A tram with dedicated tram lanes and the same number of stops should take
about 20 to 22 minutes, 25 at the absolute outside, to cover 8.5 km.
They're both terrible operations, but Melbourne has the excuse of a number
of legacy institutional constraints, including lack of priority. Sydney L2
was designed and built as a new line and has no excuses other than
incompetence.

Also, I don't think there's generally a tradition of quick public transport
journeys in either city and the status quo is sort of accepted, except by
those few who have experienced better systems elsewhere. Sydney is now
getting an eye-opener with the metro and the technology revolution on the
ferries that have both speeded up journeys immensely. Light rail, buses and
suburban trains will doubtless continue to amble along as they always have.
The old tram system was faster.

Tony P
(who finds riding Sydney's light rail is like watching grass grow)

On Thursday 14 March 2024 at 14:46:30 UTC+11 Richard Youl wrote:

>

> Which Tram is Slower? Sydney L2 or Melbourne 96?

> https://youtu.be/gJ7st9dn0as

>

>

>

> Richard

>