1. Subway routes typically number fewer than 20. For example: Brussels has 3, London has 12, Paris has 14, and Cologne, 19. But all these cities have literally dozens of bus routes, which means much less walking to get from where you start to where you're going.

2. Getting down into the ground and back out again requires time and effort. Escalators aren't always working, and many subway stations don't even have them. Getting on or off a bus, by contrast, is a one-step process (heh-heh).

3. Changing lines in a subway often requires walking long distances. Going from one bus route to another usually means getting off one bus and on another at the same stop.

4. The view out the windows of a subway is dreary: you've seen one tunnel, you've seen 'em all. From a bus, you see city life spread out before you - and if you see something intriguing, you can jump off at the next stop and walk back.

5. In some cities, riding the bus exclusively is cheaper than buying a mixed-mode ticket. A week-long bus pass will get you unlimited transport all over Greater London (including Heathrow) for £2 a day.

The buses in Brussels are fine, I have a few favorite routes (esp. the 28), but you should also include trams as a subway alternative. The new trams in Brussels are more comfortable than the buses and some of them take more interesting routes.

Oh, Robespierre, you are such a bus militant. It is what endears you to us.

However, I woud tend to disagree with your point #3 on numerous occasions.

Could that be because you use the words "often" and "usually" in some unique way?

And yes, trams meet some of the desirability criteria, too. Although there typically aren't nearly as many lines as buses.

I guess I have to disagree with you. Taking a bus in London can be a nightmare, and I am certain that if you stayed in the city for some time, you'd probably won't like the buses of it that much. The service is ok, it's just the congestion, unbearable.

I agree that buses can sometimes make more sense.

However, I do find myself avoiding them in unfamiliar cities as I often times find it easier to decipher a subway map. Sometimes it's hard to find a comprehensive bus route map (because there are often so many different lines).

Don't forget that during peak traffic times, subways can be faster than buses and taxis since they don't sit in street traffic like buses do (especially true in places like Bangkok).

On my next trip, to Rome, I will certainly try to use the bus system as they only have 2 subway lines!

Busses are great until you are forced to watch the same piece of scenery for eons in traffic.

We prefered the subway to bus while in Rome. Buses were VERY crowded and took longer to get to certain destinations. Some buses were so crowded, we couldn't even get on and had to wait for the next bus.

My favourite kind of city tranportation is trams. The routes are easy to understand and they are usually quite fast.

"...I am certain that if you stayed in the city for some time..."

su·per·cil·i·ous (sū'pər-sĭl'ē-əs) pronunciation
adj.

Feeling or showing haughty disdain.

Dukey - why don't you write a guide on <b>Why the subway is always better than a bus</b>. Or would you put &quot;often&quot; in the title, as I did?

&quot;I often times find it easier to decipher a subway map.&quot;

I don't see this as a deficiency in bus transport.

I often times find it easier to decipher a subway map.
&quot;I don't see this as a deficiency in bus transport.&quot;

I never said it was. It was simply an explanation as to why I don't usually take buses.

I have little disagreement with your statements, but it probably won't change the fact that I'm more comfortable with the metro system in Paris than I am with the bus system.

Travel is all a matter of personal preference. It's not an issue of right and wrong.

I'm certain if you thought about it, you could come us with just as many valid reasons why taking the subway often makes more sense than buses. ;-)

Okay - I'll start that right here:

1. You don't have to be very good at reading maps.

3. Changing lines in a subway often requires walking long distances or it could mean walking a few steps on the flat. Going from one bus route to another usually means getting off one bus and on another at the same stop or possibly having to walk 200 yards to a crossing point, cross busy road then walk another 200 yards to the correct bus stop. (ie argument VERY weak)

4. using a bus means you understand how a city is laid out, using a subway means you ave no idea on how far apart various places really are. This doesn't work if you use a spider amp of bus routes rather than a map that gives REAL distances

Robespierre,

I'm glad you prefer taking the bus; you'll notice I didn't say that busses ALWAYS get stuck in traffic just that when they DO they leave a lot to be desired.

Of course, if I were stuck in traffic sitting near you I'm absolutely certain things would seem worthwhile and all the other scenery would pale by comparison.

Also in a city you aren't familiar with and you don't speak much of the langauge, it can be a challenge to find the right bus stop to get off, esp if you have to notify the driver in advance by pressing a button. On subways, you can study the map on display in the carriages and look out for station name on the platform.

When I was younger, I hated buses and loved subways. In New York, I loved going down into the subway in one neighborhood and coming out in a completely different place with a very different feel. Sort of like getting on a plane in Boston and getting out in Paris. No transitional neighborhood, nothing to warn you about the changes, just the magical subway atmosphere that held all these places together and connected me to all of them. I even liked the smell. It still makes me feel nostalgic.

Now I am moving in the other direction. It has something to do with deteriorating joints and something to do with not being in a hurry.

In London, Paris, Rome, and Barcelona, I have been successful at finding bus routes that take me very close to my destination. Only when I am going long distances do I consider taking the subway in these cities.

In Rome particularly, where the subway system is so limited, the buses are important. During rush hour, however, they are insanely crowded and should be avoided. Of course, subways are also insanely crowded during rush hour, and I no longer enjoy the crush of humanity.

i agree with alec. the tube/subway/underground is often much easier to use for the reasons stated. if you are not familiar with the city, many people will worry and stare out the windows hoping to catch a street sign - difficult at night and if the bus is very crowded. i see this often in london where (as in many cities) stops are not announced and it's not clear to tourists which stops must be requested.

furthermore, some cities like london have bus stop systems that can be very confusing to tourists. for those who don't know...you must find your destination in a table, then get the stop number and look at the map to find where the stop is located. usually no problem for me, but a hassle for tourists.

finally, i think that riders (especially tourists who are not familiar with the city or its transport system) feel more 'abandoned' as they wait for a bus either alone or with people waiting for different bus lines. people start to wonder when they are waiting for the number 12 and six number 9s have already come and gone. i think people tend to have more confidence in the underground. perhaps totally ungrounded but i think this is a powerful psychological factor that works against people using bus systems that they are not familiar with.

that said, in my hometown of london, i prefer to use the bus and often recommend that others do the same, with the understanding that it involves more complexity than the tube.

If you are trying to see sights by looking out the window of your transport buses undoubtedly offer more options.

But - if you're trying to get from one end to the other of a large city with a lot of traffic - subways are much faster and more convenient.

So - I see you understand what &quot;often&quot; means. Very good.