787-9 vs. 777-300
Apr 26, 2016, 10:49 pm
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Jan 2016
Programs: Air NZ Gold
Posts: 87
787-9 vs. 777-300
Vague question but how is economy on the 787-9 vs. the 777-300. I have done Auckland to L.A. and Auckland to San Fran a few times in Economy so just looking for a comparison if there is any to be made.
Cheers.
Cheers.
Apr 26, 2016, 11:48 pm
#2
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: AKL
Programs: NZ Elite (*G), IHG Spire Elite, Accor ALL Gold
Posts: 215
Plus the IFE is better in the 787.
I've heard that 787 business is more cramped than 777 business however.
Apr 27, 2016, 12:50 am
#4
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Auckland
Programs: NZ Elite, IHG Diamond Ambassador
Posts: 908
May 4, 2016, 6:25 am
#6
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: san antonio, texas
Programs: 3.2MM AA, 1.4MM UA,StwdLftPlt
Posts: 1,586
Personally for Economy I would prefer 787 over the 777. The 3-3-3 layout seems a lot less cramped and I've heard they have something with the pressurised cabin in the 787 which means you are supposed to be more refreshed at the end of the flight.
Plus the IFE is better in the 787.
I've heard that 787 business is more cramped than 777 business however.
Plus the IFE is better in the 787.
I've heard that 787 business is more cramped than 777 business however.
May 4, 2016, 7:37 pm
#7
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Auckland NZ
Programs: NZ Gold Elite, AS, AC, QF
Posts: 748
NZ's 777-300 is the worst long economy class in their fleet, thanks to wedging in that extra seat in each row. aisles are too narrow and you get bumped frequently. 787 better. I would rank the wide bodies for economy:
767 (old, but lots of legroom recline)
777-200
787
777-300
I'm not a big fan of the space seat, but I've used an APD upgrade to one on a flight to LAX because I'd rather use my carry-on as a footrest in PE than get bumped and thumped while trying to sleep. Plus, if I'm solo in the middle 3, the other 2 pax are usually together, so the middle person climbs out the other side. when it's 4, doesn't happen as much.
767 (old, but lots of legroom recline)
777-200
787
777-300
I'm not a big fan of the space seat, but I've used an APD upgrade to one on a flight to LAX because I'd rather use my carry-on as a footrest in PE than get bumped and thumped while trying to sleep. Plus, if I'm solo in the middle 3, the other 2 pax are usually together, so the middle person climbs out the other side. when it's 4, doesn't happen as much.
May 4, 2016, 10:25 pm
#8
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: New Zealand
Programs: NZ , QF , MK
Posts: 1,372
NZ's 777-300 is the worst long economy class in their fleet, thanks to wedging in that extra seat in each row. aisles are too narrow and you get bumped frequently. 787 better. I would rank the wide bodies for economy:
767 (old, but lots of legroom recline)
777-200
787
777-300
767 (old, but lots of legroom recline)
777-200
787
777-300
Ma puce, you do know that the 777-200s have all now been reconfigured to be 10 abreast in Y the same as the -300s, don't you ?
May 7, 2016, 5:00 am
#10
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: san antonio, texas
Programs: 3.2MM AA, 1.4MM UA,StwdLftPlt
Posts: 1,586
That 10 abreast seating "improvement" in the 777 is a scourge on the traveling public and those aircraft should come with a warning label: "Not conducive to a pleasant traveling experience."