Has anyone flown Continental's 764 to Rome? I know it is a 767-400. Is this the almost the same as a 777?

The 767, although still a widebody, is a good bit (say, 20-25%) smaller than the 777, which is roughly equivalent in size to a 747. Boeing has a very nice web site (www.boeing.com) with lots of info about all their products.

Last month, I flew on two of Continental's new fleet and found both had a few inches more legroom and thus were much more comfortable.

Just want to add that I actually prefer the 767 to the 777 or 747. The two larger planes both have three seats on the window side of the aisle while the 767 has only two (in all the coach configurations I've seen, anyway). For those who travel as couples, which I guess includes most of us, those two seats between the window and aisle are very nice. Can't comment specifically on Continental's seat pitch.

Look at Continental's seat maps at http://www.continental.com/dash/build_dash.asp?corporate_05<BR><BR>Their 17.9" seat width x 32" pitch is about as tight as you see in the industry on this airplane, but it's better than the 17.2" x 31" that Continental uses on its Boeing 737-800s that it operates coast-to-coast in the US. Never mind paying double if you don't fit into those seats - for that long a flight NOBODY fits in those seats.<BR><BR>Continental's 777-200s use 17.9" x 31" overseas, also about as tight as you can order a 777.

ttt

I have flown on CO's 764.<BR><BR>All in all it is a very good plane. None are more than a year or two old which means that the seats will be in excellent condition, the plane will look/smell new, and the likliehood of a mechanical delay is low. All seats have personal entertainment systems (like the 777).<BR><BR>Since you are flying to Europe, the model you will be on has 35 seats in BusinessFirst and 200 in coach (versus 48/235 on most 777's). As mentioned above, the coach seating configuration is 2-3-2. <BR><BR>