Marriott or Hilton-which one is better
 

I am in process of joining either Marriott or Hilton. Which one gives more for your points? Which one has better customer service? Which one have better properties?

I better like the Marriott. Marriott properties tend to be better than Hilton's. Also, especially in the USA, Marriott has a better network, they can be found nearly everywhere.

Muerz

The thing I love/hate about Marriott is it's consistancy. You always know what you will get with a Marriott, you are never suprised. I can honestly say I have never been disappointed at a Marriott and I have never been overly impressed either...except the Ledra Marriott in Athens and that's in comparison to all other hotels in Athens.

Hilton's IMHO can be much better and much worse...they don't seem to have a set standard for their hotels.

Marriott definitely is consistent...especially in their 4" rubber slab mattresses. Hilton beds are better.

Depends on what you want to pay. In my line of work, Fairfield Inn/Hampton Inn are the preferred properties. IMHO, unless they are new, Fairfields get run down. I've stayed in some FFs that were down right horrible. Hampton, otherwise, tends to be a bit nicer.

Personally, I like Hilton better just because to earn elite with Hilton is easier and the Douple Dip is by far much better than the Marriot's points or miles system.

I stayed at couple of Courtyards and I have to say that I wouldn't go back there again. I love Hampton Inns and except the one in San Antonio Airport, all the others are very very nice and consistant.

Suites: I like the Homewood Suites much better than the Residence Inns because the Homewood is more of a highrise-hotel kinda structure where as Residence Inn is more of an Apartment style, which I always try to avoid, although I stayed at a very nice SpringHill Suites in the Barlett,TN (just outside of horriable Memphis) don't know about the others, seems like SpringHill is about the same everywhere.

Hope this helps.

------------------
Al

Hiltons definitely give you more points and give out elite status much easier. That's great if you plan on doing a few stays and wouldn't make Marriott's more exclusive statuses; not-so-great if you plan on staying 75 nights and don't want to share the upgrade opportunities across a more diluted status level.

Hilton is definitely stronger in the low-end brands. Scarefield Inns are hideous (IMHO); Hamptons are tolerable. *New* Courtyards are nice; old Courtyards are sometimes not-so-nice. (Old Courtyards sometimes lack the bandwidth to support two phone lines in use in every room, leaving guests without *any* phone access whatsoever. It's happened to me several times at Courtyards that were obviously built before laptops become popular.) Embassies and Doubletrees are usually nicer than Courtyards. (Again, I know there are exceptions.)

Where Marriott comes in stronger is with the upscale properties. I've stayed in quite a few Hilton Hotels that I honestly think should be required to nail "Garden Inn" to the sign. Usually, if I'm in a full-service Marriott, it's a consistently good product.

I switched my primary allegiance from Marriott to Hilton strictly because my travel plans call for a lot of low-end hotels. Two nights of fast-busy signals had me booking Embassies and Doubletrees on my cell phone. Hilton also offers large bonuses to new members, which was a sufficient bribe to get me to switch. However, I still favor the Marriott for more upscale stays.