I need to fly UA from LAX-ORD on May 26, return May 28. The best MR I can find using ITA is via SFO, which adds only 600 mi to the 1745 LAX_ORD miles. ITA shows flights via IAD or EWR, but only redeye, which I can't handle very well. Is there a way to get an early morning flight LAX-IAD or EWR, then mid-pm to ORD, and return the same way?

I need to fly UA from LAX-ORD on May 26, return May 28. The best MR I can find using ITA is via SFO, which adds only 600 mi to the 1745 LAX_ORD miles. ITA shows flights via IAD or EWR, but only redeye, which I can't handle very well. Is there a way to get an early morning flight LAX-IAD or EWR, then mid-pm to ORD, and return the same way?

Have you looked up and studied the routing rules for your fare? If yes, do they allow you to go via IAD or EWR?

It has been my experience with UA that most fare routings don't allow you to "bypass" your original destination without a significant fare increase. Therefore routing LAX-SFO-IAD-LGA/EWR-ORD may be possible, I think it will not be cost effective. You might want to try LAX-SFO-SMF-ORD or if you have more time LAX-SFO-PDX-SEA-ORD which I know is a valid routing I have used (and for extra segments you can put DEN after SEA).

Thanks. You're exactly right. I finally bought LAX-SFO-SNA-ORD and return on the same routing. It was no more expensive than LAX-ORD-LAX, and gave an extra four segments and 2000 eqms.

It has been my experience with UA that most fare routings don't allow you to "bypass" your original destination without a significant fare increase. Therefore routing LAX-SFO-IAD-LGA/EWR-ORD may be possible, I think it will not be cost effective. You might want to try LAX-SFO-SMF-ORD or if you have more time LAX-SFO-PDX-SEA-ORD which I know is a valid routing I have used (and for extra segments you can put DEN after SEA).
It may be that most fare routings are more expensive when flying an indirect, longer course, but there are exceptions, and MRers are always looking for. For example, it may be cheaper to fly IAD-LAX-LAS than IAD-LAS and the former route nets a third more miles than the latter.

mrrego - congratulations on figuring out how to add 1000 miles each way. That is good...more than a 50% increase. ^

It has been my experience with UA that most fare routings don't allow you to "bypass" your original destination without a significant fare increase. Therefore routing LAX-SFO-IAD-LGA/EWR-ORD may be possible, I think it will not be cost effective. You might want to try LAX-SFO-SMF-ORD or if you have more time LAX-SFO-PDX-SEA-ORD which I know is a valid routing I have used (and for extra segments you can put DEN after SEA).

JerseyJo - I'm not sure what you mean, but in general, one cannot go in the opposite direction first if you originate from a hub, but you can go in the opposite direction to a nearby hub if originating from smaller city. "Routing LAX-SFO-IAD-LGA/EWR-ORD may be possible" but not on a single fare basis as the routing rules do not allow that routing; that is why it will price more as you would be combining fares between different cities.

From most places, one can zig-zag. mrrego, sorry I did not have time to study the routing rules myself for this fare to give you more help before: now I have time so I just spent 15 minutes and here is what I would book on this route:

ORD-IAH-DEN-SEA-LAX gives 3765 miles outbound and permitted on UA's routing 2. Other cities could be added between SEA and LAX except for the fact that most UA fares limit you to 3 transfers...and we already have 3, so that is about the best you can do.

On the return, the identical routing won't auto price because UA schedules would require an overnight along the way to fly that route.
I suggest LAX-PDX-SEA-ORD for 3061 miles. SFO can be added before PDX for another just over 200 miles or DEN after SEA for under 200 miles...not worth it IMO.
(DEN-IAH or DEN-DFW could be added after SEA if you overnighted and actually found someone willing to manually price it...not easy.)

ORD-IAH-DEN-SEA-LAX outbound, then LAX-PDX-SEA-ORD return gives you a decent schedule and nets 200% of the miles of the non-stop for the same fare plus a few more $ in tax.

To see it price, go to http://matrix.itasoftware.com and plug in:
ORD :: IAH UA+ SEA UA
LAX :: PDX UA SEA UA
Using May 1 and May 8 for example, when it will price with an L fare.

It may be that most fare routings are more expensive when flying an indirect, longer course, but there are exceptions, and MRers are always looking for. For example, it may be cheaper to fly IAD-LAX-LAS than IAD-LAS and the former route nets a third more miles than the latter.

What do you mean?

Any given fare routing, when adhered to, will price with the same fare basis regardless how you choose to follow that routing.

Above I was using UA's routing 2 applicable between ORD and LAX on UA's L fare. Regardless how you follow routing 2 between ORD and LAX, provided there is L avail on all segments, you will get the same base fare. Not different ones.
Now, if you do not follow routing 2, you may get any combination of other fares...but that is not because the "fare routing is more expensive when flying it indirectly."

Thanks, Mr. Wanaflyforless. That's an amazing route. Did you get it by trial and error, or by looking up UA's routing rules? Either way, thank you for the education.

Thanks, Mr. Wanaflyforless. That's an amazing route. Did you get it by trial and error, or by looking up UA's routing rules? Either way, thank you for the education.

A bit of both; but primarily from studying UA's routing rules.

However, unfortunately, the version Expedia shows is incomplete and does not include SEA and PDX in the routing even though they are in the full version. I do not know of a free source that always shows the complete routing rules for every fare. Expedia is often enough...

Fares are half as random as they may seem; they are a function of two things:

1) Existent fares in a given market with their applicable rules: these include applicable dates, inventory they must book in, and applicable routings, among other things.
2) Available inventory on each segment involved.

For the mileage runner, the two most important things are understanding routing rules and for there to be available inventory in the bottom fare class fares MRers are after generally specify.

I'm glad the OP found a routing that was both cost and mileage effective.
wanaflyforless: Couldn't have said it better myself -- I am a segment runner so I'd substitute STL -DEN after ORD. Those short 500 mile segments add up quickly. However, many of my fares that I use state there is maximum of 4 transfers (total 5 segmets) each way - so I recommend checking the fare rules carefully -- for a few dollars more you may get a few thousand extra miles.
mrrego: If .bomb is working, if you put in two city pairs, and use the 2 stop default, you sometimes get surprisingly interesting routings -- but there is never any guarantee that your fare bucket exists in that routing -- I do alot trial and error -- and then hope the call center can book the 9 or 10 segment trip.