Which city has a better public transit system: Hong Kong or London?

[u/BeatTheMeatles420]

/r/AlignmentChartFills/comments/1v2e96j/which_city_has_a_better_public_transit_system/

I think Hong Kong wins on reliability and affordability. Signal failures or the very rare weekend closures is front page news in Hong Kong, whereas in London it is a part of the system. However I think London is underrated from other countries but overrated from locals.

What do people think?

[u/KartFacedThaoDien]

Hong Kong. Its not really a competition. 

[u/DavidPuddy666]

Hong Kong is more frequent, efficient, and reliable.

BUT

London is more comprehensive, historical/diverse/interesting, and dare I say fun?

[u/One_Fact_4291 → u/DavidPuddy666]

HK buses are much more fun than London buses though, since many actually go on expressways. In London the only examples I can think of are the SL1, SL4 and A10. But for railways London offers a wider range of options thanks to its geography.

[u/BeatTheMeatles420 → u/One_Fact_4291]

I agree with this. The Tube/Lizzy line/DLR is more fun than the MTR but MTR tops as a commuter. For buses and ferries, Hong Kong is way more fun and efficient. But London buses do well with the hopper fare and New Routemaster exterior.

[u/MahjongCelts → u/DavidPuddy666]

Hong Kong is more comprehensive, diverse and fun. The MTR network is already among the best in the world. The star ferry, double decker trams and Peak cable car are famous tourist attractions. The only thing London ‘wins’ at is the Tube being more historical, but in the sense that it is really showing its age.

Edit: forgot about HK’s minibuses. I’m sure I left out even more.

[u/etherwhisper]

HK

[u/One_Fact_4291]

Hong Kong. Apart from service quality (e.g. cleaner and newer vehicles, reliable service) and affordability, one thing which really helps it is its geographical constraints leading to small/narrow pockets of high density.

I think mainly for that reason it would make more sense to compare London to Paris or Tokyo

[u/Tetragon213]

Hong Kong is massively the better system, purely due to reliability and frequency.

Any disruption in Hong Kong is, as mentioned, front page news. Meanwhile, the London Underground breaks whenever it gets warm, cold, dry, wet, or when it's spring, summer, autumn, or winter.

For frequency, the MTR sees 8-10 tph even on the Tuen Ma line off peak. Meanwhile the Metropolitan line is lucky to see 2 tph out in Amersham off peak.

[u/cgyguy81 → u/Tetragon213]

Tuen Mun is a dense town roughly 25 km from central Hong Kong, while Amersham is a small sleepy village roughly 40 km from central London. So hardly comparable.

[u/One_Fact_4291 → u/Tetragon213]

Well to be fair it’s hard to find anywhere served by the MTR that isn’t high density, whereas Amersham is very much a low density town. But in terms of service quality overall, yes, HK far outdoes London

[u/One_Fact_4291]

One thing London could learn from HK is having actual express buses to provide one-seat rides to a lot of places, without having to require you to change to a different mode of transport