Plane or train

The first time I went to vegas in the early 80's I took a train from wisconsin to Vegas because it was cheaper than flying. My sister worked at Gold Spike and got me free rooms. It was probably the most fun I ever had on my own. Actually it was my second trip. First was a junket to the Ho.If you had the time, would you take a bus or train to save money and see the scenery?

 

I'd prefer to take a cruise! Logistics for that might be a problem, though!

A bus trip might be an interesting adventure. Maybe a seat up front...away from the restroom.

RICHARD

 

If it ever comes to fruition, i would definitely take a train from LA to Vegas over a plane.

But i definitely choose to drive over the two options.

 

No, but only because my Vegasitis is so bad by the time of my trip, a 2 hour flight seems forever. And worse, "the magic is over" flight home also seems long already. A train in Europe, absolutely. To Vegas? I'm chomping at the bit too much already to enjoy it!

P.S. Like Ken below, bus: never, never, never. Did that once in my youth, and that was one time too many...

 

If I want to see the scenery, I drive. Yes, rail goes a few places roads don't -- a stretch of our coast here is a great example -- but overall roads go everywhere, and when the sun goes down, what do you see outside those Amtrak windows? As for the money thing, time is money, too, so that's not really in this equation.

Bus? Never.

 

Being from the South, there isn't much in regards to passenger trains. The first time I rode one was from Philadelphia to Atlantic City and, really, that was just a commuter train. Still, if I had the time and the money (train travel seems so much more expensive for long distances) I would love to go cross country by rail. Maybe it's just a romantic notion, but the thought of sleeper cars, dining cars, and not being crammed into a row of seats with 2 other people sounds mighty appealing.

 

And in that case the experience is the train.

 

Two years ago I took whole family on Amtrak cross country trip on California zapper Detroit to Chicago and to San Jose visit my sis... took like 3 days get there ( stopped at Reno) but scenery was awesome!!! All inclusive and had suites my room had showers and own bathroom (inside the train) damn!! Was good.

 

In my 20's, I did the train from Vancouver to Sudbury in northern Ontario so about 2/3 across the continent. I drove out with a buddy who was from in Vancouver and I took the train back. Would love to do another cross continent excursion but, more with a little luxury this time around. Southern Ontario to california with a stop in Vegas - sounds good to me!

 

Does Las Vegas even have any regularly-scheduled passenger train service?

 

Yes I believe Amtrak service it regular base... I do believe it's daily as well. I think it does get busy lots people do take train there...

 

Amtrak service to Las Vegas is via bus from terminals elsewhere -- LA, Reno, maybe others.

 

I do not think Amtrak stops at Las Vegas anymore. I cannot find anything in the Amtrak schedule that shows Las Vegas. I think they stopped Las Vegas service years ago. I believe you have to go to Los Angeles and take a bus back to Vegas.
I may be wrong, so somebody chime in if you know for sure.

 

From the mid west, a bus or train trip for me would be something I would never even think about doing. Amtrak, with a sleeping car can cost just as much, if not more than flying. I can be in Vegas in less than four hours by plane. Amtrak is at least a three day trip if they are on time(which is very rare). Greyhound is completely out of the question.
So, for me plane travel in the only way to go. I am getting too old to be wasting time thinking about scenery.

 

I've not done Wisconsin to Vegas and in fact have only taken Amtrak once, from Milwaukee to St. Louis. Too many stops. Two on the way to Chicago and then several more between Chicago and St. Louis. Train would barely get up to speed and it would slow down and pull into the next Hooterville. Sure it was nice to be able to walk around, sleep, etc... but I wouldn't take a train again. I could have driven it in about 5 hours and it took longer than that on the train.

 

Here is a route map for Amtrak.

https://www.amtrak.com/ccurl/631/638/SystemMapMar2015.pdf

 

For Vegas? Nope. I want to get there NOW (so...6 hrs or so). I doubt the train or bus would hold novelty for me. I'm an Amtrak regular on the East Coast and I cannot tell you how much I hate the bus.

 

The train station is in Kingman, AZ. From there is bus service to Vegas.

 

my brother works for Amtrak, they do not go to vegas, the train does go from L.A. to new orleans, the train name is "the city of New Orleans" ...if you have the time yea the train is great but it takes too long for me...

 

I will take a cue from my sister who took a train back home to LA from Milwaukee when our mother died. She said it was nice to have the alone time after 3 weeks of mom's illness and a week after the funeral helping our father adapt. But she would never do it again. I don't need the alone time so put me on a plane.

If I had to take ground travel it would be by car. Maybe the old Route 66 as much as i could although that probably has lost its luster.