News   Nov 19, 2024
 328     0 
News   Nov 19, 2024
 450     0 
News   Nov 19, 2024
 942     4 

Toronto/Chicago comparisons

Everybody always talks about the distance of the subway system but they never compare the actual stations and what they consist of. Have any of you guys actually rode the Chicago Subway/El?

First of all, almost all of Chicago's subways are above ground and much of it runs along highways, which makes it so much cheaper to build. Only a few stations, (in the Loop) are underground. Those above ground stations must be very cheap to build because they consist of only a wooden platform (think the boardwalk, in the Beaches) and a small section of roof cover. There is usually a small over-head heater in one tiny section. It's a pretty bare bones setup and not very attractive at that. The stations on the redline are about 30-40 feet above the street and in winter, it's cold as hell, with the wind practically blowing you off the platform. I was there in December a few years ago, and rode the subway almost every day for 2 weeks, so I know exactly how cold it gets. We have no subway stations like that in Toronto. When it comes to the design of the subway stations, there is no comparison at all, Toronto's stations are so much nicer and way more comfortable to use. Even New Yorks subway stations are a step up from Chicago's and that ain't saying much. The truth is, they both look pretty ghetto. I'm sure Toronto's subway stations (all underground) cost much more to build. Of course, in that case, you are more likely to have less stations and shorter subway lines. I would not want to see those above ground subway stations in Toronto, unless they are ONLY along highways, like the 401. (but never above streets like in Brooklyn, The Bronx or North Chicago)

Ask people in Chicago if it's a good idea to ride the subway and you will probably get an answer like "HELL NO"! On my first vacation to Chicago, I stopped to ask a guy in a shopping mall, how to get to the subway and the guy replied with "You don't want to use the El, it's only for the riff-raff". Then just this summer, at my hotel, I asked the clerk where the closet subway station was, so I could ditch the car and just use public transit and she told me, to just drive downtown because the subway was too dangerous and that she would never take the El in Chicago. Of course, I did not take her advice because I had used the subway in my previous trips and only had 1 problem in south Chicago but since I was not going to south Chicago, I wasn't too concerned. (and I had no problems at all)

It's easy to get around Chicago on the subway and you almost always get a seat. You do wait longer for a train, especially at Skokie. I waited over half an hour and that was around 10am, (weekday) so it's much longer than I'm used to waiting in Toronto. Waiting 30 mins. outside the Skokie Station in September is not a problem but in December, it was not so nice. On the plus side, the parking was really cheap! I think it was 1 or 2 dollars, for 24 hrs. You can't beat that.

When I think of how long I usually wait for a train in Toronto and compare that with Chicago or New York, I have to say, Toronto does much better. Every time I have taken a subway outside of Manhattan, I always seem to wait a really long time when I take the train back. Whether it's Brooklyn, The Bronx or especially Queens, it always seems to take more than a half hour before the subway gets there. And I'm not talking late at night, either. (6pm to 9pm)
 
Last edited:
Everybody always talks about the distance of the subway system but they never compare the actual stations and what they consist of. Have any of you guys actually rode the Chicago Subway/El?

First of all, almost all of Chicago's subways are above ground and much of it runs along highways, which makes it so much cheaper to build. Only a few stations, (in the Loop) are underground. Those above ground stations must be very cheap to build because they consist of only a wooden platform (think the boardwalk, in the Beaches) and a small section of roof cover. There is usually a small over-head heater in one tiny section. It's a pretty bare bones setup and not very attractive at that. The stations on the redline are about 30-40 feet above the street and in winter, it's cold as hell, with the wind practically blowing you off the platform. I was there in December a few years ago, and rode the subway almost every day for 2 weeks, so I know exactly how cold it gets. We have no subway stations like that in Toronto. When it comes to the design of the subway stations, there is no comparison at all, Toronto's stations are so much nicer and way more comfortable to use. Even New Yorks subway stations are a step up from Chicago's and that ain't saying much. The truth is, they both look pretty ghetto. I'm sure Toronto's subway stations (all underground) cost much more to build. Of course, in that case, you are more likely to have less stations and shorter subway lines. I would not want to see those above ground subway stations in Toronto, unless they are ONLY along highways, like the 401. (but never above streets like in Brooklyn, The Bronx or North Chicago)

Ask people in Chicago if it's a good idea to ride the subway and you will probably get an answer like "HELL NO"! On my first vacation to Chicago, I stopped to ask a guy in a shopping mall, how to get to the subway and the guy replied with "You don't want to use the El, it's only for the riff-raff". Then just this summer, at my hotel, I asked the clerk where the closet subway station was, so I could ditch the car and just use public transit and she told me, to just drive downtown because the subway was too dangerous and that she would never take the El in Chicago. Of course, I did not take her advice because I had used the subway in my previous trips and only had 1 problem in south Chicago but since I was not going to south Chicago, I wasn't too concerned. (and I had no problems at all)

It's easy to get around Chicago on the subway and you almost always get a seat. You do wait longer for a train, especially at Skokie. I waited over half an hour and that was around 10am, (weekday) so it's much longer than I'm used to waiting in Toronto. Waiting 30 mins. outside the Skokie Station in September is not a problem but in December, it was not so nice. On the plus side, the parking was really cheap! I think it was 1 or 2 dollars, for 24 hrs. You can't beat that.

When I think of how long I usually wait for a train in Toronto and compare that with Chicago or New York, I have to say, Toronto does much better. Every time I have taken a subway outside of Manhattan, I always seem to wait a really long time when I take the train back. Whether it's Brooklyn, The Bronx or especially Queens, it always seems to take more than a half hour before the subway gets there. And I'm not talking late at night, either. (6pm to 9pm)

That sounds horrible. There are third world countries that have better systems than that.
 
Ask people in Chicago if it's a good idea to ride the subway and you will probably get an answer like "HELL NO"! On my first vacation to Chicago, I stopped to ask a guy in a shopping mall, how to get to the subway and the guy replied with "You don't want to use the El, it's only for the riff-raff". Then just this summer, at my hotel, I asked the clerk where the closet subway station was, so I could ditch the car and just use public transit and she told me, to just drive downtown because the subway was too dangerous and that she would never take the El in Chicago. Of course, I did not take her advice because I had used the subway in my previous trips and only had 1 problem in south Chicago but since I was not going to south Chicago, I wasn't too concerned. (and I had no problems at all)


I have been to Chicago many times. I have never had someone tell me i shouldn't use the El. In fact, on my last visit, the hotel concierge recommended i take the El to Oak Park IL instead of driving. The El is perfectly safe especially during the week since the trains are full of workers commuting to downtown. I probably wouldn't take the el outside of the downtown during the night, or get off at one of the stops in the ghettos.
That sounds horrible. There are third world countries that have better systems than that.



Yeah right, name one? CTA might not perfect but is ranked as one of the best transit systems in North America.
 
And tiny? It's about 70 km - what's bigger in Canada/USA? New York, Boston, LA, Chicago, and Washington. Atlanta is bigger if you don't include the Spadina extension. If you including the Eglinton Crosstown and SRT extensions currently being tendered, we're bigger than Boston. Including Finch West and Sheppard East we're bigger than LA (though LA will surely have grown by then ... and yes I included LA's LRT that isn't grade-separated, so it's a fair comparison).

Undersized perhaps ... but I wouldn't say tiny. Glasgow is tiny, and hasn't been expanded in over a century.

My fave subway system in the world. Wonderfully efficient despite its size. Two circular lines operating in opposite directions in the same circular route.......covers the city pretty well and interfaces with other transit (Buses and rail) to spoke out and cover other areas.

To think that the 3rd subway in the world is still operating and serving its city well is quite impressive.
 
I have been to Chicago many times. I have never had someone tell me i shouldn't use the El. In fact, on my last visit, the hotel concierge recommended i take the El to Oak Park IL instead of driving. The El is perfectly safe especially during the week since the trains are full of workers commuting to downtown. I probably wouldn't take the el outside of the downtown during the night, or get off at one of the stops in the ghettos.




Yeah right, name one? CTA might not perfect but is ranked as one of the best transit systems in North America.

I have used Chicago transit a lot (subways, Buses and commuter rail) ......never felt at risk.....and if we are being asked to accept the notion that no one local uses it, I have to ask who all those people are and where they come from?

I like the bare bones simplicity of some of the stations and admit to sometimes wondering if Toronto would have a more extensive subway system if we would build/accept some of those.
 
I have been to Chicago many times. I have never had someone tell me i shouldn't use the El. In fact, on my last visit, the hotel concierge recommended i take the El to Oak Park IL instead of driving. The El is perfectly safe especially during the week since the trains are full of workers commuting to downtown. I probably wouldn't take the el outside of the downtown during the night, or get off at one of the stops in the ghettos.




Yeah right, name one? CTA might not perfect but is ranked as one of the best transit systems in North America.

Um... I don't even know where to begin. China, Brazil, Mexico and The Philippines to name a few all have metro systems that have stations which are more than a wooden boardwalk. I would expect CTA to at least match them.
 
When I was in Bangkok a few years ago, I was very surprised to see that they had a very nice, clean and modern subway. I was expecting it to look 3rd world but it certainly didn't. It was elevated but I'm not sure if it was a proper subway or a skytrain, like in Vancouver. Anyway, it was great to ride.
 
When I was in Bangkok a few years ago, I was very surprised to see that they had a very nice, clean and modern subway. I was expecting it to look 3rd world but it certainly didn't. It was elevated but I'm not sure if it was a proper subway or a skytrain, like in Vancouver. Anyway, it was great to ride.
As far as I know, Bangkok's subway is 100% underground - certainly what I rode was. Their Skytrain is 100 elevated though from what I've seen (I've driven along it, but never actually ridden it ...

I'd hardly call Bangkok third world any more ... besides, isn't Glasgow third world? ;-)
 
And tiny? It's about 70 km - what's bigger in Canada/USA? New York, Boston, LA, Chicago, and Washington. Atlanta is bigger if you don't include the Spadina extension. If you including the Eglinton Crosstown and SRT extensions currently being tendered, we're bigger than Boston. Including Finch West and Sheppard East we're bigger than LA (though LA will surely have grown by then ... and yes I included LA's LRT that isn't grade-separated, so it's a fair comparison).

Undersized perhaps ... but I wouldn't say tiny. Glasgow is tiny, and hasn't been expanded in over a century.

Good grief. Compare yourself to 'best in class'. It's a bit pathetic to compare oneself to other poor performers and then conclude things are ok. Toronto's subway 'system' is absurdly small for a city this size. Triple it to about 200 km and it will begin to meet the needs of a modern global city.

Beating the Atlantas and Glasgows of this world is not much of an accomplishment. We're not even 1st in Canada as far as subway track length goes. We're 3rd! 3rd!!!
 
Last edited:
Good grief. Compare yourself to 'best in class'. It's a bit pathetic to compare oneself to other poor performers and then conclude things are ok. Toronto's subway 'system' is absurdly small for a city this size. Triple it to about 200 km and it will begin to meet the needs of a modern global city.

Beating the Atlantas and Glasgows of this world is not much of an accomplishment. We're not even 1st in Canada as far as subway track length goes. We're 3rd! 3rd!!!

Most of their subways are to commute to their downtown. We can start by adding the Downtown Relief Line. Unless...

...Is Eglinton and Yonge now considered part of "downtown" now (when compared to Atlanta)? If so, then the Eglinton Crosstown can be the first "downtown" underground railway (AKA "subway" in the dictionary) for Toronto since 1978.
 
Good grief. Compare yourself to 'best in class'. It's a bit pathetic to compare oneself to other poor performers and then conclude things are ok.
Good grief. No one here has has said things are okay.

And 'best in class'? We're discussing an urban disaster like Chicago, parts of which look like an urban no-mans-land that makes Jane/Finch look like the promised land.

We're not even 1st in Canada as far as subway track length goes. We're 3rd! 3rd!!!
We have more kilometres than Montreal ... and are even a few metres ahead of Vancouver ... unless your managing to include Vancouvers ICTS systems but not ours. Generally all three are equal in size, but Toronto has far more under construction than either other system.
 
I like the bare bones simplicity of some of the stations and admit to sometimes wondering if Toronto would have a more extensive subway system if we would build/accept some of those.

I agree with you there. Although if we built stations like that, they wouldn't be "world class" enough for some people. Chicago may not have the fanciest stations or trains and the elevated tracks are ugly and loud, but they do have extensive frequent service that reaches into the suburbs. The Blue Line and the Red Line run 24/7, 365 days a year.
 
Atlanta's subway system is roughly cross-shaped with a few branch lines. The two main lines meet at Five Points Station, which has Spanish-solution platforms on both levels. It is obviously Atlanta's busiest subway station, but is only as busy as Queen Station here. The only thing closest to rapid transit expansion in Atlanta is building a Maglev line to Chattanooga, Tennessee, not an actual subway extension (aside from LRTs, which are more suitable for Atlanta).

Yes, even Thailand is more advanced than Scotland (and Chicago) when it comes to subways, as stations of Bangkok do not have wooden platforms.
 
Just try to put this sort of rapid transit in downtown Toronto.

800px-CTA_Night.jpg

View of the Chicago "L" in the Loop.

800px-Chicago-Loop-SEcorner.jpg

Two "L" trains approach the T-junction at the southeast corner of The Loop

800px-20090503_under_Chicago_L_on_Franklin_Street.jpg

Chicago "L" lines run above vehicular traffic on Franklin Street
 

Back
Top