Google say it takes 31h to drive between the two -- any idea why the Amtrak takes twice that time?
The biggest constraint is "civilized" sleep, which is best had in a real bed at a real hotel, whose locations are constrained by settlements and whose typical availability hours begin at 15:00 local time and end at 11:00 local time. When you're driving west and passing through timezones, you can gain an extra hour that you can use for rest, while if you're driving east, you're racing doubly against the clock, as you're losing an extra hour you could be sleeping in a hotel at every timezone.
My longest "map-time" drive sprint (not including stops) between sleeps is 19 hours, which was filled with delirium towards the end, and I would never recommend. I've done a 16-hour sprint to similar results, and have done multiple ~12-hour sprints with no issues whatsoever. In my experience, 12 hours is around the upper limit of how much "map-time" distance one can safely drive between sleeps, especially if one is to perform a comparable drive for three consecutive days.
I have found on my cross country trips that there are plenty of small towns scatters across the US to make finding a hotel within an hour easy (though I'm sure you can find exceptions). I have also found a lot of interesting "small town" parks and culture because I forced myself to stop and find something (anything!) to do after 11 hours on the road.
On the train, you will often have to pull over to let freight trains pass you.
Nevada, Wyoming, Montana, possibly the Dakotas, are principle exceptions in the lower 48, though this means an upper bound on this interval, at least along principle rotes. An example is the 75 miles along I-94 between Buffalo and Cheyenne, Wyoming, with no highway exits or onramps at all. There are, however, services, at either end.
Alaska is a domain unto itself.
Also there are several sections that are particularly slow. The track through the Rockies is the original 1869 route, with original curvy single track and original tunnels. Speed there is around 20mph. Sometimes you come close to I-70, where cars are going 60-80mph. The Sierras also have slow sections. That said, those were my favorite parts of the trip.
The more famous railroad finished in 1869 takes a more northerly route, through Ogden instead of Provo, and through Rawlins, Laramie, and Cheyenne in Wyoming instead of adjacent to I-70 through Grand Junction and Denver.
The mountainous sections of the Zephyr, specifically the crossings of the Rockies and the Sierras, are indeed the least competitive vs. driving. Based off of the official timetable [2], the Zephyr takes:
~9 hours between Chicago and Omaha vs. 7.5 hours driving
~8.5 hours between Omaha and Denver vs. 7.5 hours driving
~15 hours between Denver and Salt Lake City vs. 8 hours driving
9 hours between Salt Lake City and Reno vs. 7.5 hours driving
7.5 hours between Reno and Emeryville vs. hours 3.5 driving
Lengthening the driving time to include breaks, the train is viable between Chicago and Denver, and between Salt Lake and Reno, but is nearly twice as slow as driving on other parts of the route.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denver_and_Rio_Grande_Western_... [2] https://www.amtrak.com/content/dam/projects/dotcom/english/p...
Most of the class I railroad track was built to handle high speed (by early 20th century standards) traffic, so trains can generally reach 70-90mph (although not so much in suburban or mountainous areas) with little modification. The difficulty is that there's no economic reason to push freight trains to high speed, and mixing higher-speed passenger and low-speed freight creates scheduling conflicts, so passenger speed tends not to hit its top speeds.
[1] On freight track, that is. The NEC, which is all passenger traffic and all-electric, has higher nominal speed: even the "slow" NE regionals will hit 100mph on the empty track in MD.
[1] https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/hsip/xings/com_roaduser/07010/se...
The train is generally pleasant and relaxing. I used to do Albany->NYC a few times a month. It takes less time in that case, but I always looked forward to that trip to work, reflect or just observe.
The problem with the trains is inconsistent times. They share track with freight in many routes and there is little rhyme or reason for many trips. The error bar for arrival for a Boston->Buffalo trip is 3-4 hours, easy.
The real problem is that the cost is greater than or equal to a 4-hour flight.
Kinda makes me wonder how much money is spent on road maintenance that we are not thinking as a cost while driving.
Here in Japan all the highways are privatized and are supposed to be self-funded by tolls. Where I live pretty much any road trip over 45 minutes you're likely to hit a toll.
All tallied up (gas+tolls), driving 3-4 hours costs about as much as taking the 1hr 40minute bullet train (which isn't cheap - about $90 one-way). Driving only becomes economical when you're 3+ people in the car.
I imagine there would be riots in the US if the interstates all started charging tolls.
I've been on Amtrak trains and have seen nothing like that number of employees. My impression is that 1 in 40 or 80 might be closer.
This video is a good analysis. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fwjwePe-HmA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mbEfzuCLoAQ
Spoiler: freight companies own most of the track
You can tell the people who've never taken the train before when they start asking why it's stopped.
I say this out of love, to set expectations. Cross country, if you want to get somewhere ASAFP take a plane. If you want to enjoy a leisurely week+, drive. If you're willing to spend a few days for the scenery of a road trip without having to do the logistics, take the train.
At least it was when I did Chicago -> SF a few years ago. It was great, after the prairies you woke up in Denver & lots more people got on, spent a day going through the Rockies, sleep, and then a day in the Sierras. (I'm pretty sure we spent some of the night parked in a siding.)
Top speed is limited to 79 mph, and is lower in many areas.
As with software development, delays tend to be additive, and not made up.
Any service disruption (track, equipment, weather, accidents, crews) means hours, occasionally (though fairly rarely) days of delays.
Turns out I couldn't find any destination where trains beat driving or flying in the metrics of time or cost even.
I do get that trains work in some regions in the US ~ but we should define those regions or what makes a region good for rail and focus there. Amtrak to me is one of the largest scams the government does - it's a constant money losing operation. It takes in so much money - and loses money on every thing it sells from the tickets to the drinks and food.
On the balance, I find most of these rules to be acceptable most of the time, but it should always be considered that it can be taken too far.
Do you have a ballpark for the financial and human cost of making our basic infrastructure not-accessible?
Only place trains win are very specific regions and for cargo
However, successive directors of Amtrak have always opposed the discontinuation of long-distance routes. Congress could likely force the issue, but it's interesting that Amtrak leadership always leans in favor of them.
There are some routes in the northeast that Amtrak turns a profit on [1][2][3], and some others are subsidized by states enough to still make them worthwhile to operate (CA, IL, NC). But if the long-distance routes were defunded, they'd likely never come back under the Amtrak banner, and significant layoffs would ensue.
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15968720#15976146 [2] http://reasonrail.blogspot.com/2012/12/amtrak-routes-by-2012... [3] http://www.riarp.org/blog/2014/11/25/september-amtrak-report
Yet every day, there it goes. Bypassing a city like Denton, TX where a lot of people live and commute to Dallas or Fort Worth. The opportunity for commuter rail is there... it's just not happening, and I wish that it would.
Realistically, nobody's making that drive in 31 hours anyway without a lot of caffeine and breaking the speed limit.
I did do it in 40 hours and some change, but with one speeding ticket in Utah, and by the time I got home I knew I ain't doing that on "google schedule" again.