Commutes

[Howell]

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2007/04/16/070416fa_fact_paumgarten?currentPage=all

Personally, I can get anywhere I regularly need to go within a ten-minute drive or ten-minute walk. Driving instead of walking ten minutes is really ridiculous.

 

[LunarMist]

I spent 20 years with long commutes, but not anymore. Life is too short.

 

[jtr1962]

Very interesting article which I can definitely relate to. I had a long commute to both high school and college. High school was about an hour and a half each way. College was roughly two hours each way. I remember each commute in detail. Funny thing was I started both at roughly the same time. I left my house about 6:30 AM, then walked about 3 blocks to catch the Q65A bus to the subway which left around 6:34 AM (they actually kept somewhat to a schedule, at least for departure times from the first stop, until traffic got heavy around 7:30 AM). From there it was a 10 to 15 minute, 2.7 mile ride to the 71st/Continental Avenue stop on the Queens Blvd express. The subway entrance was around the corner from the bus stop. Usually the E train would come within a few minutes (I think 6:52 AM was the normal arrival time). The commutes diverged from there. For high school I would take the E train about 8 miles to Seventh Avenue and 53rd Street, then go downstairs to catch the Bronx bound D train. The D train service was somewhat unreliable in those days but I generally caught a train by roughly 7:40 AM. From there it was a roughly 8 mile, half hour or so ride to the Bedford Park Blvd. stop, and then maybe a 5 minute walk to school. School started at 8:20 AM so if the D didn't come by about 7:45 AM, or was appreciably delayed, I was late. Total distance commutted roughly 19 miles, total time on average 1:40 going there and 1:30 coming home (more reliable connections). An alternate route which was about the same time and distance was the E to Queens Blvd, change to the N (now the R), go one stop to Lexington Avenue, then go downstairs and take the 4 to Bedford Park Blvd. A third way was the Q65 bus to Flushing Main Street, 7 to Grand Central/42ndStreet, then 4 to Bedford Park Blvd. You have to love the redundancy built into the NYC transit system. Many trips have multiple ways to get there.

The college commute involved staying on the E train until 34th Street/Penn Station, which is three stops down from 7th Avenue. Total distance on the E then was roughly ten miles. Usually the E train got me to Penn Station at 7:20 AM or so. I allowed myself 15 minutes slack time to catch the 7:33 AM NJ Transit Northeast Corridor local. This train always left on time, and the next one would have got me to school late on days when I had 9 AM classes, so I had to allow the slack time just in case the subway or bus was delayed. The NJ Transit commuter train took 61 minutes to do the 48.5 mile trip to the Princeton Junction stop, making 9 stops along the way. This high average speed of nearly 48 mph for a local train is what made a commute this long feasible. The 100+ mph top speed and very quick (0 to 80 mph in about a minute) acceleration of the Arrow III EMUs enabled the train to keep to this schedule, although there wasn't much room for error on the part of the train crew. After departing at Princeton Junction I took the shuttle train to Princeton (5 minutes, 3.2 miles). This was synchronized with the arrival of the local, so it arrived at Princeton at roughly 8:50 AM. From there it was a few minutes walk to classes. Total commute distance about 65 miles, total time 2:20 going (overall average speed ~28 mph). Coming home was quicker because there was no dead time in my schedule. I got off the NJ Transit train and usually got an E train at Penn Station within a few minutes. The usual trip home was around 2:05 but I made it in 1:50 a couple of times. That equates to a ~35 mph average speed using public transportation, changing vehicles 3 times. That's even including the part with the awful, slow bus ride to/from the subway which at best took 10 minutes to cover 2.7 miles. A lot of drivers can't do average speeds like that when commutting.

After doing extreme commutting for something like six years (3 years of high school and the last 5 semesters of college), I realized that this was not something I could or would want to do for many years. Moreover, since the school day was typically shorter than a work day overall it wasn't that bad. In high school I left at 6:30 and got home before 5. This was more or less the same hours I might put in on an 8 hour a day job with an average commute. College I usually got home before 5 also, although if I had late afternoon classes the day could drag on until past 7. Despite that, I still found doing this exhausting. If not for the summers off to recharge my batteries I couldn't have done it at all. I couldn't imagine doing the kind of commuting I did while working an 8 hour a day job, and then at best having only a few weeks a year off to recuperate. And I certainly couldn't imagine doing a commute like that driving. At least the time spent on the train could be put to use studying, or napping, or just enjoying the scenery. It wasn't completely wasted time as it would have been driving.

I though this quote from the article was interesting:

Commuter-wise, New York City is an anomaly. New Yorkers have the highest average journey-to-work times (thirty-nine minutes) of any city in the country, but are apparently much happier with their commutes than people are elsewhere.

I agree in that I found a daily commute of 45 minutes or so each way when I was working in Long Island City quite bearable although I wouldn't have if I had to drive. The reasons given why this may be so I also agree with:

The loneliness quotient might also account for some of the commute tolerance in New York. On the train or the bus, one can experience an illusion of fellowship, even if you disdain your fellow-passengers or are revolted by them. Perhaps there’s succor in inadvertent eye contact, the presence of a pretty woman, shared disgruntlement (over a delay or a spilled Pepsi), or the shuffle through the doors, which requires, on a subconscious level, an array of social compromises and collaborations. Train riding has other benefits. Passengers can sleep or read, send e-mails or play cards. Delays are out of their control.

A certain cameraderie does indeed develop among transit riders that just doesn't exist among drivers. Indeed, my entire social life in high school was the ride home with my friends on the subway. I got to intimately know many people this way. Because of this, I would never have traded the long commute for anything.

Finally, I agree wholeheartedly with Howell. Driving anywhere where you can walk in 10 minutes is utterly ridiculous. In fact, if it's less than about 5 miles each way I won't even consider any mode other than walking unless I need to carry heavy items. Biking would be an option also but only if there's secure bike parking.

 

[ddrueding]

I agree with JTR's comments about the short work day. My ~100mi/1:15 commute would be much worse if I did an 8-hour shift. As it is I leave around 9AM (when the carpool lane ends) and get home around 3PM (before the carpool lane starts). This combined with how I drive my commute (quite enjoyably) and that I bill for my commute time makes it more mentally tolerable.

 

[Mercutio]

I've had three-hour one way commutes to work at times.
Holidays and other traffic-heavy days combined with those sorts of long commutes can easily stretch a 90 minute drive into a 10-hour nightmare.

One of the reasons I very much like my low-paying trainer job is that I don't have to deal with a commute any more. I'm eight minutes (by car) from my office.

I am glad that I only have to deal with traffic BS maybe once or twice a week, and only at off-peak times.

I am glad I do not have to deal with that crap any more.

 

[ddrueding]

Driving around here during rush-"hour" (6:30AM-9AM, 3PM-8PM) is completely impractical. Last night I drove to SF for my father's B-Day dinner; leaving Palo Alto at 4:30PM (GF just got off work). I barely made my 7PM dinner reservation, 25miles/40minutes away.

 

[sechs]

"Drive" and "San Francisco" do not go together.

It's not just a city of hills... it's a city of hills with little parking.

 

[ddrueding]

"Drive" and "San Francisco" do not go together.

It's not just a city of hills... it's a city of hills with little parking.

That's where I perfected my parallel parking skills. I used to live on Lombard, had to park on the street and I drove a manual transmission

 

[Pradeep]

I'm happy with my 35 minute commute (took a little while to get used to it, after having a 20 minute commute for a couple of years). Traffic doesn't really affect the time by more than 5 minutes.

 

[Chewy509]

I can personally relate, up until 6mths ago I was commuting 1hr:20min each way (approx 100km or 62miles). Did that for over 18mths. All of it was freeway, but a single accident could delay travel time up to an hour, and I was working a normal 8hr day. In the end I was leaving home at 7am, and getting home at 6:30pm most days. It's exhausting.

I now live a leisurely 15mins commute...

PS. I have a company car, so fuel/car maintenance was never an issue.

 

[MaxBurn]

Been thinking about the commute thing lately too. I used to have a company car until I got promoted to more of a technical support role which doesn't rate a company vehicle so now I am looking at driving an SUV or a motorcycle to work. Fortunately I work from home and travel less but it is a burden on my vehicles for site visits. I get compensated for mileage at least but I am particular about my vehicles and where I park them and I don't like dropping a ton of mileage on them which this may require, will have to wait and see. Right now trying to balance total cost of ownership of a POS that gets decent mileage to drive for work verses sucking down gas in the truck. Think I am looking at a large net loss even considering my truck gets bad mileage. FYI; I put 120,000 miles on my company car in two years. Shouldn't be doing that kind of mileage now though.

I have lived and worked in the SF Bay area and now I work mostly in greater Boston and I can honestly say I think Boston is easier to drive in once you get past all the one ways and weird intersections. SF has some of that but in general the whole bay area and the city tech sectors are a parking problem.

 

[Howell]

http://www.freegashelp.com/index.htm

 

[ddrueding]

http://www.freegashelp.com/index.htm

Too bad it doesn't scale with additional mileage over 1000/mo.

 

[Adcadet]

I very much wanted my new home to be within 10 minutes of work, 15 minutes at the most. According to Google Maps I'm about 5 miles/9 minutes away. Once I start I'll see how it really is. Luckily I've got both highway and non-highway options, and perhaps I'll find that weather affects one route more than another.

Leading cause of death for those under age 44 is trauma...guess where I'm most likely to die, especially given my imminent sleep deprivation.

 

[ddrueding]

That's a nice commute. I'm about that far from the freeway, then my commute actually starts

 

[timwhit]

I live 4.7 miles from work. My normal commute is 30 minutes on my crime-ridden, filthy bus. 20 on a good day, 45 on a bad day.

 

[Fushigi]

Four days a week it's 23 miles each way (35 minutes AM, 45-55 PM). One day a week it's 23 feet to the den. I'll probably move to telecommuting two days a week if gas continues to go up.

 

[fb]

I have a 10 minute walk or 3 minute bicycle ride to work.

 

[Clocker]

7 mile, 20 minute commute for me.

25 mile, 45 minute commute for the wife.

 

[ddrueding]

I only work 2 days a week now, the rest of the time I'm dancing, climbing, or sailing.

85-100 mile commute, 45-90 minutes.

 

[Handruin]

I'm at about 40 mile/60 minute commute each way 5 days a week. I hope to be moving to a 3 mile commute very soon; though I'm not holding my breath.

 

[udaman]

So in about 6 hrs, I'll be getting up early, and driving a rental Honda Civic (kind of sucky car in just the hour or so I drove it this evening) going from LA to SF, to attend the biggest Pinot Noir wine tasting in the country. And insane number of wines open for a 6hr stretch (1st hr. to members of the trade who get in for free ) where you can't possibly try even half of everything open, even if you could just taste/spit, move on to the next table etc. 170+ producers form Calif. Ore, France & New Zealand, etc. over 400 wines poured. Event costs only $50, but I get in for free .

http://www.pinotdays.com/events.asp#SFO8

Rental cost me only $48 for the 3 day weekend. Didn't want to put wear and tear on my car, so this is a good deal as the Honda should get at least 35mph (I don't drive much above 75-80mpg unlike DD) or more on this trip of approx 900 or so miles RT. Saturday around noon I stop off at Andy Marinari's Orchard, premier heirloom fruit grower to pick up what I can't get in LA, via the Fresno growers like HoneyCrisp.

http://www.andysorchard.com/ao-harvestcalendar.shtml

Then it's off to Ton Kiang for dinner, Hakka style Chinese, &maybe fuel up on dim sum before heading off to the nearby tasting which starts @11AM. (still haven't booked a hotel, but it will probably be expensive as there is nothing near Fort Mason that's much under $100 a room, and not already booked).

Could have flown, but it would have cost about twice as much, and I'm cheap. Trains would have been much more inconvienent, on my tight time schedule. Well that's my 4th of July vacation, I guess.

Time for bed/sleep. Early to rise .

 

[Handruin]

Dude, I would have loved to had a Honda civic for a rental this past week and a half. I hit a deer with my car and was in getting some body work done and my rental was a Chevy Aveo. I know the car is cheap, but it's kind of a joke for what it should be. For example, the Aveo weighs 1000LB's less than my car...it has 183HP less than my car...and its engine is 2.9L smaller...and it only got on average 1-2 MPG more than my car in fuel efficiency while driving my normal commute.

I look at that car with its lack of options, performance, efficiency, safety, handling, and its price and I wonder why anyone would spend $10K on that bare bones car when a used honda civic is a much nicer car for probably the same if not less money.

 

[ddrueding]

...For example, the Aveo weighs 1000LB's less than my car...it has 183HP less than my car...and its engine is 2.9L smaller...and it only got on average 1-2 MPG more than my car in fuel efficiency while driving my normal commute.

I look at that car with its lack of options, performance, efficiency, safety, handling, and its price...

<said under breath while coughing>
ahmhericancar
</said under breath while coughing>

Ugh, sorry. That happens to me sometimes...

 

[Fushigi]

Aveo carries a Chevy badge but is a renamed Daewoo from Korea.

Anyway, Handy's point about the mileage is a good one. I average 24.5-25MPG in my 8.5 year old V6 midsize sedan. New midsize V6 sedans get maybe 2-3 MPG more. So in 8 years, two complete automotive generations, fuel efficiency has gone up by only about 10%. As my car is still reliable it makes it hard to justify buying something new.

 

[udaman]

CR shows only 1mpg advantage over the 'mid-size' (not really) Corolla, and I wanted a Corolla cause the a Honda repair shop guy was at the Hertz rental desk getting a one day rental on an Accord, so I asked him (Miller Honda & Toyota) which of these econoboxes would he take. He said the Corolla as they (the civics) 'breakdown' a lot more...eeks. Sure hope I don't get stuck on the Interstate somewhere in this summer heat.

Well the Honda is listed as compact, but the rental price would have been about the same. I hate that 'drive' by wire? accelerator on the Honda, way too jumpy/inaccurate, and the brakes are really grabby. Seating position (same for Corolla according to CR) is not all that comfortable. You really see the difference btw the inexpensive Japanese cars and a Euro car like VW's (yes, DD? ) Passat or the Audi. I needed the high mileage of the Civic though.

If it was just an insurance week long rental, I would have gone with something more fun...Black & White rental on Robertson & Burton Way in BH has red Ferrari 430? & yellow Lambo Gallardo convertible...hmm, must be pretty costly to rent one of those, I suppose you'd need an Amer. Express 'black' card to get them? I wonder, could probably find that supercharged Cobalt here in LA for rental, somewhere.

Sorry, don't have time to fix the formatting characters and such, gotta go.

From CR, partial quoting their online review.

===========

The Cobalt falls short of the best small cars. Its 2.2-liter engine is spirited but noisy and relatively thirsty. The ride is steady and relatively comfortable, but handling isn't agile. The steering is too light at low speeds. The rear seat is not roomy, even by small-car standards. Interior fit and finish is just so-so. A supercharged 2.0-liter, four-cylinder engine powers the sporty SS model, which is quick and handles securely. The oversized spoiler on the SS blocks the rear view. The Cobalt sedan received a score of acceptable in the IIHS side-crash test with optional head-curtain air bags, and poor without them.Also see: Guide to the Ratings and reviews Road test Consumer Opinions on this car

More information

Body styles and prices

Price range Trim lines coupe FWD $13,175 - $20,975 LS, LT, SS sedan FWD $13,175 - $18,500 LS, LT, SS, LTZ Reliability history Trouble Spots Chevrolet Cobalt
97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 Engine Major

Engine Minor

Engine Cooling

Transmission

Drive System

Fuel System

Electrical System

Climate System

Suspension

Brakes

Exhaust

Paint/Trim/Rust

Body Integrity

Body hardware

Power equipment

Audio System

Used Car Verdicts

New Car Prediction Worse than average

Safety information

Safety belts:
Pretensioners, front/rear Yes/no Center-rear 3-point Air bags:
Occupant sensing system Not available Side air bags, front/rear No/no Side curtain air bags Optional Accident alert system Available Active safety features
Antilock brakes Standard (optional on LS) Traction control Optional with automatic & ABS Stability control Not available Daytime running lights Standard Tire pressure monitor Not available Crash and rollover tests:
Gov't front-crash test, driver:

Gov't front-crash test, front passenger:

Gov't side-crash test, driver

Gov't side-crash test, rear passenger

Gov't rollover test, 2WD

Gov't rollover test, 4WD NA IIHS offset crash test Good IIHS side crash test, with side air bags Acceptable IIHS side crash test, without side air bags Poor Specifications Drive wheels
Front
Seating
2 front, 3 rear
Engines available
2.2-liter 4 (148 hp)
2.4-liter 4 (173 hp)
2.0-liter 4 supercharged (205 hp)
Transmissions available
5-speed manual
4-speed automatic
Fuel
Fuel type Regular EPA city/highway, mpg 23/29 Fuel refill capacity, gal 13.5 Dimensions and weight
Length, in. 181 Width, in. 68 Wheelbase, in. 103 Curb weight, lb. 2,990 Percent weight, front/rear 60/40 Typical towing ability, lb. 1,000

Tested Model
2005 SS coupe, 2.0-liter Four supercharged, 5-speed manual
Tires as Tested
Pirelli PZero Rosso, size 215/45R18 93W
Acceleration

0-30 mph, sec. 2.9 0-60 mph, sec. 7.3 Quarter mile, sec. 15.7 Quarter mile, mph 95 45-65 mph, sec. 3.8 Braking

Braking 60-0mph dry, ft. 132 Braking 60-0mph wet, ft. 135 Other findings
Transmission

Routine handling

Emergency handling

Avoidance maneuver
max. speed, mph 54.0 Headlights

Turning circle, ft. 42 Ground clearance, in. 5.0 Fuel economy

CU's overall mileage, mpg 23 CU's city/highway, mpg 16/32 CU's 150-mile trip, mpg 27 Annual fuel: gal./cost 665/$1725 Cruising range, mi. 335 Convenience & comfort
Ride

Noise

Driving position

Access

Controls and displays

Fit and finish

Door top to ground, in. 50.5 Trunk

Luggage capacity 3+2 Max. load, lb. 890 Seating
Front-seat comfort

Front shoulder room, in. 52.5 Front leg room, in. 42.0 Front head room, in. 3.0 Rear-seat comfort

Rear shoulder room, in. 48.0 Rear fore-aft room, in. 26.0 Rear head room, in. 0.0