each

checked:

- 2 Bags Free - Up to 50 lbs. and 75 linear inches*

- 2 Additional Bags - $20 each

- Oversized Baggage (76-100 linear inches*) - $20 each

so ~ 300 lbs of luggage and the oversized stuff you can take is comprehensive. (bikes, ebikes, surfboards, skiis, musical instruments, golf clubs, guns, etc...)

https://www.amtrak.com/onboard/baggage-policy/baggage-specia...

Checked baggage service in my experience is rare, and actually figuring out whether it is available is hard. It appears it isn't available on any NYP-ALB service, so unless you're starting from Albany, checked luggage would not work for this trip. It used to be available at some (maybe 10% or fewer) stations on the Pacific Surfliner route, but is 'suspended', so it appears it is now only available on very long distance routes. So if you have a connection, you likely won't be able to check baggage. If your connecting short route does offer checked baggage, you'll need to make sure your connection is at least two hours.

Carry-on items can be larger than on a plane and 50lbs, but the trains are poorly fitted to accommodate these, and you'll need to handle the luggage yourself. On the NYP-ALB trains in my experience, for example, there is one luggage rack for large luggage, able to fit perhaps eight pieces at most, for an entire car; since it can be converted to a bike rack, if a single passenger checks a bike, all that storage goes away. There's sometimes space on the floor toward the ends of the car, and sometimes not, and using it is unclear. The remaining option is overhead, so you'll need to be comfortable lifting those 50 pound items above your head while surrounded by impatient people. Just to get them on the train, you'll also need to carry them up rather difficult steps, while surrounded by impatient people. You also need to keep in mind, while placing your luggage, that different doors may be in use at different stations, so if your luggage happens to be in the wrong direction for the the flow of exiting passengers, you'll have a challenge getting to it at a short station stop.

You may need to pay to check luggage on a plane but you can typically wheel it right up to the check-in counter and right out from baggage claim (to a cab).

When I took a ship into NY earlier this year, I decided to just pay to have the luggage shipped home given that I was taking Amtrak in a couple days. Big logistical win that was well worth the few hundred dollar cost. Trains are great in many cases but the ability to bring on huge amounts of luggage is not one of their advantages. (I didn't have a huge piece of luggage but it was wheeled and moderately heavy. Reasonable to pay so as not to deal with it.)

Dates lined up for me on a trip late last spring and I enjoyed it. Would consider doing again.

Maps showed about 1 day and 18 hrs so I accounted for 3 day rental but lodging slipped my mind. So probably another $200-$400, if leaning towards economy options.

5 days * 8h/d * ~73 MPH will take you from SF to NYC, which only needs 4 hotels on the way. However, if you’re including stops in that 8h or fail to avoid traffic it can take a lot longer.

If you're spending all day driving, might as well fly?

Though, there are other reasons to do it, like if you're moving stuff along with your car.

As such 5 days is just a reasonable baseline. It lets you see the country along the way, have some slack, and show up without being exhausted. Got an extra day, week, or month and you can find plenty of things to do along the way, but you still need to account for the underlying distance. Alternatively, if you’re in a hurry there’s plenty of ways to cut that down.

Most of the times I've driven across the US, I was either moving, or transporting a vehicle.

For transportation it mostly stops making sense over 1000km, anyone's time is more valuable than any price difference. The only exception is overnight sleeper trains between major cities.

If you have lots of money to burn, a train with the sleeper car or roomette is a better experience. You can at least lay down and have more room to relax, the windows are less grimy, you get better shades, lights, and much more room to lay down and relax.

The whole point of mass transit is it's not a car, so comparing it to driving is apples and oranges.

Greyhound buses run more-or-less on time. The routes are direct, they're predictable, and they will take you where you want to go. They also don't have a dining car, spacious bathrooms, room to walk around and stretch your legs, etc. If somebody has diarrhea, everybody on that bus is going to know it and smell it.

Amtrak is more comfortable in every way. It's also usually late, and subject to delays because of low rail priority. You can't really count on it for anything other than "it'll leave eventually" and "it'll get there eventually". While on the train, it's really quite pleasant - as long as you don't care about arriving when the schedule said you would.

I can easily believe that trains are more spacious and the seating is more insulated from odors.

But my experience riding trains is that they sway/shake obnoxiously while going around curves. Where as busses like Megabus are a very smooth ride the entire way.

> room to walk around and stretch your legs

My experience with busses is that there are somewhat frequent stops where people are encouraged to walk and use the bathroom. Which isn't a complete fix, but it does serve to substantially mitigate those problems.

I've only used one long-distance Amtrak train (as an international tourist), and it was more comfortable than any long-distance bus I've ever used. Loads of legroom, a power socket, a large toilet at the end of the coach, a big window, a decent seat. There's a table if you book it, e.g. for a group of 3 or 4.

My journey was ~12 hours during the daytime. I wouldn't want to sleep overnight in that seat, but it's still going to be better than a bus.

Example with plenty of pictures of inside the train: https://www.seat61.com/california-zephyr.htm and https://www.seat61.com/UnitedStates.htm

I finally got a roomette experience after Amtrak introduced the lottery for lower prices (and to fill empty seats). I really loved the roomette, and the reintroduction of the dining car (I'm old enough to remember when everyone got to dine...). If I had lots of money I would take it all the time.

But most of my experience with Amtrak is coach. On long trips, it's very hard to get comfortable when trying to rest/sleep. Even if you get a window seat (so somebody isn't waking you up to get up), and manage to find a good position to lay in, the whole train is shaking and bumping and banging at odd times, and the cabin is freezing. Add to that the coughing and talking on phones and everything else and it's not a great time. By the time you arrive the next day you feel like you've been in an MMA fight.

The bus is slightly better. It's still not comfortable, but the ride is much smoother, and generally it's a little quieter. You often get a straight shot for 2-5 hours of just steady movement and light rocking, and then a break where you can stretch your legs or use the bathroom (don't ever poop on the bus!). Sometimes they're late, sometimes they're not, and it's always chaos trying to figure out which gate is which route. But in general I don't feel as beaten up and tired after I finish the bus route.

The other reasons to use the bus is it goes where the train doesn't (we have extremely limited rail lines in the US), it's cheaper, and runs more frequently to more places. Buses also take highways where cell signal is available, so if you have a hotspot you have internet; on Amtrak the internet usually doesn't work and on longer trips there's often no cell signal. The bus is definitely a more fraught journey, but the train ride literally makes me feel worse. I guess it depends on the person.

I should add that Amtrak is going to be a much better experience (maybe the only choice, next to a plane) for people with disabilities or the elderly. Long-term parking is also often available at Amtrak facilities, unlike many bus depots. And I will say that the Amtrak quiet car is a thoughtful respite from noise, even if some people don't respect the rules. But I wouldn't travel on any of these lines without ear plugs and an eye mask.

I completely disagree with this. The point of mass transit is to move people from one place to another. I routinely compare driving, trains, planes, buses, and ride shares. They all have pros and cons and it really depends on the trip.

Yeah, I also think it's unfortunate that flying is so much more affordable. But, as another passenger said on the train, taking the train is also three times the experience!

And when you have a sleeper ticket, three meals a day are included.

It says 3 days and Google Maps says ~2day drive time so I'm assuming either the passengers or driver swap busses at several points.

That would be a miserable trip and I'd pony up the extra money to fly though.

Time passed so much faster than flying. Being able to take in the scenery, get up and walk around, have a mean w/some wine, etc. couldn't be beat.

I understand the sentiment you are trying to convey, but if you need the price to be lower to be worth it, that's the definition of "not worth it" :)

It is a nice experience, worth the time; I was not sensitive to the price. I booked last minute because it was a spur of the moment trip, and iirc we snagged a bargain rate because of that.