alison

Hi, for a mid-December trip, I intuitively thought of starting in Tokyo for "bright lights big city" and then ending in Kyoto (4 nights each, with a day trip from Kyoto to Hiroshima). Wondered if others would chime in on whether this is really better than the reverse. We would be flying open jaw from LAX either into Osaka and back from NRT or into HND and back from Osaka. I realize HND is easier/more convenient, but don't see this as a dealbreaker (?). Mostly trying to figure out if my intuition for starting with Tokyo (and jet lag) and moving on to more relaxing sights is shared by others. Cost is same.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts!
P.S. I realize that this isn't best time of year to visit with short days, but at least there may be less rain than other times and it's the best time for my adult daughter to travel.....

Kathie

I think it doesn't matter in which city you start. The one thing I would change is I'd give more time to Kyoto (especially since you are taking a day away from it to go to Hiroshima).

Do you know about www.japan-guide.com ? it is the best resource on the web for info about travel in Japan.

alison

@Kathie, thanks. Yes, I'm a top researcher and follower of fodors and TA! I've been consulting japan guide and other sources. Actually, part of my thinking of the begin in Tokyo/end in Kyoto thinking is that it gives us a bit more time in Kyoto since we would have part of the day we arrive from Tokyo plus a full half day of our last day. So even with taking time for Hiroshima we would have 2.5 days in Kyoto.

kja

If you haven't already done so (and your probably already have, alison!) look at the times: what arrival and departure times better suit your purposes?

FWIW, I was glad to end in Tokyo, not because it was less relaxing (it certainly was NOT!), but because Tokyo was not my highest priority, and I wanted to ensure that I had as much energy as I could manage for the other places on my itinerary, including Kyoto. In other words: I was willing to “sacrifice” Tokyo. As it turned out, I was fortunate -- I felt that I had enough energy to visit everything I really wanted to see, including Tokyo.

Hope that helps!

kja

P.S. That's still not a real answer... I thought (and did) have a more energy at the start of my trip; others might find more energy after a bit of vacation....

Kavey

For me, I'd prefer ending with Kyoto because I love it more and I like to build the wonder through a trip... especially a short one... I don't want to find myself in a place wishing I was still in the last place, even though the current place is great!!

2.5 days for Kyoto is very little...

internetwiz

I would end in Tokyo, merely because I have jet lag when I arrive and the excitement of a big city is too much to begin a trip with. Plus if you leave Tokyo until the end, you'll be acclimated to Japan more, which will be useful in a big city.

Just my 2 cents worth.

bob1010

If jet lag is an issue for you as it is for me,
And if you think Kyoto will be your fave, start in Tokyo because you'll be more in a daze and will sleep more

MinnBeef

For me, I've never had real jet lag heading over to Japan but wow, 5 days on the return end on both of my trips. I agree with Kathie about keeping the anticipation of Kyoto for later in your trip when you've fully acclimated to Japan. And 2 1/2 days is about one third of what you would ideally want for Kyoto plus Nara.

Kavey

I have horrible jet lag, and find I wake up in the early hours for days and days after landing. But I don't mind that so much, I like to get out and about and I'm not into nightlife so it doesn't make much difference for me where I am at that point! ;-)

janisj

IMO you really don't have long enough in either city -- but especially not for Kyoto.

If it was me, I'd concentrate on Kyoto - maybe spending 6 nights there. And just spend the last two nights in Tokyo. That way you'd have at least an adequate time in one of the two . . .

Les

Having taken basically the same trip last year (minus Hiroshima), I found that starting in Kyoto and finishing in Tokyo (5 days each) worked well for us.

While I liked both cities, I found that Tokyo had much more that held my interest than Kyoto, and left much more to return for. Many of the main sights in Kyoto were similar (beautiful temples), but Tokyo was different around every turn, and held so many more interesting things that I wish I'd had more time to see.

But, admittedly, I'm a big-city boy, and clearly have different priorities than some of the earlier posters.
It's all good!

kja

Fascinating! While I enjoyed parts of Tokyo, much of it seemed to me yet another block of high-rises, electronics shops, and au curant teens. In contrast, I found the differences between Kyoto’s temples and shrines and palaces abolutely intriguing!

I’m exagerrating, of course, to draw attention to differences between people in what they see, even if seeing the same things. Vive la différence!

BigRuss

I think it's amazing that people discuss Kyoto like it's an effing village. If Kyoto were in the US, it'd be the 7th most populous city (just behind Phoenix, but less likely to make you combustible in summer). There are no commonalities among the immediate Kyoto Station area or Shijokawaramachidori and Ardmore, Oklahoma.

That said, I'd arrive in Tokyo (which I have each time) because the effects of travel will wipe out your arrival day and part of the next and you already lack time in Kyoto. And I don't jet lag as badly as the rest of my family.

mrwunrfl

alison, I think your intuition is about right, but the decision for me would depend on the flights: schedule, connections, aircraft type, seat pitch & width, etc.

I like the idea of a morning arrival at HND. One thing that could tip the balance for me would be if I could depart KIX on an international flight. Like the JAL/AA-codeshare nonstop KIX-LAX, or UA connecting in SFO. Or Air Canada from Nagoya to LAX via Vancouver. Or, if business class then Asiana via Seoul. That is my preference though I can't really argue against a Japan domestic connection.

But a LAX-HND-LAX keeps your options options. Afternoon or late night departure from HND means you can get there from Kyoto pretty easily.

Les

BigRuss, I agree that Kyoto is not an "effing village."

Having said that, I still wouldn't travel 6000 miles just to see the 7th most populous city in the U.S. I WOULD travel that distance just to see Tokyo, however.

Did I mention, I love BIG cities?

BigRuss

I'd travel 6000 miles plus to see the third most populous city in the Kobe-Osaka-Kyoto region. And do so again and again.

I've not been to Phoenix.

alison

Thank you to everyone for your responses. Will look forward to returning to Japan forum for a different trip to Japan. This was wrong time of year, too little time. But planning for what would have been a mother/daughter trip intrigued my husband so a trip to Japan will be with him! Meanwhile, I will be over at the UK forum planning a late March London week with my daughter.

Next big trip with DH will be Japan or Andalusia. Loved Barcelona so much we will return to Spain. (My Barcelona TR is posted)

So, see all of you helpful folks in the U.K. forum.....and either Spain or back here in Japan.
Thanks as always for your input!

bussa17

When my family came I show them Kyoto first. More quiet, less stress going around, very characteristic in term of tourism. then Tokyo and go shopping and running around and party...Kansai as well has some great party time

sandgroper

Agree with posts that suggest starting in Kyoto and finishing in Tokyo.
Our reasons for travelling this way was May was our first trip to Japan, and we wanted to get an idea of train and bus travel, restaurants etc in quieter environments before staying in the biggest city we've ever spent time in - Tokyo.
Very glad we did it that way as by the time we hit Tokyo we were definitely ready for this wonderful and vibrant city.