posted
I just made a reservation on the Southwest Chief and was placed in Room #13. What are the pros and cons of being on the lower level? I have never had a lower room in the past. I asked the agent about the chance of changing, but it was over $300 extra just to move up! However I can still book a 2nd reservation, and cancel the original.
Let me know what you think.
Posts: 1082 | From: Los Angeles, CA. USA | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
Only steps away from the vestibule where you can open the window on the exit door and stick your head out for some fresh air, dispose of contraband or a small obnoxious child from the family bedroom.
Posts: 218 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I've traveled in a lower and found it to be quieter. In fact, I booked the lower room on purpose, precisely because of the exclusivity of the lower level, as well as for the other points listed in the previous post.
Posts: 134 | From: New York, New York USA | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I prefer a more or less track-level view of America, just as the men who originally built the railroads intended. So for that reason (and all of the others mentioned above), I always book a lower level room, except on those rare occasions when only the upper level is available.
Experience-wise, it's the closest thing to traveling in your own private railroad car. More than once, I've taken trips where I've literally been the only passenger down there.
posted
I, too,have enjoyed lower level rooms for their relative privacy. The absence of foot traffic outside the door makes it much quieter at night.
The only downside, it you'll pardon the pun, is you can't look down on the scenery. The view is still quite good, though. The upside is you can easily get to the vestibule to see out the other side.
Just remember to close your curtains before you go to sleep! Your room is visible from the platform at those morning station stops.
Some people claim there is less sway on the lower level. I have not noticed an appreciable difference, however.
Posts: 2649 | From: California's Monterey Peninsula | Registered: Dec 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I can't stand the lower level! The windows get dirty from all the dust kicked up by the train, and you hear every little noise from the track. Even if the train is on welded rail, there is still some "clickey clack"-most likely from a wheel that isn't perfectly round. This is amplified on the lower level. Let's not forget that BANG BANG as the train goes over a switch frog (or worse, a perpendicular track intersection). Hearing this for 2000 miles is not my idea of fun.
Posts: 286 | From: Knee deep in the retention tank | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Lower Roomettes are my choice; I wish Amtrak would consider them to be a separate category of space such as they do Lower Level Coach seating.
I do, however, respect Messrs. PaulB and Toy's thoughts. But from my perspective, any route over which I travel, such as the Capitol Ltd, Lake Shore, or Auto-Train, I've 'been there done that' umpteen times - pre and post A-Day. Note of course those routes are 'overnights' which diminishes available scenery to view by some two-thirds.
And lastly, as I have previously noted at any railforum at which i participate, regarding scenery riding to Florida, "If you've seen one pine tree, you've seen 'em all".
Posts: 9976 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
I had a lower level roomette on #6 doing one of the pre-scheduled Wyoming detours in 2004 and absolutely loved it for the reasons stated above; less foot-traffic outside my door, access to my larger bag just steps away, and the ability to shoot into the shower when I spied it available rather than trudge downstairs and linger in the vestibule with my shower bag early in the morning.
The sway issue is a valid concern for some people and I have noticed less sway downstairs. The only time sway has bothered me personally upstairs was on an overnight trip during the brief, brief period the 'Kentucky Cardinal' operated with a superliner sleeper.
I would not hesitate to travel in a lower level roomette again....particularly if I were saving $300.00 by doing so.
At the time I took this trip the UP main through Wyoming was new mileage for me. (My previous experience with the Pioneer was when that train originated in Salt Lake City). Riding the Wyoming detour was the sole reason for making that trip. I enjoyed being at track level to get a look at things I had never seen before in the towns we were passing through. Downstairs may have been a frustration had we been on a more scenic route (although Donner Pass was great downstairs too.).
Given that you have made several trips to Oregon on the Coast Starlight already, I think you might want to try it downstairs once so that you can compare the experiences the next time you plan a trip.
-------------------- David Pressley
Advocating for passenger trains since 1973!
Climbing toward 5,000 posts like the Southwest Chief ascending Raton Pass. Cautiously, not nearly as fast as in the old days, and hoping to avoid premature reroutes. Posts: 4203 | From: Western North Carolina | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
The one downside I've seen to a lower level enclosed section is:
The curtains "don't necessarily" provide 100% coverage at night. The lower level is low enough that folks can actually look into your room, especially at stations.
As far as the windows getting dusty... water and a rag solves that! (I've been known to clean my windows at division point stops).
-------------------- The City of Saint Louis (UP, 1967) is still my standard for passenger operations Posts: 1404 | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
A few hours after my reservation, the price for a roomette on the same trip went up, so I am deffinetly going to keep my reservation, and room. Thanks for all the tips!
Posts: 1082 | From: Los Angeles, CA. USA | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by PullmanCo: The one downside I've seen to a lower level enclosed section is:
The curtains "don't necessarily" provide 100% coverage at night. The lower level is low enough that folks can actually look into your room, especially at stations.
Same as on the Viewliners...what's the difference?
Posts: 134 | From: New York, New York USA | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, the windows on the Viewliners and the other single level cars, i believe, are a bit higher than the lower level rooms on the Superliner cars.
I have only ridden in the Lowerlevel of a Superliner once and it was the worst night on a passenger train that i have had. We had the Family bedroom. There was so much banging around and huge horizontal movements(more like violent jerks. Now, it is possible that this was due to the crappy state of the CSX track in the Carolinas and Georgia(Auto Train), however the next year, i was able to ride in the Upper Level in a Roomette, and the ride was signifcantly better. The View, i think is better from the Upstairs, but not so much that if a lower level room cost less that i wouldnt opt for the lower price.
Posts: 143 | From: Richmond, VA | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I really don't have a preference --- lower level or upper level. And would definetly not pay $300 more for an upper. It is quieter on the lower level and being closer to the tracks is interesting too. In a couple of weeks, I am going on a ride from Chicago to Truckee, CA and back (5 days, 4 nights trip). One way I booked the upper and one way I booked the lower.
The most interesting thing was on my March 2006 trip to New Orleans. A roomette was $212. The family bedroom was $216. You bet I paid the extra $4 and had a view of both sides -- that was really fun. Except the attendant thought I was odd... it was the first time she saw 1 person in the family bedroom. Hehehe...
Posts: 100 | From: Milwaukee, WI | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Bear in mind that the family room is right next to the wheels, while the roomettes are farther away. That probably makes a difference in the noise level, if not comfort.
At various times we've had rooms 2, 3, 6, 7, 8, 11 & 14 all on the same route and we can't discern any appreciable difference in ride quality or mechanical noise levels. Track quality, not room number, seems to be the defining issue.
quote:Originally posted by Capltd29: Well, the windows on the Viewliners and the other single level cars, i believe, are a bit higher than the lower level rooms on the Superliner cars.
This is correct. The single-level equipment has windows that are in between the lower level and upper level. If you look at a Bombardier bi-level commuter car that is used by Metrolink, Sounder, ACE, GO transit, and many others, the single level windows at the ends are the same as would be on a single level car. In fact, these cars were meant to be compatible with single-level equipment. You'll note on the bilevel portion, the lower windows are lower than the "in between" single-level section at the ends. It's hard to explain...look at a photo and it will become clear.
Also, note that for a single level car, you have to climb stairs up into it, which isn't so on a Superliner. On the lower level of a Superliner, you are riding in between the wheels and trucks. This explains why when you pass another train, you basically see just wheels going by.
Posts: 286 | From: Knee deep in the retention tank | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't like the lowerlevel rooms at all. I felt they were darker,bumpier, and colder than those upstairs. Also I think the view is far superior upstairs.
Posts: 1577 | From: virginia | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by rtabern: The most interesting thing was on my March 2006 trip to New Orleans. A roomette was $212. The family bedroom was $216. You bet I paid the extra $4 and had a view of both sides -- that was really fun. Except the attendant thought I was odd... it was the first time she saw 1 person in the family bedroom. Hehehe...
I've thought about doing that and I *would* do it too, given the right circumstance and opportunity.
Posts: 134 | From: New York, New York USA | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I only travel on days when I can get a lower level roomette. Other riders have given the reasons-quieter, close to bathrooms and shower and I am told the rocking is less. I have not trouble sleeping so I don't notice the rocking. Give the lower level a try!
Posts: 54 | From: Chagrin Falls, OH, USA | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Colonel, unless one is participating in an activation ritual for the 79mph club, what does the Lower Level Superliner window level mean?
It is not the same as traveling in some Asian countries where burglars will reach into an open sleeper window and help themselves to your property (once traveling Chang-Mai to Bangkok, the Attendant patently gave that warning).
Posts: 9976 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by PullmanCo: Viewliner window is far higher off the ground than is a Superliner lower deck window!
Note the difference: PEOPLE CAN SEE INTO A SL LOWER LEVEL ROOM FROM PLATFORM OR STREET LEVEL!!
I'm not sure how to break the news to you, but when a single-level train pulls into a station equipped with a high-level platform, anyone who so chooses can peek into the Viewliner windows, too.
The solution? You can turn off the lights. Or you can keep your pants on. Or you can simply smile and wave.
posted
Reminds me of a travelling companion who, "Life of Brian" (Monty Python) style, flung open the curtains on the London to Glasgow sleeper, wearing just underpants, only to ind himself staring at a platform full of Motherwell commuters - and them staring back at him...
Logically speaking, the rocking on a lower level roomette ought to be less because the axis of rotation is within the height of the room (maybe head height); whereas upstairs the axis is well below the floor and is therefore magnified.
Geoff M.
-------------------- Geoff M. Posts: 2426 | From: Apple Valley, CA | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Due to bad knees, I traveled in a lower level sleeper in 2005 - great for my knees (because I had the attendant bring all my meals) but very isolating. In September 2006 I traveled in all upper level rooms so I could enjoy the diner, the wine tasting & the (in my opinion) superior views. The common upstairs bathroom can get pretty icky unless people are neat & the attendant vigilant. Also, my lower level room was plagued with a flat wheel (I think) which was extremely annoying for its clank-clank-clank-CLANK-clank all night & day.
-------------------- My new "default" station (EKH) has no baggage service or QuikTrak machine, but the parking is free! And the NY Central RR Museum is just across the tracks (but not open at Amtrak train times. . ..) Posts: 337 | From: Goshen, IN | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
