Greyhound offering $1 express routes from Chicago

By Julie Wernau
Posted Nov. 12, 2010 at 9:00 a.m.

Greyhound will launch new express bus routes in the Midwest Dec. 1 to take passengers from Chicago to Milwaukee, Madison, Indianapolis and Lafayette.

Tickets start at $1 for the one-stop service, the company said Friday, on new buses that feature reserved seating, free Wi-Fi access, additional legroom and power outlets. Dave Leach, president and CEO of Greyhound said the company is adding the routes in response to Megabus competition and higher demand from travelers looking to hop between popular Midwest cities.

Tickets can be purchased at www.mygreyhoundexpress.com and printed at home.

Greyhound Express terminal and curbside locations:

Chicago, 630 W. Harrison St., Greyhound Terminal

Milwaukee, 433 W. St. Paul Ave., Milwaukee Intermodal Station

Madison, Wis., 636 W. Washington Ave., curbside near Kelley’s Market

Minneapolis, 905 Hawthorne Ave., Hawthorne Transportation Center

Indianapolis, 105 N. Delaware St., IndyGo Stop

Lafayette, Ind., 200 N. 2nd St., outside of the Amtrak station

jwernau@tribune.com

Read more about the topics in this post: ,
 

Companies in this article

9 comments:

  1. Andrew Metcalfe Nov. 12, 2010 at 2:45 pm

    I bet these bus trips are faster than the “High Speed Rail” that talks about 6 hour trips to many of these places….

    _Am

  2. Rance St. Ambrose, IV Nov. 12, 2010 at 4:57 pm

    Tics start at only a buck. Do they let you sit INSIDE the bus for that little?

  3. Dan Nov. 12, 2010 at 5:12 pm

    Great, now there will be more smelly bums on the buses.

  4. StateStreetKid Nov. 12, 2010 at 6:55 pm

    No the express buses are not as fast as even the “slow” version of high speed rail. Right now there are no “High Speed Rail” trains serving Chicago. The first to come online will be the Chicago to Saint Louis and it will reportedly make the run from downtown to downtown in about 4 & 1/4 hours even with about 5 intermediate stops. The fastest nonstop bus from downtown Saint Louis to downtown Chicago takes 5&1/2 hrs to 6 hrs provided there are no extraordinary traffic problems.

  5. Elmwood Nov. 12, 2010 at 11:19 pm

    We have Megabus, Lincolnland Express, and now Greyhound investing their own private money to provide cheap, convenient transportation around the Midwest. But for some reason we must still pour billions of dollars of tax money into so-called high speed rail to put them out of business. Why? To save an hour or less? Is there really anyone today who is saying to themselves “I’ll continue to drive my car as long as public transportation takes 5 1/2 hours, but once it reaches 4 1/2 hours, no more driving for me”?

    Is it really worth billions for dollars for high-speed rail?

    And, yes, I acknowledge that buses use tax-funded highways. But I would also point out that those highways are there whether the buses use them or not and the buses pay gas taxes and license fees.

  6. Marcus Twain Nov. 13, 2010 at 1:25 a.m.

    Uhhh, the potential for a 220mph corridor will save more than an hour.

    Or…ever tried to make a trip to St. Louis in a snow storm on I-55?

  7. Mike Payne Nov. 13, 2010 at 2:16 a.m.

    One very important factor is that a bus can carry maybe 100 people on a 2 level bus with one driver. A thousand people takes 10 drivers.

    A train can carry 1,000 with one Engineer (and varying size of train crew), and can be easily much lengthened to carry many, many more; still with just one engineer.

    And a long train carrying 2,000 passengers would use much less total energy than 20 buses.

  8. Elmwood Nov. 13, 2010 at 4:48 a.m.

    Fair enough.

    But 20 buses could be spaced to provide almost hourly service, so that there would be a bus going to St. Louis whenever the people wanted to go to St. Louis. But with a single train, anyone who didn’t want to go to St. Louis at, let’s say, 9:00 a.m. would be out of luck and would just decide to drive at a more convenient hour. I don’t know the exact economics of train travel, but would hourly trains carrying 100 people each be more or less efficient than hourly buses carrying 100 people?

    And what if we build it and they don’t come? Buses can be rerouted to a different route if that is what the public wants. The highway will still be there to serve other vehicular traffic. The billion dollar investment in high-speed tracks won’t be of much use.

    And if trains are the only acceptable form of transportation, is a 220 mph train more or less fuel efficient than a 79 mph train? How about if you include the energy expenditures required to build and maintain high-speed tracks?

  9. Elmwood Nov. 13, 2010 at 5:06 a.m.

    “Or…ever tried to make a trip to St. Louis in a snow storm on I-55?”

    So let’s say someone wants to go to St. Louis during a snow storm. Will they choose to drive anyway unless we can provide them with 220 mph trains? Will they refuse to take 79 mph (or whatever today’s speed is) trains?