underradar

Planning a trip for 8 nights in May in Italy, starting in Rome and ending in Venice. Family of four, two kids - 22 YO son (this is a college graduation present) and 19 YO daughter. We have been to Florence for one day - in the course of a longer trip to Tuscany - but never to Rome or Venice.

Our original thought was to do 5 nights in Rome, one night somewhere between Rome and Venice (convenient to one of the high-speed trains) and then finally two nights in Venice. Now I'm wondering whether we should just do an extra night in Rome and forget the intermediate stop.

Any thoughts? Are there any places that are truly worthwhile for a group like ours to stop over in? Padua and Bologna are the most obvious choices but I have spent a fair amount of time in Bologna and I don't think my family would find it that interesting.

(To give you some insight into our proclivities, we were originally thinking of stopping in Perugia to do the chocolate factor tour, but then we decided not to drive).

Thanks all.

janisj

No need to stop between Rome and Venice. I'd do 5 nights in Rome and three in Venice (which will give you about 2.5 days in Venice - enough to get a taste)

bilboburgler

Ravenna if they are into pre-medieval mosaics....

Ferrara if into bicycle based life styles

Padua for those who like lovely buildings

Verona to see the fictional balcony

Soave to see a walled city famous for its wine

Chiusi for Etruscans

it kinda depends on what the kids like

Sassafrass

The rec for three nights Venice is good. So much to see and do. Perhaps Burano by boat or Vicenza by train. Verona is a bit far for me, but maybe not for your group and they might like it.

underradar

Wow that was fast!!!

I'm figuring that between Rome and Venice, the kids will be "historied out" - and if they won't be, then I will.

On our Tuscany trip, our kids loved Lucca. My daughter actually learned to ride a bike there on the ramparts (obviously a long time ago). So Ferrara and Soave may be worthwhile.

Any idea of which of the suggestions above are convenient to the high-speed trains (other than Padua, which I know is convenient)?

Dukey1

I would NOT bother with that definitely FICTIONAL balcony in Verona. There is much more to see and do in that city which is far more interesting than anything fictional. And it is only a short rail ride over to Venice and can easily be reached from Rome.

bobthenavigator

I would stick with two hotels in your short time---I like the 5-3 scenario.

kybourbon

For the fast train stops, it depends on which fast train as they vary a bit. If you enter Rome/Venice on Trenitalia, you can see the stops for each train by clicking the little i next to the train number (you'll get a pop up window with stops).

dwdvagamundo

Another vote for the 5-3 split first suggested by Janis.

tarquin

Padua is only 30 minutes by train from Venice so not worth staying there. I would do the 5-3 split.

ekc

Yet another vote for 3 nights in Venice. That really only equals 2.5 days in Venice and there is alot to see in that tiny city. No problem if you will be historied about by the time you get to Venice - that is plenty to do that does not involve museums. One of my favorite things to do is just wander the back alleys and stop for a cafe along the way.

If you have not yet booked your plane tickets, you should consider flying into Venice and out of Rome. Many of the flight out of Venice to the US leave brutally early. Also, it is a lovely town for recovering from jetlag as you must walk or ride everywhere and there are no cars/bikes/buses to contend with. A long boat ride across the lagoon is very restorative!

underradar

EKC,

I had a whole other thread on FF about booking our flights. I won't bore you with the gory details here, but from a cost and availability perspective, it made sense to fly into Rome and out of Venice. It also gives us a chance to try to get to the Rome Masters tennis tournament, which falls in the earlier part of our trip.

Now I'm torn between 5-3 and 6-2. It feels like there is so much to do in Rome - including daytrips.

DRJ

6 and 2? I'd do 4 and 4.

Sassafrass

There are actually tons of things to do and see in Venice also. It is just that many visitors have so little time, they see very little, mostly just a glimpse of the city which is a work of art in and of itself, but there are churches and art museums to keep you busy for days.
There are great day trips from Venice also. The Palladian architecture in Vicenza is gorgeous. The little island of Burano is so colorful and charming. A tour of the Ghetto is very interesting. There is the Brenta Canal for biking or boating. There is the Lido for swimming or biking.

I have been to both Rome and Venice several times and once to each for a week. There is enough in either to enjoy and explore for days and days, but many people short change Venice. Like DRJ, for myself, it would be 4 & 4, but Rome has such big, major sights, it makes sense for a first visit to give it the extra day, so 5 & 3 should give you a good feel for both.

rebekkah

I'm following this! Trying to decide on this exact thing for September.

janisj

2 nights in Venice will give you barely 1.5 days which would be a shame.

>>I won't bore you with the gory details here, but from a cost and availability perspective, it made sense to fly into Rome and out of Venice.<<

Many people do fly into Rome and out of Venice because of the cost -- but getting to the airport VERY early AM usually requires a water taxi + time-of-day surcharge. So sometimes it is a false economy.

sandralist

I think your FF arrangements were probably a smart choice, especially given the opportunity for the masters, and with 4 of you, a water taxi will make economic sense if needed at all.

There just isn't a reason a stop between Rome and Venice unless you are looking for a special "zing" -- like a motorcycle factory tour, or special activity (horseback riding?) -- you get what I mean. If there was something like the Masters that would be an exceptional treat for the grad or the whole family, sure. But if you think their appetite for generalized sightseeing will be used up by the time you leave Rome, then just head to Venice and look for some special things to do there or in the vicity.

sandralist

vicinity.

underradar

thanks for all of your responses. There was a significant cost savings in going to Rome first as well as better options for direct flights flying into Rome than going back from here. And you have convinced me to book three nights in Venice.

OK, now to hotels. We are holding reservations at the St.Regis and the Danieli (Starwood cash and points). The Danieli looks like a Venetian experience but with risk in terms of room choice. The St Regis gets superb reviews but would we be shortchanging ourselves somehow on authenticity? Or should I just get over myself?

janisj

I wouldn't stay at the Danieli -- you will be in Venice such a short time I personally wouldn't stay that far from the center of things.