cblaisd

I'll move this from the San Francisco forum to the Marriott forum where the good folks there can help you.

cblaisd
Senior Moderator

Ryantek

If the location doesn't matter, I would choose the JW. The rooms are nicer and so is the concierge lounge.

SkiUtah

Is the Regular marriott in a better location for a tourist???

allset2travel

The 2 properties are only 10 minutes apart by walking through Union Square. I stayed at both. If rates are similar, I would stay at the JW. JW is a better hotel in terms of general services. If you are elite plat, both places will treat you right. I prefer the lounge at the JW (not quite as crowded). When stay at either on weekend (lounge closed), they would provide breakfast voucher for elites. In such case, the breakfast buffet at the MR is excellent.
Plenty of posts about "Marriott family in San Francisco". Do a search and thou shall find.

USFreak

I haven't done the JW but I have done the Marriott.....I thoroughly enjoyed my stay there but man, I have never seen so many people in my life at the Marriott. JW is much smaller so you wont have to wait in line to get in the concierge lounge nor wait in long lines (at the wrong times) for an elevator......

keeton

If access to public transportation (BART, MUNI) is an issue, then the Downtown Marriott would be a better location.

SkiUtah

access to bart is a priority for me. Looks online like the regular marriott is closer to bart???

sfpaul900

Yes, the SF Marriott is closer to BART, but the JW is a short walk (1 block east to Powell and four blocks down to Market) to the Powell Street station. it's not much of a hill, especially given San Francisco's topography, and can be done in 7-8 minutes, if you walk briskly. If you don't mind the slightly-seedier Mason Street, you can avoid the slow-moving tourists on Powell and walk straight down Mason to Eddy, then left to the BART station entrance on Cyril Magnin Street.

IMHO, there is no comparison between the two hotels. I avoid the Marriott whenever possible. It's full of conventioneers and can take forever just to check in if you arrive at the wrong time. The concierge lounge is far too small for the number of people that use it. OTOH, every time I've stayed there, the lounge at the JW has never been crowded and has a far better selection of hot food (eggs, bacon, sausage, etc).

Rooms are comparable, but the bathrooms at the JW have a glassed-in marble shower and a separate tub. The JW is supposed to be undergoing a renovation, but hadn't started the last time I was there (June).

Overall, the JW has a much more calm and exclusive feel to it. There is an excellent restaurant and a very congenial bar, unlike the cattle-car atmosphere of the Marriott. A co-worker and I went up to The View, atop the Marriott, for an after-work drink. After being ignored for 10 minutes while sitting at the bar (it wasn't even that crowded), we left and went across the street to a local bar. On the contrary, on a subsequent trip when I stayed at the JW, we had such a good time at the bar that we drained a whole bottle of Plymouth Gin and my co-worker ended up passed out on the couch in my room.

bigguyinpasadena

The SF Marriott is very close(1/2 block north,1/2 block west)to bart-but the JW is a much nicer property IMO and is not that much more of a walk.

rln

Why not consider something different? This last weekend, I stayed at the Walnut Creek Marriott - just a block or so off of the BART. I got upgraded to a gigantic executive suite - the bath had a separate shower - and got a breakfast coupon for the full breakfast buffet. There are a number of full service Marriots (Oakland, SFO Airport come to mind) that are right next to BART stations and can usually be had for much less than the downtown properties. I had a $115 rate at the Walnut Creek - Summer Promotion with a $100 bonus buck included. Great deal!!! Think about it. . . . .saving X amount of dollars each night could help purchase a lot of very nice dinners in the city (but the room service at Walnut Creek is one of the best I've seen). 'Course, you may have someone else footing the bill. In that case. . .I was going to say, let them pay for the more convenient location. But, on second thought. . . . .

VA1379

I have stayed at both properties, and the San Francisco Marriott is good if you are there for a convention or an event. Otherwise, the JW Marriott has a nicer concierge lounge and is a nicer property overall. The only negative to the JW that is that there are more emergency vehicles at night running around the hotel. If you do not like that noise, the San Francisco Marriott is a better choice.

whistlindiksee

I was told by plat desk that there is no concierge lounge or designated floor at the JW San Francisco, yet I see references to it posted here. Can anyone comment? I'm going to be there Sat - Tues this weekend (Labor Day). 2 nights on B1G1 and two on standard points.
I'm hoping it's wonderful there. Very little could top where I am now--at the Victoria Marriott in a corner suite, water and parliament view, on standard points!

TrojanHorse

I did a search but the terms SFO, San Francisco kept showing nothing or that it was a 3 letter word and not searchable.. so can either someone find the thread (if one exists) or can someone say what properties they liked, which had lounges, any type of free hi speed if applicable, upgrades, or any other thing that you liked or did not like

allset2travel

The search tool sucks this morning

Take a look at below for starter.

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/showt...t=family+hotel

TrojanHorse

looking for JW, SF Marriott, Fishermans Wharf Marriott, & Stanford updates since this summer