Sleeping on sleeper trains

All I can tell you is I remember earlier Pullman heavyweights as far more comfortable than Amtrak.  Last heavyweight I slept in was an impeccably restored Illinois Central car from Mexicali to Mexico City in 1974.

I rode behind steam in the early 1950s, but was shorter then.  They seemed luxurious.

New sleepers for us. Silver Meteor to Florida, Crescent to New Orleans, and Sunset Limited to AZ. Slept OK once I learned how to use the extra pillow brace you while taking curves at 80 mph. My main advice: if traveling with someone, get separate roomettes. At 77, no desire to cope with a top bunk.

A level route does not equate to a smoother ride.  It's the quality of the roadbed that gives a smoother ride.

My wife and I travel to Florida using the autotrain often and I can tell you the top bunk is like sleeping on a slab. Some of that is due to old age. 

I traveled by troop trains decades ago and slept great again I think some of that was due to youth and the sleep elixer that young soldiers take before bed time. 

rpmcobra posted:

My wife and I travel to Florida using the autotrain often and I can tell you the top bunk is like sleeping on a slab. Some of that is due to old age. 

I traveled by troop trains decades ago and slept great again I think some of that was due to youth and the sleep elixer that young soldiers take before bed time. 

Absolutely! Traveled coast to coast on AMTRAK a few years ago. Never again. Between the rock-hard upper bunk and the frequent stops to let freight trains pass, didn't sleep worth a ****.

My wife and I have traveled to FL on the Star for years. Started in a roomette and now have graduated to the handicapped bedroom. I would agree with Joe on the two roomettes for a couple. I've always slept well (I do get the lower due to physical limitations).

Has anyone ridden the Halifax train on VIA. They've got former EuroStar equipment on these trains now. We had a trip planned and found out there was one "cabin" with two lowers which we booked. Looked forward to the trip but a health issue intervened and had to cancel. Don't wait to do things--getting older can intervene.

I have traveled in Europe on the night sleepers and love them,sleeping while getting to your destination instead of staying in a Hotel.

Mikey

Mrs RJR & I have found that there is no issue in sharing the lower bed in the bedroom. Unlike Rex, we found DC to LA was a most enjoyable trip, and slept like logs.

Having used the roomette many times going to Florida on the Auto-Train (which was commuter rail for me for awhile), I would agree that a not-too-young couple should get 2 roomettes

I’m reminded that American sleepers typically have bunks arranged longitudinally, while British and European trains have them transversely.

Not quite so, rockershovel:  roomettes, yes; bedrooms, not on superliners

mikey posted:

I have traveled in Europe on the night sleepers and love them,sleeping while getting to your destination instead of staying in a Hotel.

Mikey

Traveling by train in Europe is definitely at least the next level up from US. 

In 1973, my family and I traveled from Birmingham to D.C. and back.  My Father was a Southern Railroad official.  We had a suite.  Lots of room,wonderful service, and the dining experience was better than any restaurant I've tried to date.  China, linen, crystal, silver, with amazing food and service.  Nothing compares.  I was a teenager then.  I could sleep anywhere.  The only negative was going over crossings.  The bells woke me up.  We spent a week in the capitol.  We were all too tired not to sleep on the way back to Birmingham.  Best family vacation ever.   

While in collage at the University of Alabama,  I would put my bicycle on the baggage car and ride the crew car to New Orleans.  On the trip back to Tuscaloosa on Sunday,  I got a hot shower and a nap, again on the crew car.  All free of charge.  Thanks Dad.

Bill

On the more general subject of ride quality, back-in-the-day the UP was known for smooth starts, more-so than any line I ever traveled on. You had to be watching the ground to know when the train had begun moving. Same with UP stops, you never felt a jerk or bump. You needed not worry about standing or walking while the train was stopping. I was told the way they did it was to always stop with power still on, thus keeping the slack stretched. My experience was early-mid '60s before UP began combining trains into single much longer trains.

Odenville Bill posted:

While in collage at the University of Alabama.....

Well, they play football pretty well, anyway.  

RJR posted:

Not quite so, rockershovel:  roomettes, yes; bedrooms, not on superliners

That’s a worthwhile piece of information 

Its the same on the View Liners.

breezinup posted:

Odenville Bill posted:

While in collage at the University of Alabama.....

Well, they play football pretty well, anyway.  

Didn't yesterday.

I had a roomette on the Cascade from Portland to Oakland in August.  Some portions of the ride were smooth and others were very bouncy.  I suppose that it depends on the track.  Overall, I enjoyed the trip.

I got up around 2 a.m. just before the train stopped in Klamath and went to the observation car.  The only other people in the car were 3 young men.  They could hardly wait for the Klamath stop so that they could get off and smoke weed.  I never knew that waiting to smoke weed could be as exciting as waiting for Santa Claus when I was a kid.  It was a new experience for me.   I suspect that they slept well when they returned to their coach seats.  NH Joe

ALL passenger trains are sleeper trains for me, my last train nap was on the Arkansas & Missouri excursion heading back to Van Buren, AR.  Had a whole couch to myself , or was that the Grand Canyon Railway ?  The clikety-clack just does me in. 

the Canadian, in Canada runs from Toronto Ontario to Vancouver BC. I have taken this train many times, usually once per year. It still uses the original Budd stainless steel cars purchased in 1953 by Canadian Pacific. This is a long (4 day) ride, and a real treat if you like trains. 

The ride is the same as it was in the 50's. There is some movement in the sleeper, however these cars may be the best design there ever was. I have only taken the Euro style sleepers between Montreal and Halifax, which are smaller and not as good a design as the Canadian.

The car interiors have been redone maybe 3 times since the 50's. the main difference from the original is that airline type toilets have replaced the foot peddle that you could look through an see the "ties go by". I prefer the old method, as there was never any issue with frozen pipes during the Canadian winter, where the entire trip is at - 22 degrees C (-10F). after 3 days, anything with water in it tends to freeze.

Joe,

That must be a great trip.  I now have two reasons to cross the border again.  I always have trouble getting back in the USA for some reason.  My Southern drawl should be enough to get me escorted home to Alabama.  "I need a new toque" is my number one reason.

Bill

Joe Hohmann posted:

New sleepers for us. Silver Meteor to Florida, Crescent to New Orleans, and Sunset Limited to AZ. Slept OK once I learned how to use the extra pillow brace you while taking curves at 80 mph. My main advice: if traveling with someone, get separate roomettes. At 77, no desire to cope with a top bunk.

My buddy and I have been on almost all the long Amtrak routes in the U.S. I agree, at about 70, the upper bunk no longer becomes attractive at all. We have always slept in a roomette, and I always get the upper bunk, as he is claustrophobic. The first night can be a little trying,especially with those tiny flat pillows, but after that, I have no trouble getting to sleep. We always try to get an upper level room, and get a room in the middle of the car. The lower level, and rooms over the trucks do not seem to ride as well. Of course, in the east, there is no upstairs choice. Track condition is everything when it comes to a smooth ride. Level landscape means nothing. Try Amtrak in Kansas, west of Newton. Talk about level, but rough as a cob. Hard to sleep out there on that roller coaster train. 

Jeff

Joe K posted:

the Canadian, in Canada runs from Toronto Ontario to Vancouver BC. I have taken this train many times, usually once per year. It still uses the original Budd stainless steel cars purchased in 1953 by Canadian Pacific. This is a long (4 day) ride, and a real treat if you like trains. 

The ride is the same as it was in the 50's. There is some movement in the sleeper, however these cars may be the best design there ever was. I have only taken the Euro style sleepers between Montreal and Halifax, which are smaller and not as good a design as the Canadian.

The car interiors have been redone maybe 3 times since the 50's. the main difference from the original is that airline type toilets have replaced the foot peddle that you could look through an see the "ties go by". I prefer the old method, as there was never any issue with frozen pipes during the Canadian winter, where the entire trip is at - 22 degrees C (-10F). after 3 days, anything with water in it tends to freeze.

So, are those longitudinal, corridor type bunks on The Canadian? I haven’t slept on a train like that since I first crossed the US by train in the 1970s. 

Scotie posted:

Don't wait to do things--getting older can intervene.

I agree. However, while we were raising 4 kids we were living "paycheck to paycheck". Now that we are in our mid-70s, we buy travel insurance (not cheap, but a good idea).

I never tried the upper bunk, so I don't know how it compares to a lower, comfort-wise. The main reason I kept away is getting up and down during the night (you old guys will understand). The lowers have always been comfortable for me. Also, 2 people cannot stand up in a roomette with the bottom bed set up. Oddly enough, 2 roomettes cost less than one "bedroom", yet the "bedroom" still has bunk beds, just more floor space plus a chair.

Joe Hohmann posted:

I never tried the upper bunk, so I don't know how it compares to a lower, comfort-wise. The main reason I kept away is getting up and down during the night (you old guys will understand). The lowers have always been comfortable for me. Also, 2 people cannot stand up in a roomette with the bottom bed set up. Oddly enough, 2 roomettes cost less than one "bedroom", yet the "bedroom" still has bunk beds, just more floor space plus a chair.

Agree on all points especially the bathroom issues ! My wife couldn't sleep on a recent trip I saw her sitting up in the chair so I took the opportunity to hit the bathroom. I sat on the lower bed and my wife knowing the top bunk issues said try it out. I woke 3 hours later and it was a whole different experience.

I have challenges sleeping in general and rarely if ever sleep much on moving objects, however I really enjoyed the Slumbercoach berths on the Broadway Limited when I rode it regularly between 1987 and 1992.  Just having a private room made the train riding experience that much better.  I could turn off the light and watch the lights at night when sleeping was a challenge. 

The route of the former Broadway was severely downgraded through Ohio and Indiana when I rode it so my largest complaint was banging across the diamonds was enough to wake anyone up.

Lower berths were generally more comfortable than upper ones, but being in my late teens and early twenties I just enjoyed the adventure of it all.

RJR posted:

A level route does not equate to a smoother ride.  It's the quality of the roadbed that gives a smoother ride.

And the train handling skills of the engineer.

My wife and myself have traveled almost exclusively by train as a far as Seattle, Denver, New Orleans, Chicago, Kansas City, Sanford and other places.  Next year we will be traveling to Glacier National Park in Montana. Sleeping on a train can be a good or bad experience and much does depend on the track. The train does rock some but in over 17 years of traveling by train we have grown accustomed to traveling in a bedroom. It just takes some getting used to and few get in 8 hours of sleep but it is possible. Just don't expect hotel comfort and bring carpenters wedges and gaffers tape to stop the doors from rattling

Oh, more useful detail! I’ve been on ships like that...

"I’ve seen mention of the “Water Level Route” which followed a much easier route so as to give a smoother ride." 

The issue there was that the New York Central's mainline from New York to Chicago was almost completely flat. Competitor Pennsylvania RR's route went over much hillier terrain, so when the train went uphill your feet would be higher than your head, and the opposite when going downhill. Both had smooth track, but on NYC you weren't tilted up and down.

Rockershovel posted:

I’d be interested in hearing about experiences of American sleepers, old and new? 

Genuine Pullman-operated sleeping cars, which ran until the late 1960's were very well-maintained.  There was not a squeak anywhere in the car.  The beds were comfortable, and Pullman had warm blankets on top of the crisp sheets.  Everything was spotless and quiet.  Paint was immaculate.  The Pullman Conductor and Porters were very polite and upheld the very highest standards of hospitality and service.

Today, the service, and, particularly, the equipment, do not come anywhere close to those standards.  Of course, we live in a different era, and people no longer expect excellence.  "Good enough" does the job now.  Amtrak has some sleeping car attendants who go above and beyond, to give good service.  They also have some lazy ones who do only as much as required.  Many of the Superliner sleeping cars have been rebuilt at least once, and some have a better bedroom layout than others.  Small things are often not repaired, so squeaks and rattles, or doors that are difficult to open or close, are not unusual.  They do ride smoothly, though, and they are the best we are going to get in the United States for the foreseeable future.  My wife and I travel in sleeping cars on Amtrak.  We have adjusted our expectations.  When we get a very clean bedroom in which everything works, we are pleased, but we know better than to expect it every trip.

In Canada, the situation is better.  The equipment is better maintained, and the on-board service is noticeably more consistent and traditional.  However, it is also more expensive.

We hope to sample a sleeper train in England and Scotland before too long.

Thanks for that, which was all rather as I expected. I last used sleepers in the US in the late 1970s, so I missed the Pullmans and caught the early years of the present generation of cars. These were quite good at the time, and the service was still quite good, as I recall. 

The two main sleeper routes in the U.K. are the London to Aberdeen or Inverness, and the London - Penzance routes. Both have been extensively refurbished in recent times, so I can’t speak of either from experience. They are both quite slow by U.K. main line standards, being diesel hauled on a network which is mostly electrified (on East Coast Main Line at least, London to Edinburgh). They are expensive, because no one travels by sleeper for convenience - budget airlines took THAT market long ago, and coach (bus) travel is very cheap. 

London - Penzance and London - Aberdeen are both about 8 hours, Inverness a bit more. I used London - Aberdeen in the North Sea “mad years” of the late 70s and early 80s, and again occasionally in the late 90s. I’d prefer it to the red-eye flights but I don’t usually get the option, not that I go to Aberdeen much these days. 

I’d like to travel by sleeper again, I always enjoyed it. My good wife had a rather unfortunate experience of sleeper travel in Egypt in the mid-80s (actually it was mostly due to her general inexperience of international travel, and being in the early weeks of expecting didn’t help) and has long since closed her mind to the subject, so I can’t see it being any time soon..

I read a article that discussed riding in a vintage sleeper that had been restored. The conclusion of the author: the old cars looked nicer, today's cars ride better.

When I travel on the Meteor to Florida we always get 2 roomettes across from each other. neither of us want to sleep in the upper birth. On the long distance trains we get bedrooms. The roomettes are way too small and the bathrooms are on  another level.

Joe, are you saying they have NEW sleepers on the Meteor????

Rockershovel posted:

I’ve seen mention of the “Water Level Route” which followed a much easier route so as to give a smoother ride. 

I’ve never slept on a steam-hauled train, or on a train on a route as severe as US and Canadian trans-continental routes. I’ve experienced British sleepers, which are diesel hauled and pretty comfortable (apart from Station tannoys at Crewe and Glasgow). I’ve experienced a Russian sleeper once, which was... all a bit Russian. 

I’d be interested in hearing about experiences of American sleepers, old and new? 

As a former employee on "The Water Level Route", I can tell you that being level wasn't related to comfortable riding.  The NYC had mechanized tie and surface gangs working all main lines on a five year cycle.  By the ride quality on a division, you could tell where ti was in the maintenance cycle.  The year the work was done there was a nice smooth ride.  In the fifth year, you couldn't sleep nearly as well.

to answer a previous comment. The Canadian still has the original 1954 sleeper layouts, with upper and lower berths.

The Canadian now has 3 sleeping car layouts:

Manor Cars have 6 (2-people upper & lower bunk) bedrooms, 4 single bedrooms, 3 upper/lower berths and one shower (converted from an upper/lower berth

Chateau Cars have 3 (2-people upper & lower bunk) bedrooms, 1 drawing room (3 people), 8 single bedrooms,  3 upper/lower berths and one shower (converted from an upper/lower berth

New Prestige cars has 6 (2-people) bedrooms, that take up the footprint of two original bedrooms, with a fold down murphy double bed. 

JK

eddie g posted:

Joe, are you saying they have NEW sleepers on the Meteor????

No, I'm talking about current Amtrak sleepers vs old Pullmans.