zabashel

Hello,

I've been an avid reader of the Fodors boards for some time, but this is my first post! I am planning my honeymoon and we've narrowed it down to either an Alaska cruise or a Hawaii cruise (7/8 days). We had hoped for Europe, but it is simply too expensive fight now and these cruises appear to be on the edge of our budget. I wanted to see what everybody's opinions were on these two options.

We are from Florida and have each been on several Carribean cruises. We are both in our thirties. So the beach and watersports do not hold much appeal to us; we can do that whenever we want. We do like seeing natural beauty (unlike that which we can find in Florida), going on sightseeing boats/tours, seeing quaint towns/villages, eating good food and generally seeing the sights.

We are more into seeing the ports and the shore excursions rather than relaxing on the ship; we can relax at home. For that reason, we've tried to find itineraries that are heavy on ports and less "at sea". By the same token, we are not into extreme activities (i.e. difficult hiking, watersports, seaplanes, etc.) We are more interested seeing something magnificient and extraordinary, and something we can't see in Florida.

The problem is that it looks like Alaska (with its glaciers, mountains and forests) and Hawaii (with its volcanoes, mountains and forests) both fit the bill. With that in mind, what are your suggestions and recommendations between these two?

Confused in Florida

therenaissanceman

There is no doubt that Alaska is much more a change from Florida than Hawaii is. You would probably enjoy either, but Alaska would be a cruise you would never forget. Try to take the land portion as well as the ocean cruise.

kfusto

Alaska is beautiful and I have cruised there 5x (also live in FL). I would not, however, expect "quaint" small towns as these ports are totally dependent on the short tourist seasons and some resemble the worst of what we have here (think stupid t shirts, trinkets, etc).

Alaska is about the stunning scenery and getting out into the countryside. The excursions are very expensive but are very important to the experience, unlike in the islands where I think they are a rip off and unnecessary. I always book apart from the ship and save a ton of money.

I strongly urge you consider a one way Seward to YVR vsw a roundtrip and also think that Hubbard Glacier is the most spectacular of all; you will want a balcony as the public decks become very crowded.

Choose a smaller ship and a nicer line that provides wildlife experts, etc., as this enhances the experience IMO.

Go to cruisecritic.com for port info.

kfusto

Forgot to add that I have been to Hawaii and will take St. Lucia any day!

petlover

I would vote for Alaska with a one way, not round trip, on one of the smaller ships that don't carry thousands of passengers. I just returned last week from Alaska on Regent Mariner from Vancouver to Whittier (Anchorage). Wonderful ship and every cabin has a balcony which makes it really nice. Even the least expensive standard cabins are oversized, also all inclusive. No formal nights on the ship either.

You could tie in a trip to Denali too if time and $ allow. Also a don't miss is http://www.huskyhomestead.com/ if you're into the Iditarod race and mushing dogs. You can even hold the new puppies. Happy Honeymooning whatever you decide.

Dreps

We also took the cruise that petlover describes albeit a couple of years ago in the reverse direction--Anchorage to Vancouver. It was terrific. I arranged our land portions at either end independently, which is easy for Alaska and cheaper than booking through the cruise line. We did take some of Regent's excursions, which are always excellent. Both petlover and I use the same, great travel agent who specializes in Regent, so if you'd like more information or if you're interested in our itinerary, drop me a line: [email protected].

jcasale

I agree with the votes for a one way Alaska cruise. And try to spend a little time at each end. We sailed out of Seward and so we spent a couple of days there at the beginning and did a small boat trip into Kenai Fjords National Park. Fabulous! Then we ended in Vancouver and rented a car and stayed in Vancouver for a couple of days and then Victoria for a couple.

BudgetQueen

With the time and money considerations, they are expressing, round trip of either location would be great. Hawaii would have the priority of more port intensive- which they state.

If Alaska is a choice, I would suggest a round trip Vancouver for the superior routing. I don't find the cruise portion of round trips inferior to one ways at all. A one way without adding another week, with the costly air and long flights may not appeal to them. But in no way, would I eliminate a round trip choice. Just wonderful sailing Alaska any way you go.

I definately agree- ports are over run with shops and crowded. Tours are necessary in my opinion to really make the most of any Alaska visit. This can tie up a big part of your budget as it is tough to find a lot under $100pp. I always recommend a flight, you just don't see the vast beauty any other way.

cruznut6

I guess I'm the "odd man out", so to speak. My DW and I have cruised Alaska and Hawaii(twice), and loved both areas. I would (will) go back to Alaska again, but Hawaii has my heart. I thoroughly enjoyed the diversity of the Hawaiian Islands, each beautiful, yet different. You can visit snow covered mountains and beautiful, warm black or white sandy beaches. You can see various cultural history of the South Pacific, along with American history about World War II. Enjou cuisine native only to Hawaii, see whales (also in Alaska), scuba or snorkel in some of the best sites in the world. One of our favorite things was to rent a Harley Davidson in Maui and travel the coastline for hours! Talk about awesome! You can rent a car anywhere and do your own site-seeing tour if a bike is too risky. I really did love Alaska and can't wait to return there too. It's my "second" favorite place to cruise! ;-)