Travel

AA with 787 or JAL with 777?

  • Last Updated:
  • Aug 16th, 2017 4:42 am
Tags:
[OP]
Sr. Member
Dec 2, 2005
931 posts
10 upvotes
Markham

AA with 787 or JAL with 777?

I'm looking at flights from Toronto to Tokyo.
For same price, both transferring at Chicago first, I can fly with AA which uses newer 787 planes, but less leg room (79cm from Google Flight), or JAL which uses older 777 planes but with more leg room (86cm from Google Flight).

Which one would you pick please? I have never flown on a 787. Is it that much more comfortable that worth sacrifice the leg room and better food and service for?
28 replies
Deal Fanatic
User avatar
Apr 26, 2004
9819 posts
542 upvotes
Mississauga
I'd go for the JAL 777. Legroom is of primo importance on a super long flight, and JAL is the superior airline anyway. How tall are you?
Newbie
Oct 2, 2011
89 posts
20 upvotes
Toronto
JAL for sure. Took JAL to Tokyo March, UA back. Much worse experience for UA.
Deal Fanatic
Jan 27, 2006
6133 posts
1514 upvotes
Vancouver, BC
Almost any airline before US based airlines for international and US domestic travel.
Deal Expert
User avatar
Sep 19, 2004
19796 posts
2931 upvotes
Waterloo
I'd Google reviews and compare photos yourself
787 does feel better, and should have newest AVOD system

but I'd take JAL over AA as well, better service, probably better food too
Which Credit Cards to sign up? >> Jerry's List of Credit Cards with $200+ Welcome bonus/Aeroplan & AMEX Churning FAQ
AMEX Personal 60K || Business Platinum 75K || Biz Gold 40K || SPG 20K
Deal Addict
Oct 18, 2014
1019 posts
284 upvotes
New York City
General rule of thumbs:
-Asian carriers over Americans
-787 if in Business/First as they likely have a newer product, opposite for Economy as they may have a slimmer seat
-Legroom > *
Deal Addict
Nov 27, 2005
2065 posts
57 upvotes
Toronto
McKinsey wrote:
Aug 11th, 2017 8:59 pm
General rule of thumbs:
-Asian carriers over Americans
-787 if in Business/First as they likely have a newer product, opposite for Economy as they may have a slimmer seat
-Legroom > *
Your first rule is legit, but the second is negotiable. The lower pressurization altitude of the 787 means less jet lag. I generally vote for less jet lag. Also, carriers like AC have high density 777s. Pure torture on a long haul flight.
Deal Addict
User avatar
Aug 16, 2010
3678 posts
418 upvotes
Aurora
JAL all the way. Absolutely no question about it. I've flown most US airlines and none of them have adequate economy legroom. PLUS, the last 5 flights I flew with AA all had major delays/cancellations - I would have thought the law of averages would give me just one pleasant flight experience, but no.... Generally, NO to any US based airline for economy seating is my opinion.
Sr. Member
Apr 12, 2012
624 posts
134 upvotes
Toronto
I've flown Delta a couple of times to Asia and the trips were fine. They use the new 777 for long hall trans-Pac flights

I have flown the 787 coming back from Copenhagen. The equipment was quiet, but since it was so quiet, people started to stand up and talk with each other. The noise level will remind you of a night at a bar.

I'd go for JAL. I flew with them several times when I lived in Canada and the service was top-notch. You will have better food and better-looking flight attendants, if they matter to you ;)
Member
Jan 10, 2009
462 posts
99 upvotes
Toronto
It's a long flight, JAL most definitely. I've flown JAL 777s before on 13 hour routes in economy, and they were great. Also I'd never fly an American airline unless I absolutely have to, they really are terrible.
Deal Fanatic
User avatar
Sep 6, 2002
6960 posts
346 upvotes
Toronto
The 787 is nice but taking the Asian carrier is a no brainer.
Did I post something that interests you? Feel free to PM further questions.
Member
Sep 22, 2005
444 posts
33 upvotes
BC
I cannot tell the significant difference of humidity or noise level of 787 vs other Boeing airplanes.
You also need to check how many seats per row; the width of the seat.
Deal Addict
Oct 18, 2014
1019 posts
284 upvotes
New York City
pablonutribar wrote:
Aug 11th, 2017 9:22 pm
Your first rule is legit, but the second is negotiable. The lower pressurization altitude of the 787 means less jet lag. I generally vote for less jet lag. Also, carriers like AC have high density 777s. Pure torture on a long haul flight.
True about the AC 777HD. Not all carriers have retro-fitted their 777, the odds are just higher with the 787. Disclaimer was "general rule of thumb".
Member
Sep 22, 2005
444 posts
33 upvotes
BC
AC's 787-9 high density is also bad!
Sr. Member
Feb 11, 2009
833 posts
136 upvotes
JAL 777 long haul will probably be 9 seats abreast.
AA will be 9 abreast on a 787 which is a narrower plane!

Sure the windows are fancier and the air pressure is supposed to be higher and more humid but I think the width of the seat is the most important factor.

The airlines have taken a great plane like the 787 and ruined it.

Top