davef139

I am very new to United. I plan to make 1P this year by segments alone and possibly might not break 25k miles. I'm planning some trips to STL which is about 5-6hours from me in WI. Flights are about 150 or 230 for the dates I have planned. Flying MKE > ORD > STL.

So I am curious how much others here value your own time when it comes to personal travel. I really enjoy driving but a 5hour drive alone sounds pretty horrible compared to a couple of quick flights where I can eat inbetween.

I figured out the gas cost alone for a solo drive is roughly 1/4 of the ticket.

n198ua

I fly MSN-DSM through ORD at least once a month, which generally takes 5 hours or so with connections. I can drive it in around 4, but I much prefer flying

I always keep my status generally on segments alone - so your not the only one.

Welcome to UA ^

underpressure

I regularly drive to Orlando/Cocoa Beach (7 hours)

I leave home when I want.
I leave Orlando when I want.
I stop and eat when I am hungry.
I wear my shoes all day.

mahasamatman

Gas is not the only cost of driving. For cost, I usually figure on the IRS value of around $0.50 per mile (or $1.00 per mile round trip). That covers gas, tires, brakes, maintenence, insurance, etc. If you use that value, not even taking your time into account, flying is a bargain. Plus, someone else is doing the "driving", so there's (generally) less aggravation.

karung99

I enjoy driving especial when I am with somebody, however, if the ticket is cheap and I am alone.. I fly for sure

MLRoach

I fly on the west coast much more often than I'd fly on the east coast. With the prevalence of SouthWest out here, the fares on a 300 mile flight are reasonable.

When I was growing up in Maine, we'd never fly PWM-NYC on your own dime - legacy only meant the flights were silly expensive. East coast just didn't have the cheap short hops.

Now, Mrs. MLRoach and I usually fly SFO-LAX when it's just one of us, and usually drive when it's the both of us (unless we can find really good fares).

goalie

i fly if at all possible. if i am going sfo-rno, i'm not gonna spend 4 hours (and perhaps longer if inclement weather) in my car where i can fly it in 48 minutes or so and no way would i drive sfo-lax or vice versa

axpmaluga

i love to drive/road trip and would do it everywhere if time allowed for it, unfortunately driving 3 days each way to vegas for a long weekend doesn't make too much sense...generally anything under 5 hours i'll drive...i love being somewhere with my own car, i love not being at the whim of the weather or ATC delays or anything else out of my control, i love controlling my own schedule...however, when everything runs efficiently, i love flying

nba1017

Good post.

Being based out of CLE for most of the year, and spending a good deal of time in CHI, I deal with this question pretty often. I can make the drive in approximately 5 hours; however, it makes a day trip exhausting, and overnight parking in CHI frequently runs $30-40. If I'm going for two days, the $80 in parking is often close to as much as a r/t flight from CLE-ORD. Granted, that doesn't factor in the taxi back and forth from the airport, but I burn about $90 in gas driving anyway. So, it's effectively equal. Generally, I choose flying, as the forty-five minute flight is much easier on me than five hours on I-80.

Driving by DCA

To New York or Philadelphia, I'll take the Acela. Anywhere else, I fly.

I hate long car trips if I'm the one driving. I hate them only slightly less as a passenger.

It's not really the value of my time though. I'll easily take a short connecting flight from a hub to my destination (DEN-COS, for example) even if the layover is longer than the drive would be before I'll rent a car in DEN and deal with driving down.

jetsfan92588

On the east coast I'd rather take a train than fly. If you figure in the amount of time to go through security, wait in the airport, etc... it takes less time to take a train (especially if I'm travelling with my mom who likes to be airside 2 hours before boarding begins ). Anywhere else (or if a train is not an option), flying is much better.

ua_to_ord

For me, any drive over an hour is a bore, and I will always opt to fly. There's nothing like that rush on take-off. And further benefits of flying include time to nap, to catch-up on the day's NYT or Financial Times, the chance to enjoy a glass of wine (er, that red-colored paint remover that UA serves in the back ). It's all good.

CPRich

I drove PIT-DCA for a year, just about 3:50 non-stop, 4:15 with a couple of breaks. That's about my outer limit.

gregas

I'll fly when flying saves at least an hour door-to-door. This usually means that the drive is >4-5 hours. From LAX or BUR, I fly to SFO or PHX. I would not fly to IYK, in spite of the fact the UA tries to tempt me with e-fares every week. Ok, to be fair, I would not drive IYK either!

knifemein

For short hops like you are citing, it really is less of a question of valuing your time than you think. Sure, in absolute terms, flying segments MKE-ORD-STL does not take very long. But when you take into account time it takes to get to the airport, check-in, security, wait for boarding, wait for departure, wait for deplaning, wait for connection boarding, wait for departure, wait for deplaning, wait for luggage, time it takes to get from airport to destination... versus driving directly from your home in MKE to your destination in STL without any of these delays, is the time savings really significant in the end?

The question might be more, how much do you value your comfort? Taking a plane is more effortless since you're being chauffeured, and you spend less time sitting in a cramped space than driving (or, best case, you fly premium and spend no time cramped).

Possible plane costs: Airfare, cost of bus/taxi/gas to airport, airport parking, renting car in destination city

Possible car costs: Gas, vehicle value depreciation, parking car in destination city

Many factors to consider.