The point is the travel. If you have the time, then this would have been a great way to see a lot of the world. It's a bit of an adventure by itself.

I can't say it would have been very comfortable, so I guess it would be trading time and comfort for money.

I have friends that take the long haul Amtrak route. One does it for environmental reasons. He also eats discarded food so as not to waste. Great guy. Just a bit of a nut.

Another travels by train with his wife because they are retired and both have knee problems that make sitting in a plane untenable.

But yeah, traveling by train in the US outside the Northeast corridor doesn't make except for unusual circumstances.

You definitely don’t take long distance Amtrak today for cost or convenience. You go for the experience and views. I had a blast sharing a room with a friend on the Seattle to Emeryville route. I’m looking at Chicago to Emeryville next (or starting in Denver along the same route).

The Wikipedia article made it sound like more of a "land cruise". The bus stopped at some tourist and shopping destinations along the way and the description make it sound more like a cabin cruiser than your typical bus. I can see the appeal for people who want to travel and don't have a lot of money. Definitely easier than hitchhiking across the continent.

The other motivation would be getting to see - albeit briefly - all of the countries in between.

If I had 50 days to spare I might choose that over a flight too!

Can't believe you tried so hard to list reasons for taking the route, and missed an obvious one that other commenters suggested. Travel is not always just A->B as fast as possible.

It followed the hippie trail, that was the motivation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hippie_trail

For the most part, the purpose of the long haul Amtrak services isn't to make it economical go from one end of the line / one major city to the other (e.g. NYC to Chicago); It's to provide a transportation service for all the intermediate, rural stations who might not be near an airport or have any other public transportation options.

"There is just absolutely no reason to travel that way."

Some people liked to see all these places and meet people. The journey itself would be an adventure. The other alternative would be by sea.

I used to know someone who travelled to India overland long before the Beatles made it fashionable for westerners to visit.

I took the Amtrak from Chicago to SF and it was the highlight of that year for me and one of the best memories of my life. Eating breakfast as we snaked by the Colorado river with fresh snow on the rocks - that's a travel experience.

The same reason why people take month long road trips anywhere, it's to see everything on the way. I'd guess their clients were 20 year olds wanting to go on an adventure. Honestly, if this had been a thing when I was 21 and out of college and a friend asked me to go I probably would have.

I once took Amtrack from Chicago-Seattle-San Francisco-Los Angeles-San Antonio-Chicago. With side-trips to Madison WI, Vancouver and to Yosemite (via Green Tortoise company).

It was a 6 week vacation, the purpose was to travel and see the US. I enjoyed it very much!

By way of comparison, it took pilgrims from England traveling on ships like the Mayflower about 66 days to arrive in New England.

Says so right in the opening paragraphs:

> became famously associated with the overland Hippie Trail of the 1960s and 1970s

Depends on the type of tourism you prefer, I absolutely love roadtrips because "journey is more important than the destination", it's an adventure and the best memories from trips I have are from the journey itself, the destination is just a cherry on top.

iirc it was more doing it for the experience than as a convenient mode of travel (and actually if you run the maths/do some estimation, the journey time would be much shorter if they were driving 24/7 - like 5-10 days maybe)

Really, more expensive than flying? The family and I are looking at taking a X-country trip on AMTRAK and it looks to be significantly cheaper than flying. Plus, we will get to see awesome sights.

Amtrak is not for someone that simply wants to get from A to B. I suspect a 50-day bus trip would be the same.

When I take Amtrak, it’s because I want to look out of a window for a few dozen hours and see something new (to me) every time I look out the window.

It’s probably the bus trip that they want, and not simply “go to India.”

What if you want to enjoy the scenery?

I’m surprised you’ve missed the most important reason of all. The very journey and the time spent on it is the point I would imagine for a large majority of the folks. It’s an adventure. What sort of person misses this?

Road is the destination, thus you arrive a changed man, ready for the Indian sub-universe to experience and mold you further.

And specifically on this, clashing with a very exotic cultures and mindsets along the way, forming unexpected intense interactions and experiences that you will remember for the rest of your life.

I've done a similar thing to this since this specifically wasn't possible anymore without crossing battlefields and risking kidnapping and death - backpacking around India for 6 months together. No real destination or plan, just 1 thick Lonely planet book covering whole country in the backpack (this was 2008 and 2010), return ticket and fixed budget in cash.

Came back a bit different, dare I say in some ways enlightened person. Experience cannot be explained to others by mere words, but other folks who experienced similar understand without a word.

Or being a "nomad" type who considers the journey itself as an end.

Fits the hippie age quite well.

You don't need to do it in one trip.

The equivalent of this would be interrailing through europe... travel via train to one country, stay for a few days, travel to next, stay a few days, and continue, all with a single ticket: https://www.interrail.eu/en/interrail-passes/global-pass

Judging by the facilities mentioned in the Wikipedia article, it was very much planned as a (relatively) modern-day Orient Express. Not everyone back then had the luxury to not work for 50 days (one-way), so it was very much a rich people service.

drug and sex tourism