YYZ-HKG business class
 

Please follow the discussion as the thread moves to the Air Canada forum. Ocn Vw 1K, Senior Moderator.

In what way? Food, seat, service, IFE?

Hi longtimeflyin, I guess the overall experience...seats, food and IFE. If prices are relatively equal, which flight between AC and CX from YYZ-HKG would have the overall better experience or is the business class experience on AC and CX roughly the same? Thank you.

Seats are basically the same, although the Air Canada pods offer slightly more privacy from the chest region to the hip region. Outside of that, personally, I would take Cathay in a heartbeat. They edge out Air Canada, especially on that route where service is hit and miss on AC.

Simply no comparison. CX all the way.

Love the late night departure - you get a very extended night's sleep, arriving in the AM in HKG

The lounges in HKG on the way back outscore AC by a mile. in YYZ, you only get the plaza premium - but its still better than the MLL - but you d miss out on the signature one in YYZ.

With AC you get the new Signature Suite but it will be an earlier departure, so it depends on the fortitude of your stomach.

As I have said before, the HKG route is staffed by good crews usually but it very paint by numbers. Efficient, organized, perhaps a little cold. The crew will be attentive but maybe not 100% friendly.

This is in comparison with the YVR base where you get a warmer crew.

I have not flown CX so I cannot comment on their service.

Also, that flight is usually delayed a tad (to use the Airplane 2 reference) so you may want to plan around that, if that matters

A tad is an understatement. Its delayed 44% of the time - even with the schedule padded 15 minutes more than CX

https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.fly...905a7f6bc3.jpg

I know it's a matter of taste, but come on, the international Plaza Premium lounge is a joke. You're more likely to get warm food at the PPL, but the facilities and drinks selection is really subpar compared to the MLL.

My reference to a 'tad'

You guys really like the midnight departures?

I find it so late and you arrive so early in the AM and have to stay awake the whole day or risk messing up your sleep pattern.

I personally prefer the mid day departures ex NA, the returns are great too. Just have to stay awake for the evening (easier imo for jetlag).

I've not done a late PM/early AM departure (other than SYD) but I am doing Eva to KUL next week.

Will have to see how I feel after starting a flight at 1.45am

Never experienced CX or AC J out of YYZ, I do a YVR-HKG twice a year, if price is the same I take AC over CX, I tried CX a couple of years ago when they had a sale and I find their service quite cold compared to AC. Seats are pretty much the same to me, you get a little extra privacy with AC seats. Food wise, I think its about the same. If the lounge is your thing, then CX lounge in HKG is miles better than any AC lounge I've been to.

Use the search function please. Discussed a million times already.

The early AM TPACs knock me out. The AC15 is a great slot leaving at 10 AM and arriving at 1.25 PM (or more likely 2 pm). It gives me the time to connect or to get settled in at the hotel. However, the CX 826 at 3:25PM that gets in after 7PM is an excellent time as well.

It's all about trade offs. I do prefer AC despite some negatives. My experience has been;
Food and beverage: CX is better. The attention to quality is still there. At Air Canada it is the same old boring uninspired industrial cafeteria fare. Despite all the hype about Signature Service, the quality hasn't improved.
Cabin Crews: Depends on one's preferences, but I would call them equal. Each has positives.
Cabin Experience: After several years of being wedged under the tray table of the AC seat and not being able to sleep comfortably on my side, I have come to dislike the AC seat. My experience with the CX 777 is that it has a pull out tray that allows for a roomier feel. The assumption that the AC seat gives more privacy is wishful thinking. No matter the design, once the lights go down and people go to bed, the difference is minor.
I hate warm cabins and CX can cook you. One of these days, I will drink one too many portos and forget I am on a flight and will strip down to my undies and give the cabin a traumatic encounter.
CX keeps its lavatories spotless and they are a more pleasant space than the stinky AC lavs. All I know is that there must be many physically disadvantaged/impaired males who fly AC because they leave the lavs splattered with urine. (Sorry boys, but I don't think the girls stand there and spray the toilet and floor.)

In respect to the lounges, unless one is connecting, I doubt that most people spend too much time in the YYZ lounge. I know I have better things to do. Sure a quick drink or a nibble, but that's it. The YYZ lounge experience whether it was AC int'l or PP, was never anything to celebrate. Yes, the Hong Kong lounge experience is good, but I find the CX experience over rated. The lounge is often crowded and noisy. Whoopdeedoo, you can get pizza. They have food and nice drinks and you can have a headache too from the packed place. On the other hand, I can pick between the busy TG lounge with its Thai menu based lounge or the updated United lounge which is always empty when AC pax are there. I detest United, but it has a good lounge in Hong Kong. Fresh food and pleasant staff. Because I love Thai food, I often visit both lounges and have my lunch with TG because I know that the AC meal will not be particularly appetizing.

However, I now select based on cost. If I leave on an off peak day, I save money by flying AC. If CX is less expensive than AC, I will select CX. (I don't even bother collecting points with CX or OW.)