Sq bus cl vs. Ual first cl
Aug 20, 2012, 1:26 pm
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Los Angeles
Programs: CO Infinte Platinum, UAL 1K
Posts: 66
Sq bus cl vs. Ual first cl
I am using points to travel to Asia and have the option of SQ business class on their all business class flight from LAX to SIN or UAL Global First. Was wondering which product is better. The miles being charged are basically the same because the SQ flight would be using my SQ miles and the UAL flight would be using my UAL miles. Thanks.
Aug 20, 2012, 1:59 pm
#4
Join Date: Jul 2006
Programs: Continetnal Silver
Posts: 234
I am using points to travel to Asia and have the option of SQ business class on their all business class flight from LAX to SIN or UAL Global First. Was wondering which product is better. The miles being charged are basically the same because the SQ flight would be using my SQ miles and the UAL flight would be using my UAL miles. Thanks.
Aug 20, 2012, 3:16 pm
#5
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: SEA, but up and down the coast a lot
Programs: Oceanic Airlines Gold Elite
Posts: 20,391
I am using points to travel to Asia and have the option of SQ business class on their all business class flight from LAX to SIN or UAL Global First. Was wondering which product is better. The miles being charged are basically the same because the SQ flight would be using my SQ miles and the UAL flight would be using my UAL miles. Thanks.
Aug 20, 2012, 3:23 pm
#6
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Chicago
Programs: UA 1K, SPG Gold
Posts: 174
I just experienced both on a trip to SIN and I say SQ C wins: better food and better service. Particularly to give up the stop as well. UA might win for the seat, but even that would be a narrow margin.
IFE is almost identical, but I believe it's a bigger screen on UA.
IFE is almost identical, but I believe it's a bigger screen on UA.
Aug 20, 2012, 3:39 pm
#8
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: SF Bay Area
Programs: UA 1K MM, Marriott Life Plat, various others of little note
Posts: 2,763
I just experienced both on a trip to SIN and I say SQ C wins: better food and better service. Particularly to give up the stop as well. UA might win for the seat, but even that would be a narrow margin.
IFE is almost identical, but I believe it's a bigger screen on UA.
IFE is almost identical, but I believe it's a bigger screen on UA.
Aug 20, 2012, 6:29 pm
#10
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: EWR, PHL
Programs: UA1k 3MM, AA Plt, peasant on everybody else, elite something or other at a bunch of hotels.
Posts: 4,637
The UA F seat is much better as I'm not a fan of the SQ cubicles in their new C, but I would recommend SQ over a stop in NRT. Food will be better and service wonderfully consistent.
Aug 20, 2012, 7:05 pm
#12
Suspended
Join Date: Jun 2012
Programs: UA PP, AA, DL, BA, CX, SPG, HHonors
Posts: 2,002
Aug 20, 2012, 7:25 pm
#13
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: LAS
Programs: DL PM, UA PS, Hyatt Globalist, Marriott Titanium
Posts: 4,904
Another vote for SQ C over UA F. The SQ C hard product is equivalent to many airlines' First Class ... except there's 100 of you, not 12. But the FAs are better on SQ than on UA, so that balances it out.
Aug 20, 2012, 7:54 pm
#14
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,324
I've flown to Asia using SQ C a couple times, and SIN-SYD on the A380 last month...
Initial impressions of the cabin and seat grant a "wow" factor that is hard to beat. The trimmings and seat leather are first rate in every facet of the imagination, and the 1-2-1 configuration presents ideal privacy that is equal or better than many F cabins, including UA's. The cabins are beautifully detailed and the washroom is nice, having actual hand towels and some amenities I took a liking too (the A380 takes it even further in this regard). Think Ritz v. Hilton.
That said, there are some deficiencies with the seat. One, it is awkward to sit in given the tremendous width. There is a small pillow, but there is nowhere to actually rest both elbows, a bizarre shortcoming and one that I noticed almost immediately. Second, in bed mode the foot cubbyhole is offset so one need lie sideways to sleep. I found both the bulkhead and window to have a length problem (the same one I find on many C products being 6'2") as my feet were jammed and had little place to go - right here I realized this was still a grown up, very polished C product v. a true F product. This is something that's difficult to discern in photos, but clearly apparent in practice.
UA F actually represents a decent F product in my eyes. Yes, it's not a "suites" type product, but consider its price and accessibility are also not similar to those either. Physically, I found the padding to be slightly more comfortable than the SQ seat (not to imply the latter is uncomfortable by any means - far from it). Yes, it's narrower, but working on my notebook is less awkward as I have somewhere to rest both elbows - sounds like nitpicking, but again, one of those things that's apparent in reality. Sleeping is where the F suite clearly won out in my assessment - the ability to truly lie flat on my back with my feet unencumbered was the difference between poor and sufficient sleep. Entertainment wise, both have the same 15.4" monitors, but I preferred the placement in the F suite. KrisWorld wins hands down for content and interface, however.
The soft product is where the largest distinctions appear - SQ offers an experience that UA does not - to be expected given the pricing/accessibility realities in my opinion. I had outstanding service on all my SQ segments, but there was still the oft-noted robotic nature of the SQ girls to contend with. On UA I always feel at home and connected to the men/women servicing the cabins - usually a small gesture of goodwill towards them is reciprocated back exponentially. They do not get on their knees and kiss the ground for you in the way SQ will, however.
UA F isn't as ugly as it's oft portrayed in my opinion, but if it's a one time deal, I'd choose SQ for the novelty and experience alone. UA isn't a boutique luxury carrier, so if you get the choice, I'd try and experience that at least once.
Initial impressions of the cabin and seat grant a "wow" factor that is hard to beat. The trimmings and seat leather are first rate in every facet of the imagination, and the 1-2-1 configuration presents ideal privacy that is equal or better than many F cabins, including UA's. The cabins are beautifully detailed and the washroom is nice, having actual hand towels and some amenities I took a liking too (the A380 takes it even further in this regard). Think Ritz v. Hilton.
That said, there are some deficiencies with the seat. One, it is awkward to sit in given the tremendous width. There is a small pillow, but there is nowhere to actually rest both elbows, a bizarre shortcoming and one that I noticed almost immediately. Second, in bed mode the foot cubbyhole is offset so one need lie sideways to sleep. I found both the bulkhead and window to have a length problem (the same one I find on many C products being 6'2") as my feet were jammed and had little place to go - right here I realized this was still a grown up, very polished C product v. a true F product. This is something that's difficult to discern in photos, but clearly apparent in practice.
UA F actually represents a decent F product in my eyes. Yes, it's not a "suites" type product, but consider its price and accessibility are also not similar to those either. Physically, I found the padding to be slightly more comfortable than the SQ seat (not to imply the latter is uncomfortable by any means - far from it). Yes, it's narrower, but working on my notebook is less awkward as I have somewhere to rest both elbows - sounds like nitpicking, but again, one of those things that's apparent in reality. Sleeping is where the F suite clearly won out in my assessment - the ability to truly lie flat on my back with my feet unencumbered was the difference between poor and sufficient sleep. Entertainment wise, both have the same 15.4" monitors, but I preferred the placement in the F suite. KrisWorld wins hands down for content and interface, however.
The soft product is where the largest distinctions appear - SQ offers an experience that UA does not - to be expected given the pricing/accessibility realities in my opinion. I had outstanding service on all my SQ segments, but there was still the oft-noted robotic nature of the SQ girls to contend with. On UA I always feel at home and connected to the men/women servicing the cabins - usually a small gesture of goodwill towards them is reciprocated back exponentially. They do not get on their knees and kiss the ground for you in the way SQ will, however.
UA F isn't as ugly as it's oft portrayed in my opinion, but if it's a one time deal, I'd choose SQ for the novelty and experience alone. UA isn't a boutique luxury carrier, so if you get the choice, I'd try and experience that at least once.
Last edited by tuolumne; Aug 20, 2012 at 8:00 pm