What makes a commute good? Ease of transportation, low cost and reliability rank high.

Some cities offer commutes that fit those requirements. Buffalo N.Y., Milwaukee, Wis. and Salt Lake City, Utah all offer smooth commutes. But on the opposite end are Atlanta, Detroit and Miami, thanks to drivers who don't carpool, public transportation, bad traffic and insufficient infrastructure to manage the quantity of traffic.

Forbes.com examined the 75 largest metro areas in the U.S. and compared them on efficiency of commuter use, traffic delays and travel times, using data from the U.S. Census Bureau's 2006 American Community Survey and the Texas Transportation Institute.

The best commutes were those that were short, dependable and in cities where fellow commuters used transit options efficiently.

The worst were those cities that wasted the most time and were least reliable.

Efficiency was difficult to gauge because of development patterns in cities and population densities. For example, Los Angeles offices are spread out while many jobs are concentrated around the center of the city. Because of these differences, a mass transit system would function differently in each city.

Public transit systems are most efficient when they are able to take cars off the road, limiting congestion, reducing delays and travel time as well as increasing commute predictability. Since carpooling responds to similar needs, results were determined by measuring a city's commuting efficiency.

Los Angeles has 20 percent of commuters using public transit, Boston has 23 percent and San Francisco boasts 28 percent of commuters using public transit. Kansas City commuters are less likely to use the transit system, with only 12 percent of commuters served.

Higher efficiency ratings also mean lower cost. Since carpooling is less than driving alone, and both are more expensive than public transit, which costs more than walking, the less dependant a commuter is on fuel, the less expensive the commute.

Capacity is measured by the Department of Transportation by examining highway miles per 10,000 people. Los Angeles has only 4.73 miles per 10,000 people, San Francisco has 5.86 highway miles per 10,000 people and Houston boasts 9.54 miles per 10,000. Congestion occurs when an area doesn't have enough highway miles to handle the commuting population.

Forbes used the Texas Transportation Institute's data to rank cities according to the time an average traveler was delayed by traffic each year.

Though its population is shrinking, Detroit has one of America's worst commutes. Even though Detroit roads are tailored to the auto, only 11 percent of commuters carpool, walk or use public transit. That means that the average Detroit commuter spends 54 hours per year in traffic, more than drivers in San Bernadino and Riverside California -- with 49 hours of delays and Chicago or Boston with 46 hours of delays on average.

Some drivers have tough commutes because of sprawl. In Atlanta, 12.7 percent of drivers take over an hour to get to work. In San Bernadino and Riverside, 15 percent of drivers spend more than an hour in their daily commute.

One benefit of sprawl that must be noted is that lower-priced homes are more accessible. Places like Atlanta, San Bernadino and Riverside have long commutes but more affordable housing, compared to other nearby cities or the national average. But, as gas prices continue to rise, the benefits of affordable housing and longer commute become less of an asset.