Photo by Flickr user anitakhart
Let’s start with the carpet. Why would Bay Area Rapid Transit, one of the country’s busiest commuter rail systems, decide it was a good idea to upholster the floor?
The result is Eau de BART, the stomach-turning scent that hits you in the face every time you board a train to San Francisco.
Oh man. Our transit system is getting dissed…nationally! Okay, I agree that the cloth seats are a bad idea. What’s more barftastic: BART, Muni, or the NYC subway?
(Thanks for the tip, reader Dave)
If you liked this Muni diary, you might like:
Written by jeff
Like Sex, Love, Lust … Muni? Click 
Ride Muni like a boss. Our Fast Pass Clipper card holders and Muni Diaries T-shirts are all on sale 
They are phasing out the carpets though.
Besides, the new trains won’t have carpets or upholstered seats, afaik.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
[Reply]
Yup I think yesterday in the comments people have said that the carpets are being phased out. But though the carpets are being ripped away, the seats on the older trains are still the gross cloth…eeeeek! I remember seeing an ad for BART at one of the Prelinger Archives talks, advertising how comfortable BART is, with the plush seats and reading lamps. Yes, reading lamps. I assume those were phased out or axed quickly.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
[Reply]
BART is plagued by being a hybrid system. Many use it for a regional commuter-type experience (read: Pittsburg to downtown SF) and pay through the wazoo. Whereas, if you’re like me and lucky enough to live on a BART line in SF, you use it to zip to point B in SF that happens to be along the BART line also. And yes, I totally prefer carpetless (TWSS). Clothless-seats would be a godsend, but this is the first I’m hearing of it.
For $1.75 within SF, BART still can’t be beat. Except for the fact that it doesn’t go many places.
CAPTCHA somehow fitting: achoo He
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
[Reply]
Brandon Reply:
June 24th, 2010 at 7:37 pm
Despite the $1.75 (or $10 added to a muni monthly pass for unlimited rides) im guessing that the SF portion of BART is profitable, and subsidizes the other parts of the system. This is why BART should build a Geary line, it would be a hell of a lot better than anything Muni can do, and would MAKE THEM MONEY, which they could then put towards extensions at the ends of the lines (Livermore, etc) which will always be money losers.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
[Reply]
I’ll agree that carpeting & upholstery were both bad moves on BART’s part, but I spent last summer in NYC, & eating on the subway is WAY out of control there. So while we have old carpet stench, NYC has all-day fast food nastiness stench, which I, personally, found to be worse (esp. when combined with riders’ smacking, eating sounds). [Shudder]
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
[Reply]
DUDE, no. Absolutely no to a pigeon in BART.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
[Reply]
Did anybody think to check the pigeon for proof of fare? I think eating on public transportation in itself has to be the grossest thing. How anybody sit on a bart or muni line and stick food in their mouth is beyond me.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
[Reply]
So a streetperson, not in their right mind, whip it out and start to piss. Right there in the back row. I have never sat in the back row of any car ever since.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
[Reply]
NYC subway is far more disgusting. There is no contest. If you’re not smelling urine while you are waiting/getting off the train, then something’s wrong. SF underground is nicer, more pleasant, and less crowded with people who smell like urine.
NYC Metro might be more efficient, but MUNI smells better. Take your pick.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
[Reply]