Look I'm Mexican, you could easily stuff 1000 people in 100 cars


“Amateurs…” -a clown


"Super Amateurs..." - Indians


“I said AMATEURS!” • Mexican-Indians who happen to be professional clowns


Cannibal will never eats clowns. Because they taste funny.


So in India I saw a family of four on a moped. Only the driver had a helmet because he was the only one who legally had to wear one.


Yeah, super common. Mopeds are actually [advertised](https://i.imgur.com/MgpMUDd.png) as family vehicles in India, many people are too poor to own/operate cars but mopeds and motorbikes are dirt cheap.


Four is kinda amateur hour here in South East Asia. I more than once saw a family of six on a moped, 2 kids in front of the dad who's the driver the mom holding one kid on a kid sling and the last kid hanging on for dear life at her back. Other six people config might have one the front kid standing between the mom and the dad while holding the dads shoulders. Oh and of course, no one's wearing a helmet. And honestly, sometimes my thoughts ~~and prayers~~ are more for the moped instead of the family. You can see that rear suspension is compressed as hell already, and roads here are shit, it's a miracle that the frame doesn't suddenly gave up mid-pothole.


As you are right, this pic is very friendly to actual car use in e.g. Germany. Would be more of 950 cars, maybe 890.


And 1000 people into a single train car


Ever been to India?


Can you actually get 1000 people on a 4 car train? I mean, you definitely couldn’t on the trains I’ve been on. Is “one link train” something special??


And if you're going to squish everyone in the train, shouldn't you be using all 5 car seats as well, using 200 cars instead of 625? EDIT: So this image is about the Seattle Subway [ST3](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sound_Transit_3#Light_rail) expansion. Their Link light-rail trains use Siemens S70/S700 LRVs, [which have a capacity of \~235 according to Siemens.](https://assets.new.siemens.com/siemens/assets/api/uuid:95ab2a35-be61-4de5-8b61-e422ef3f06e9/minn-stpaul-s700-data-sheet-en.pdf) So it's more like 940, but you can squish 1000 and it sounds a lot better.


> Siemens S70/S700 LRVs, which seat ~235 according to Siemens. Had a look at the specs: >Passenger capacity: 61 seats Approx. 235 total passengers @ 6 p/m² 4 wheelchair spaces and 2 bicycle racks I don't think 6 people per m² is the standard one should base total capacity planning on.


The S700 is actually a design that features wide open walkways and fewer seats than the ones it replaced, this is to allow for higher standing capacities. In the UK, peak capacity is said to be 4 per m2 on trains and just under 5 for standing sports viewing areas.


i live just outside nyc on Long Island. a typical LIRR railcar can hold 101-111 *SEATED* passengers with 10-12 railcars used each trip. that's about a1,060 to 1,272 *SEATED* passenger capacity each ride. even these days with hybrid/WFH patterns, the trains can get so busy during rush hour that there aren't enough seats for all the passengers, so people are standing in the aisles. so even though we do not have 4-car trains, the benefit of taking a train is still undeniably stark.


During busy hours (what matters) trains mostly run at capacity in real life, most of the time cars in rush hour are only carrying one person to work. The numbers seem about right, I'd say 5 train cars to be fair. Doesn't make much difference.


I live near a train station in the aforementioned city. It's never full. There are usually just a few people present.


Maybe recently? Seattle Transit constantly runs pretty near full around higher traffic hours, around 4-5 pm. Less people might be taking transit due to Covid or even University students taking Summer break.


Because too many people drive. This isn’t an argument against trains, it’s an argument for educating people about public transit and climate change.


But that's missed by titling the chart "What it takes to move 1,000 people". I get the sentiment, but feels disingenuous.


It feels disingenuous, but it is realistic. Cars have become the main mode of transportation, and the majority of the time, they are used to move a single person around. Contrary to public transportation, which can be in constant use throughout the day, cars have to sit around in parking lots 90% of the time.


No it feels disingenuous because the graphic doesn't have a little disclaimer that says "*based on an average vehicle occupancy of ___ which is based on X study of average occupants per vehicle in traffic." Without that, it is twisting data.


It’s only realistic when people are all going from one location to another location Can 1 train go from 1000 starting places to 1000 ending places?


If we collapse the 1000 starting/ending places down to a realistic number of "walkable distances" places, yes.


I was wondering the same. Maybe you can, but it definitely wouldnt be comfortable.


If you lay everyone down and stack them to the ceiling maybe?


[Like this?](http://i0.wp.com/mentalunrest.files.wordpress.com/2015/09/wpid-wp-1441560499482.jpeg?w=792)


I was expecting something like this.. but not this.


What is wrong with you.


damn son


Why did I know it was going to be this


At standard capacity the Seattle link trains fit 200, 250 is a crush load that they actually hit. Would making it 5 train cars make a big difference?


I don’t think the Seattle stations are capable of using 5 cars. The Link train cars are articulated—sort of two cars in each. So that’s a long train.


250 people in one train car? How? Stacked like crayons in a box?


Haven't you seen those videos from India?


Yeah, but at that rate let’s stick five people in each car. Now we’re down to 200. This is a disingenuous calculation. Edit: Now that I think about it you could probably fit 250 people on one of those double decker commuter train cars, but if we’re talking maximum capacity and then we’re still gonna have to put five people in each car to have a fair comparison. And if we’re picking specific rail cars to support this argument and then we could assume some of those cars are seven passenger cars as well. God knows there are enough full size SUVs or the US.


Yes, but also no. You *could* fit 1000 people into 200 cars during rush hour, but only in theory. In actual reality, the only thing that counts, people don't carpool like that. Rush hour trains however are filled to max capacity in reality.


Yes this is true, but not reality. During a rush hour, a train can be at max capacity do to everyone being assigned their own seat. But whit cars, most people have their own car wich they will be using thus having 1-2 people per car on avarage. Sure you could fit more, but in a realistic scenario, are you gona take 3 strangers into your car and drive them to their destination?


Agreed. I don’t think it’s disingenuous to assume the average rush hour train is at 90-100% capacity while the average rush hour car is still only 20-40% full (1-2 people).


Anti-car people love their message, and to some extent I agree with it. I like how it points to the need for parking at both start and destination. So it knows that there is an start and destination; but ignores that public transport doesn't get you there.


When are we just gonna have those tubes from Futurama and be done with the whole debate?


As someone who vehemently supports more public transportation I never understood why people attack cars without actually planning on replacing them with public transport. To me it’s a bunch of yuppies who work downtown or from home. Like I’d love a way to take public transport to work but they need to freaking build it first


In Melbourne Australia, our new trains have a capacity of 1800 with 7 cars. So that isn't unreasonable.




This train has a max '"crush" capacity of 1800 people across 7 cars. Which means 257 per car. 250 people wouldn't be comfortable but it's doable. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Capacity_Metro_Trains


So they use the max theoretical (and unrealistic) occupancy of the train cars, but only assume 1.6 passengers in automobiles? I don't know why they had to mislead with this infographic, you can make the same point with truthful numbers.


It's based on real life usage statistics during rush hour




This is the answer


But most cars are privately owned, so they aren't shared in such a situation, at least not in the same sense as a train (I.e. "back and forth")


The German [ICE](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ICE_4_(Deutsche_Bahn))\-4 train: maximum 918 seats with a length of 374m (1227 feet), 13 carriages.


Yea but that's 71 people per carriage, not 250.


That's 71 *seats* per carriage. Easily space for another 100+ buckos standing around too.


The only thing wrong is the four cars figure. New York City subways have 10 cars each on the main lines. Each car has about 50 seats, give or take. Most people stand during a rush hour or busy times. Easy to get a hundred people in a car, and I'm sure it gets up to 130 or 140.


I assume they don’t mean a typical subway car. But even then, on a longer Amtrack type car there isn’t much room for 250 people. Although, during rush hour I have def had a 4hr ride on a toilet as that was the only seat available in the entire train.


MARC, NJT and Exo have [Bombardier multilevel](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombardier_MultiLevel_Coach) train cars, the highest-capacity variants of which can hold 142 people each. Four of those cars have a little more than half the seating capacity than what Seattle is suggesting for the capacity of their light rail subway vehicles. My presumption is that it's SRO on those things.


Spirit Air Rail Services.


what is this guiding me in doing? Maybe post this in a data sub, it’s not a guide on how to do something


Havent you noticed that coolguides is really just "hastily put together inforgraphics"?


/r/CoolGuides is a subreddit about skewed statistics meant to support the world view of people who aren't old enough to get a driver's license.


Or people who live in a city with actual public transit. Like yeah let me walk 3 hours to the nearest bus station then transfer 7 times to get to my destination in 8 hours when I could’ve taken a 45 minute car ride.


This. Living in the countryside, in a 2000 people town, with ONE bus going to the main closest city a day, and ONE coming back, using public transport is a no go for me. Plus I work in a nearby town and if I wanted to go by bus i would have to wake up at 4 every morning and be back at 9pm, working 8-5.


That's what this sub has turned into. Shitty infographics that are reposted daily. Sub has turned to shit.


Well it's wrong anyway


You mean that you haven't had the common issue of having to move 1000 people and not knowing how?


I mean I do but this guide didn't help.


Yeah, I get what they're saying here... but the train or the bus frequently doesn't go where I need to go.




How is this supposed to make me want to buy a shitty sandwich?


It appears the guide assumes full capacity of the bus and the train, but not the cars. I've seen lots of buses that are running at partial capacity, sometimes almost empty. Edit: 1. Cherry picking data is cherry picking data. 2. Weird how a couple people got their knickers in a bunch. All I did was point out the data is flawed. I didn't pick a side. People should want honest data, even when it challenges their assumptions. Especially when it challenges their assumptions. 3. It isn't unusual where I live to see buses running almost empty during rush hour out of town, then full into town (in the morning) then switch in the afternoon rush hour. That almost halves the ridership numbers.


Yes, this has been posted multiple times and is clearly flawed on multiple levels. The premise is a good one, but a typical type of statistical manipulation in play here.


Need to pick up 1000 people from the airport, let me know, still looking


It’s for megachurch honey! NEXT!!


[NEXT JOKE ORIGIN](https://www.reddit.com/r/ChoosingBeggars/comments/7kr5as/i_need_a_free_100mile_bus_trip_for_20_people_and/)


I have 15 buses for hire. Can give discount for bulk booking.


Go watch cars pass by during a rush hour and tell me how many of them have more than one person in them. While it may be correct that packing the transit options at 100% isn’t entirely accurate, you can’t say that an average of 1.6 people per car is too low.


Sure. But that's not really the point. Those cars are there at rush hour because that's when the people who own them need to be traveling. But during the rest of the day the cars are parked but the trains and busses are still moving, with or without passengers. (Or they're not, in which case they quickly become unviable as a means of transit) At rush hour, a train (or bus) may be completely packed, but if you have good public transit and the train comes by twice an hour 16 hours a day and once an hour at night, let's say, then there may be a whole four hours during the day where the train is full, amounting to 8 total occurrences. The other 20 hours of the day (32 occurrences) the train will be, on average, mostly empty. Taking a train or bus is still obviously better in many (most) ways. But it's not as simple as saying "cars are almost never at capacity, but trains and busses are." Trains and busses are *usually* nowhere near capacity.


By law, every car is designed to carry exactly 1.6 people.


Good thing I have a lot of evenly sliced people to make that perfect 1.6 really easy to attain


It’s all about planning a head.


I do love planning all my heads


You mean "planning ahead", right? Right!?


\*Anakin stare\*


And it works out nicely so that four .4 people can ride together, too.




Thats sort of the point of an infographic like this though. To show the need for less car dependent infrastructure


So how are you planning on getting everyone to move to a high rise in the city?


Well first we need to colonize space with the use of robots. Then we ban robots on Earth. Unfortunately this will lead to several high profile murders of Spacers, but I think it's worth the cost, don't you?


You don't need to live in a high rise in the city. Go to Europe and check out some of the suburbs of big cities. Or even look at LA before auto manufacturers ruined the city (look up "streetcar suburbs"). Hell, just go to Brooklyn -- there are large parts of Brooklyn without subway access. It's still dense enough to support public transportation. And if you really want to live in a detached single family home with roads as your only mode of transportation, that option will still be available for you.


I mean, even with cars in full capacity (carpooling), it still requires 200 cars to fulfill the needs. The car vs public transport problem is a matter of urban planning problem and not a simple matter of choice. By designing a city that purposefully eliminated public transportations, you have not only increased the space required for roads, highways, and parking lots, you have also eliminated the small shops and restaurants that could have been there within walking distance from home or office if they were planned more like any Old World cities.


200 is a considerable difference to the 650 that this chart is trying to depict


This also only applies to people who don’t need to travel around or take equipment and/or materials for work. As a tree surgeon, you won’t see me carrying my saw on a bus or…. Or chipping into a train car.


I'm a videographer/photographer. It means traveling with a 5' tall case with lights, stands, tripods, etc that weighs 75lbs+ and a backpack with two cameras, six lenses, and various cables and accessories that's 40lbs. Today, I was at an event that was 25 minutes away and according to google maps, that'd be a 5hr public transit ride...while lugging around over 100lbs of gear. No way in hell is that happening.


I'm pretty sure this is considering rush hour, where everyone grabs transport at the same time, it's very more unlikely for a car to be full than public transport in that scenario


Then the title should state that this is about averages at rush hour specifically, not "how many does it take."


To be fair, you're seeing the image divorced from its original context.


That (potentially) transfers my criticism from the graphic itself to OP's title.


This guide assumes all will begin and end the journey at the same point. How do all get from the train station or bus stop to the ultimate destination?


If the public transit system is well designed, there should be a stop within a reasonable walking distance of most places in a city.


which makes the commute significantly longer and less flexible with your departure/arrival times


Exactly. I live 8.1 miles from work. It is a 20 minute car ride. Best case scenario on public transit is an hour and a half. 3 busses and 1 train. We have pretty decent public transit here but it's not feasible for everyone.


Too bad public transportation isn’t viable for everyone everywhere


This repost assumes 1.6 passengers per car, but that the busses and trains are full.


And the trains don't need stations


And everyone goes to and from the same place


At the same time


Might as well be 625 tandem bicycles with 1.6 riders each.


It's really weird that that many people are driving around with just over half a body in their car.


Math is not popular anymore


An accurate reflection of reality during rush hour. I don't think I've ever seen 5 people carpool to work. Trains and busses on the other hand are packed multiple times a day.


That's not what this "guide" claims though. Context really matters here.


This a really bad attempt to show what we all know - mass transit is a good thing. But, a metro train car has a capacity of 120 people so it takes 9 cars for the train. A typical transit bus has 40 seats so 25 buses per 1k commuters And if we comparing capacities against capacities it really is unreasonable to average 1.6 people per car.






B-b-because car bad 😖


Fuck other people, I'll use my own vehicle.


Which train car seats 250 people?


misleading shit like this only hurts your cause


Is this for India? I don’t see how 4 train cars can move 1000 people.


Depends on the train cab available I know Europe has some high capacity train carriages


Your comfort means nothing.


So...this graphic assumes that the train and buses are at full capacity, but the cars are not. If each car held 4 people, it would require 250 of them, not 625. Whether you use maximum or average riders, it should be done consistently, so this graphic is misleading.


Now we just need 1000 people to want to go to the same place


1000 people needing to be at 1000 different locations at the same time.


Its a guide on how to make a bad graph. The graph assumes the cars aren't at full capacity and it groups all 4 train cars into a single picture instead of 4 separate ones.


Step 1: Find 1000 people all going from the same place to the same place


People when doing well economically, they don't want to ride in buses or trains.


I don’t think people just want to be moved, they want to travel to their destinations of choice. Now I’ll take my train to grocery shopping…said no one ever


I don’t want to ride on a bus with 66 people or a train car with 250. That’s really crowded.


In other words a thousand people to one place, 15, or 625 others. It's not just about numbers, it's about the destinations too.


Also, for the train and busses generally speaking they don't usually go right to the people's actual destination, nor do they start from their original location. First the person has to travel to the train station or bus stop, wait for the vehicle in question, then get off at another train station or bus stop and travel to their final destination through some other means. It might be as short as a walk across the street, or as long as walking several blocks or getting a cab or even another bus. With cars they can leave directly from their house, at whatever time is most convenient for them, and drive whatever route they choose, and then park their car in the parking lot of their destination or in a nearby commercial parking garage if they are in a dense area of a city.


You're gonna fit 250 people in each train car, but can only manage one and a half people per car? This is just a fuck cars agenda post.


Why did that subreddit get so big out of nowhere?


Sponsored by Seattle subway. Thanks


I was really confused because Seattle does not have a subway system. This was made by a grassroots organization, and is very misleading…


Yeah I was confused by the subway wording too, but Seattle does have an ever-expanding link light rail system which is sort of subway-ish with underground stations, etc. but no one here calls it the subway.


Certainly unbiased.


My new job has a train station right across the street. I thought to myself, "this is great, now I don't have to drive!" The nearest station to my house is five miles away. If I take public transportation, I have to take two buses and a different train just to get to that station. My commute now takes 90 minutes and I arrive 30 minutes early. Meaning in order to get to my job at 8:00 am, I have to get up at 5:00 am. Which means going to bet at 9:00 pm. After getting out of work it takes another two hours to get home, at 6:30 pm. This means I have 3.5 hours of "me time" every day vs. 12.5 hours of work and work-related commute. Driving my car to and from work takes 20 minutes. I think I'll keep doing that.


Generous Calculation One Chair Car Train Compartment = 108 People i.e, around **10 Train Compartments** One Bus = 50 People i.e, **20 buses** One Car = 4 People i.e, **250 Cars** ​ This is a more acceptable calculation.


The graph is for seattle, our train cars hold just under 250 people, our buses definitely hold more than 50 people and the average car during rush hour holds between 1-2 people. it’s not that crazy


Or one Helen of Troy.


*Thousand ships not included.


So, our one link trains are 600 capacity and are horribly uncomfortable at that. Also, we're measuring area by front cross section instead of footprint. The cars are single occupancy and the mass transit are max occupancy. The point is valid but overstated.


What kind of train has only 4 cars and can carry thousands of people???? Not the average train. Maybe in india.


250 people per train car...is this India?


But trains are full of dickheads. Buses too but to a lesser extent.


This isn't a cool guide. It's an infogrqphic


I live in a rural area and visited Chicago. I can see how having a car in downtown is really unnecessary. But where I live. There isn’t going to be a public transit solution.


There’s no way 1000 people can fit in 4 train cars. This is a terrible guide.


That five acres of parking doesn't all need to be in the same place though. Yes, it would be better if more people took trains and buses, but the best part of a car is that you can all drive to or from wherever you need to be. For many people, a car may be needed to get to the train station, in which case you need parking available at the train station anyway.


Not to mention you can stack those five acres one on top of the other. You have options.




Make it 5 people per car, still about 200 cars


This is bullshit.


Okay seriously, is noone going to call out the areas needed for buses or trains? I get the argument and it’s pretty neat guide, but it’s very misleading to say ”One link train” without considering the needed tracks/stations and ”15 buses” without considering the bus stops and the parking for those.


That’s nice if 1000 people come from and go to the same places as yourself. Otherwise it’s false. While commuting I’ve noticed maybe 3-4 people who come from my neighborhood and get off at least 7 exits before me. I have a long and boring commute.


625? Last time I checked that's not what 1000/5 equals


ignores the fact that trains and buses require everyone to be going roughly the same place at the same time.


What if… and hear me out… the thousand people aren’t going to the same fucking place? also… how the fuck did they get to the train station? Did they teleport?


Garbage post.


*thinks you need 625 cars to fit 1000 people* *also thinks one train car can fit 250 people* 🤔 Def a garbage post. It's just Seattle public transportation's propaganda for getting you to use their shitty buses.


yes but where’s the data on odor for each mode


yeah I'm all for public transport and walkable streets, not the biggest fan of wide highways going thru the city centre, but this infographic is misleading AF If we take maximums, why not do it for the car as well. Typical car can host 5 people inside max (noone is asking about comfort here) so a 1000 people would need 200 cars, more than 3 times less than in the graphic. I know it's still bad etc but this is misleading and we don't have to use misleading propaganda to show why trains are better. This is just straight lying


Becuase the train car is filled up to the max during rush hour, buses are nearly filled up to the max, and cars simply are not. this is the case in seattle, where the data is from, and likely representative of many major urban areas.


I flag this as misleading Guide. how much time would it take the same busses to take the same number of people to all their individual destinations, including walk time?


Aren’t you embarrassed posting something so out of whack and wrong?


Meh, still would rather my car.


Lol I love how bullshit these selective "guides" are. They make it so the trains and busses are filled out to the max and have it so cars only have 1-2 people in it, when most cars can carry 4-5 people. Fuck off with this anti-car bullshit OP


That's 1.6 persons per car. I could do that in 1/3 the cars.


625 Cars carry 1,6 persons each. WTF?


I think it is interesting that it mentions you need the parking space, but it doesn't mention you need to have a fucking railway built for the train.


a really bad fart…… ads to reinvent the 19th century. hey how about hourses and coverded wagons…! they are even better for the environment…


250 people per link train car? [Insert WW2 Germany joke here]


heres why the train and bus dont work well: We're all going different places...at different times. Rocket Surgery, I know.


Yes, we all live the same place, and we all work the same place.


625 cars for 1000 people? I mean it would take 1000 trains to move 1000 people if you only did 1 train per person too


I know of a single oblate spheroid traveling at 30 km/s that can transport approximately 7.8 billion people at a time and it gets everyone to their destination simultaneously.


but in reality.. this doesn't take into account: People need to go FROM different places, TO difference places. People need to be at these different places at different times People are going home again, at different times People might have various stops to do, before heading hope (such as shopping or picking up their kid) This would work fine if everyone in a certain part of town worked in another part of town and everyone had to go to work at 9 AM and got off work at 5 PM. And never did anything else. but that's not how things work in the real world


You can fit 1000 people in 200 cars.


The real question is what kind of rail cars can fit 250 people. Even the double decker ones Amtrak uses could fit at most maybe half that amount.




That’s assuming they’re going to exactly the same place, namely a train station


there is no fucking way a 4 car link train is gonna fit 1000 people comfortable enough to replace the comfort people want from a car


People need to park at the train station as well.


As long as no one cares where they are going and all start from the same locations, then the public transportation works great. Oh... and don't have to haul anything they can't carry on them (like more than a bag or two of groceries).


It takes 200 cars to move 1000 people at 5 person capacity, so false. 250 if you want to be a bit more comfortable at 4xCar


Yeah, I don't get why they think only 1.6 people can fit in a car, but 250 can fit in one train car.


It’s called an agenda post


I figured, r/fuckcars type stuff. I get they mean well, but I don't agree with their sentiment, I live in a part of town where you're pretty much fucked without a car.


I see /r/fuckcars is leaking again, why assume full capacity for trains and buses and not for cars? Also, what the hell kind of train carriage can you fit 250 people on?!


I think it's because trains can usually carry a full car of passengers as they go to work for example. However you don't get 4 people sharing one car to go to work. It's very much usually one person in one car going to work.


15 Busses = Covid 1 Link Train = Covid/pickpockets Car = Serenity and I can stop at McDonalds® For an Egg McMuffin™


if we take into account parking, we also need to take into account the rails for the trains, trains and bus stations also, a car gets you exactly from point a to point b, while a train and a bus combined may only take you anything between 1-20 minutes in usually more time than the car. dont get me wrong, i love public transport, but this is just some pedantic r/fuckcars shit


The rails for trains and stops for buses are still way less space than parking lots. I’m not sure of your point here.