I feel like I'm going crazy whenever people say Metro is slow
Let me preface this by saying that LA metro obviously has issues apart from pure time in transit, like coverage and headways in some areas, delays etc. But generally, I feel like one of the main talking points against metro is that "it takes too long" i.e.:
Anonymous posts from r/losangeles
But when I compare the systems on a mile-to-mile basis, it seems that at most LA metro is 30% slower than NY subway, often more like 15-20% if you aren't going to/from the valley. And this is all-in with walking:
NY Subway (Bushwick to Manhattan) ~5 miles
LA Metro (Atwater Village to DTLA) ~5 miles
NY Subway (Harlem to South Brooklyn) ~15 miles
LA Metro (Reseda to Mid-Wilshire) ~15 miles
NY subway 2nd Av express ~13 miles
LA Metro E line ~13 miles
I'm just showing that even in transit paradise, that same distance from Atwater Village to DTLA is gonna take significantly longer than driving in LA. And also that LA's bus system is pretty great as the 2nd largest by ridership in the US. These are also only two examples, but I've been noodling for a bit and the results seem consistent, even during rush hour.
Is the disparity in thinking just because people in LA typically need to travel further due to lack of housing? Or the cultural expectation of traveling 15 miles taking 30 minutes or less? Or rather just directly issues with LA Metro?
Posted Apr 8, 2025, 9:23 PM UTC