It depends on the purpose of the trip and whether I needed a car at the other end. A couple years ago for a business trip to another city about 1000km away, I flew as it had to be a quick 2 day business trip there and back. And it was a tax write off anyway. But hey, WestJet, I am a normal size person and never before have my hips actually got wedged between the arm rests on any plane. They were a bit stuck and I had to twist to get out of the seat.

However if I was staying a week or so I would drive, especially if I was going with some other people. I would also consider the train if it was a vacation trip.

However, to go to my daughter`s graduation in the east, about 3500km away I certainly flew. Though while there we did two road trips that were about 600 miles each.

In 2008 My daughter and I did a road trip in 5 travel days from LA to Pittsburgh. We had a great time.

1

I prefer train or by boat if there's water involved. True, travel by plane is the fastest option, but it's not very comfortable. I didn't enjoy flying to China because it was an entire 12 hours of sitting in a chair not being able to sleep, very little leg room, it was cold, and the people next to me snored. Loudly. I can't fall asleep on a plane no matter how hard I try.

On the other hand I took a train at one point and it was quite comfortable. I had a bed and small TV. I could sit, stand, lie down, move freely. I had my own little room. Also, I could see everything from my window.

On an airplane you sort of miss a lot of stuff...mostly because of the clouds. It would be nice to see miniaturized everything but all the time I only see white bright clouds so it's quite boring after the first hour.

Travel by sea is nice because again you have free movement. It's not that bad the time it takes to get across the Atlantic. My voyage was only 13 days, and it seemed to fly by, especially if you are on a nice ship you can occupy yourself. I'll be honest I had more fun on the ship to England than I did in England.

Definitely plane but really a train is preferable to the car. Just got back to Philly from Morehead City, North Carolina. 10 hours by car! What a brutal trip and it's always worse going home than going there since you're more tired and irritable! At one point we got turned around and we going back to where we started until I noticed a few things. We had to cross the Millard E. Tydings Memorial Bridge, that high one on I95 over the Susquehanna River! It was raining so hard you couldn't see a thing! It was terrifying! With a plane the hardest thing is getting to the airport on time. Then sit back and relax. It would have taken about an hour-2hours tops--and we wouldn't have had to figure out how to get there.

If the distance is around 5-6 hours by train I take the train because the journey is not too long and the train is comfortable and cheaper than the plane. When the train journey is too long I take the plane to get there faster. I dont drive so I only travel by car when I can ride with someone else. I live in Europe and I usually travel by train across my country or to nearby countries and I take the plane when I go abroad to countries that are more far away and the train journey takes too long.

If the purpose of the trip is to get there, plane since it's much faster. If the purpose of the trip is sightseeing, then a motorcycle. I just completed a 3000km round trip and had a ball. Yes, I got rained on and got wet, but I also saw a lot of nice scenery in the mountains, unimpeded by a roof or door pillars. The bike is convenient for stopping to take pictures without impeding traffic, or doing U-turns to check on a historical site marker or interesting object that in a car would involve turning around at the next intersection, or most likely giving up because it's probably not worth the effort. (this was mostly on not very busy 2-lane roads)

I greatly prefer to travel by train where possible. Earlier this year I traveled around Europe by rail, fantastic.

I don't like buses or planes very much just because of the comfort factor. After a few hours of sitting my knee's begin to cramp, and I'm more or less incapable of falling asleep on either so I tend to arrive at my destination exhausted and sore, where as a train I can walk around when need be and, assuming the compartment is empty (some east European trains have 8 seat compartments) I can just stretch out across 4 seats and go to sleep. Not to mention that long distance trains have caf'es/resturants/vending machines, toilets and sometimes wifi.

The other advantage to taking the train is less limitation on luggage. As someone who would prefer to travel cheap, I'm not interested in spending more for additional bags/weight. I only took a regular sized backpackers bag around Europe, but it will still oversized for budget airline baggae allowances.

Car would be my second choice, but I like looking out the window, the guarantee that I wont get lost and not having to pay for fuel. Of course, since I live in Australia there is also rental fee's when I go oversea's, something im not willing to pay when the mk1 leg can get me most places I want to go.

It depends upon the enjoyment and luxury. If you need to stop at every beautiful place you see you need a car(You can stop at any time if you wish) and an additional point about a car especially if it is a coupe or a cabriolet that if you want to enjoy open air you need to travel by car, if you need to stop after a while like about 10 minutes, but not according to your wish you need a train. An additional point about the train is that if you want to see beautiful things without stopping you can use a train. You can use a plane if you're going somewhere quickly and do not want to visit scenic places you can use a plane. But as many people do not have the affordability to buy a plane ticket, they can either buy a ticket for a train or rent a small car. According to luxury, a small car(Toyota Yaris) might be uncomfortable but a large car like a Hummer Limo or a Rolls Royce can be very comfortable. If you buy a ticket for a small train(Economy Class0 it might be uncomfortable but if you buy a ticket for a large train in the First Class Compartment it will be comfortable. Similar here with planes if you buy a ticket for a small plane in economy class it might be uncomfortable but if you book a ticket for a large plane in a First Class Compartment it might be comfortable depends upon how rich you are. (Hope I did not offend anyone here)

I agree with most of the answers; it does all depend of your destination and how many people are accompanying you. Personally, I have never been on a train or a plane in my life but I'm definitely eager to try. I think Plan would be best if you are crossing a boarder because the hassle is less than getting your whole car searched. However if you are going on a cross-country tour, I think train or car is a better bet, depending on the amount of people. 3 or less people I'd say car, but any more than that, and it can become crowded, therefor a train would be better.

Your question is very wage. How far are we talking? Let's say 1000 mile or farther.

Business trip: Meaning you have no time to enjoy the scenery - let them pay for the plane ticket.

Vacation: I love to travel by car, since I can stop any time and enjoy - for 1 hour or 2 days, but if I really had to get to some place within a certain time limit - I love the train, not having to concentrate on traffic and watch the scenery.

I have been flying round trip from Germany to LA or SF ~13 times - loved it. Never had any bad encounter, always was lucky with my neighbor, no crying babies (we are talking ~150 hrs), but I have to admit that during all those flights, I only had one wonderful flight without any clouds flying from NY to LA where I could watch the landscape changes