I've been flying United several times a year between SFO and EZE, but I'm ready to give up on them for a number of reasons. For me, minimizing door-to-door travel time is important, and I noticed that American and Continental have the shortest flights: about 16 hours total time on the northbound through DFW or IAH. One thing I noticed at EZE is that the check-in lines at AA tend to be quite long as it has several flights. I also heard good things about CO's service (at least when compared to United).

Any other input would be appreciated.

Im afraid Im no big help on your question.... but I will tell you this: I know for a fact that CO is more strict than AA in terms of baggage allowance, weight limits and other rule/small print issues. This may not be of major importance to you, but its a good thing to know.

Also, I think that AA still has some 777 metal flying down here that has an F cabin, and as far as I know CO only has 2 classes of service.

In case you're not already aware, LAN 603 is nonstop LAX-EZE (14 hours I think).

Unfortunately, no it is not. It is a 1-stop @ SCL that will operate approx. 4x/wk. The other days it is 2 stops (LIM/SCL) or 1 stop LIM with connection there. Having been on LAN through LAX many times, the LAX/SFO portion on the return is a major pain, adding several hours to the trip (immigration, change of terminal @LAX).

I was just going to post much the same thing about LAN - they mark them as "non-stop" because you don't change planes, but the truth is, that they do about a half hour to forty minute stop in Santiago on virtually all flights into Buenos Aires - just enough for passengers to get on and off - if it's not your destination, they ask you to remain seated; and sometimes the same thing in Lima. Sometimes I've also found that the stop in Santiago is significantly longer - 2-3 hours. On the other hand, despite the bit of extra time, LAN's in-air service, staff attitude and attention, is among the best I've found on any airline and their food is often quite good.

I've flown Continental for years and had always been happy with their service quality. I have noticed that the last 2-3 years things have gone a little downhill - they brought in a new cost-cutting CEO in late 2002 or early 2003, and the cost cuts show - in quality of food, and even just the general attentiveness and attitude of their flight attendants, especially the younger ones - presumeably newer hires. That said, at their worst, I think they're better than American Airlines at their best. Over thirty some years of flying, I can't remember a single AA flight that I didn't get off of at the end being pissed off. Their flight staff have what have to be the worst customer service attitudes of any airline in the sky - I never fly AA unless I have no other options.

Thanks to everyone for the input. I think I'm going to give CO a try.

I also agree that going through customs and immigration at LAX is to be avoided when possible, l was there a few weeks ago and it was seriously understaffed. I'd do it if there was a nonstop to EZE, but an hour wait at immigration and customs and then a terminal change at LAX for the short flight to SFO is the last thing you want after two segments and 15 hours.

From what I've seen over the past few years, I get the impression that we probably won't see a nonstop to EZE from the West Coast anytime soon. Maybe if AR decided to go EZE-LAX-(somewhere in Asia), perhaps as a codeshare with another carrier. A problem is that the transit visa requirement for non-US citizens makes it more appealing to go to Asia via Europe. Also, AR probably has bigger fish to fry right now.

Im surprised AA or UA dont fly LAX-EZE as a non-stop, considering how many South Americans live in the California area... such a flight could feed Uruguay, Chile and other South American destinations from EZE. Alas, Im sure they have done the numbers and perhaps the loads would not be sufficient to make it profitable...?

I would love a nonstop LAX-EZE, I would be willing to pay at least a 20% premium for that and I would increase my frequency of travel. I suspect that I'm in the minority, as most people I know who travel that route don't do it that often. When they do, price is usually their main concern.

I believe AR used to have a direct LAX-EZE flight a few years back, nonstop on some days and with a stopover at LIM on others. I flew AR two months ago and the in-flight magazine had a dotted line listing future routes, LAX-EZE was one of them ("coming soon"). The website has no information about it, and I suspect it's been on the magazine for a long time.

I wonder what could be done to convince an airline to at least give the route a trial run for a few months. The flight would be shorter than the EZE-AKL nonstop already server by AR with an Airbus A340. Maybe even a 767 could do it.

Let us know what your experience is like on CO!
I've flown several times to SCL the last couple of years (from SFO) and have always flown AA (via DFW). And to repeat what someone has said on this thread already, I always end up ticked off.

Flying to Mendoza in July and have decided to go with LAN this time SFO-LAX-SCL-MDZ.

Aerolineas used to fly to LAX in the 80s... I dont know if it was non-stop as Im not sure the old 747-sp and 747-200s had enough range.

The SP had plenty of range. The -200 had enough range (but not much margin, methinks).

I would be happy if UA would go back to stopping over in MIA or somewhere more on-the-way than IAD. :-(

IAD is not that far out of the way. It is just a horrible place. Neither was JFK (another old UA route). The total elapsed travel time was similar, and it gave a longer chance for sleep. Don't forget that SCL is east of MIA (not by much) and EZE is a nice chunk east of there.

Back to the OP, I once connected @ MIA from Lan to AA and it was a horrible experience - F on Lan to 2 cabin F on AA. From the check-in and security zoo that took forever and a day, to AA lounge matrons who almost didn't want to permit entry with a F OW ticket (Lan), I hate the place (among other trips from a near misconnect due to MIA immigration, to a near missed flight with a security line that was so long I had to have a AA EXP who was on the phone for his own misconnect put me on with his agent to see if she could protect me, too (I have no AA status) - I just find any way to avoid MIA with a South America to domestic connection in the early AM. I don't know if AA through DFW would serve you better. However, much of their SFO/DFW service is on MD80s. I have no info on CO.

Ive heard from frecuent CO pax that the check-in agents for CO at EZE have a reputation of being very picky with baggage allowances and other issues. It seems like they like to throw the rule-book at pax all the time.

One example of this is that CO check in staff are known to be some of the harshest enforcers of the 5 liter per pax rule for wines in checked luggage, although they are wrong and this rule does not apply to wines because of their alcohol content.

So I flew SFO-EZE and back on CO. Overall, CO with no elite status was better than UA as a 1P. I was able to get exit row seats on the short domestic flights by calling the airline 24 hours in advance, and the international coach seats on CO were comparable to UA's E+. I have a lot of miles to burn on UA, but I'd be hard pressed to pay for the SFO-IAD-EZE flight again.

In particular, IAH is a much more pleasant airport to go through than IAD. Also, the flight is noticeably shorter. SFO-EZE took 18 1/2 hours door-to-door .

The only negative: because I didn't buy my ticket on continental.com, I only got 50% EQM. I think that's a harsh punishment. Still, I find being a 1P on UA pretty much useless these days.