travel32

Plan on visiting Amsterdam, Bruges, Munich, Salzburg, Vienna, Prague, Budapest in early june. Need tips what route to take. We will be travelling via trains.

nytraveler

How much time do you have for this trip? You have listed 7 places - even allowing 2 days per place with time in between you will need 19 days on the ground plus arrival and departure days. And while 2 days is fine for Bruges and salzburg it's really giving short shrift to the other cities.

And who/how many will be in the group?

You can get details of all available trains on the bahn.de website (schedules, routes and times, but prices only for trains in Germany). Once you check this out it - and a basic map) will help you determine the best route - and if you have time to cover it.

PalenQ

Yes how many days to do this? Amsterdam, Munich, Salzburg, Vienna, Prgue, Budapest are all in a kind of straight line - Bruges is an outlier detour. You'd need at least 3 weeks if not more to adequately do all of those. For lots of great info to plan a European rail trip I always spotlight these IMO fine sties: www.seat61.com; www.budgeteuropetravel.com and www.ricksteves.com. You are traveling enough if doing all those to look at a Eurail Select Saverpass (if two are traveling together that is) - valid in Benelux, Germany, Austria, Czech Republic and Hungary vs the cost of regular tickets.

hetismij2

Start in Brugge, then Amsterdam and the rest. So fly into Brussels and out of one of your southern cities.
As Pal says you will need a minimum of three weeks to cover that ground, and actually see more than a train carriage.

travel32

amsterdam 3 days
bruges 2
munich 3
salzburg 2
vienna 2
prague 2
budapest 2
(i can also leave budapest out and add those 2 days to the cities mentioned above if that is a better idea??)

We are just 2 people. PalenQ do u have a link where i can check this saver pass?? Are u talking about the Germany pass which has the Austria, Benelux, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, Sweden*, Switzerland as neighbouring countries????

Aramis

It seems OP's don't even need to post the number of days they plan to travel to get unsolicited advice on the minimum number of days they should be entertaining for their vacations.

Travel32 - the answer really depends on where you will, or are able to, fly in and out of. For example, Budapest is not a major gateway to Europe from N America so leaving from there, even thought it is the easternmost point in your proposed itinerary, could be expensive and more complicated to arrange from a scheduling perspective.

There are a number of efficient routes possible, ranging from about 2100 - 2500 kilometers and 22 - 24 hours (road distances, not rail). Not a big difference between them and likely not a big difference by rail either, so the airport logistics are probably your biggest issue to nail down.

annhig

It seems OP's don't even need to post the number of days they plan to travel to get unsolicited advice on the minimum number of days they should be entertaining for their vacations.>>

Aramis, as a regular poster, you'll know that many people fail to factor into their plans the amount of time it's going to take to get between places. Using the rule of thumb that every time you move you lose half a day, the OP has 16 days with 6 moves, so s/he will lose 3 days in travel out of a 16 days trip, which to me seems like quite a high percentage of a holiday. And if s/he has planned on 2 days worth of sightseeing in Vienna [not very long for Vienna, anyway] it's going to be disappointing when they realise that they are only going to have a day and a half.

travel32 - as hetismij says, it makes sense to go to Bruges first, then Amsterdam. After that, fly to Munich.

if you drop Budapest, you can add a day each to Vienna and Prague, which you might find would make a more satisfactory trip.

Aramis

I do no agree with the premise that there is a minimum acceptable period of time below which someone will be disappointed in having visited a place. I also do not believe that individuals planning travel are clueless as to the fact the it takes time to move from one place to another and that this movement is, somehow, "lost" time.

Surprisingly, then, I do not "know" that which you presume I do. Therein lies the issue.

The presumptuousness of some to believe that their personal reality should be everyones is fascinating and sad enough when it is used to denigrate an OP's plans. It drifts right into galling when it begins to precede the available information.

Why is there such a need to validate one's own experiences and self importance by instructing and scolding others regarding matters on which they have not even asked assistance?

And, as a logistical exercise, it makes little sense to travel to Brugge first, and then travel north to Amsterdam, only to travel south/southeast again to any of the next possible destinations. Amsterdam - Brugge - Munich takes 11:30 by fastest trains, while Brussels - Brugge - Amsterdam - Munich takes 12:11. Similar results for heading to Prague instead of Munich.

In addition to the 41 minutes of travel time saved, arriving in Amsterdam only requires a 13-16 minute train to Amsterdam Centraal, while landing in Brussels requires a 1:23 train ride with a change at Brussels -Midi to get to Brugge. Which would you recommend the OP do after a trans-atlantic flight? And why is visiting Brugge first a preferred option, then?

It is not a huge difference, granted, but that is why I said it would depend on the ease and cost of using different airports. There are multiple factors. In response to unsupported speculation, facts are always useful no?

The OP said they would be taking trains - did you think they were unaware that one could fly from Amsterdam to Munich?

Would dropping Budapest be more satisfactory for you? That's interesting but not helpful at all if the OP wants to see Budapest, is it?

I think it is more helpful for the OP if one reads the original post and responds with facts (or opinion, if asked) rather than replying as if one has an unquenchable drive to change the wishes and plans of others while simultaneously misinforming them -this presume you don't have some great reason for stating that it makes more sense to visit Brugge before Amsterdam that trumps the extra travel time and heavier jet lag day travel obligations.

hetismij2

I tell you what Aramis. We just won't bother making the effort to answer peoples questions. That way we can't upset your or their sensibilities.
Would soon make for a very boring and useless forum though.
I withdraw my suggestion.

OP can use the internet search engines as well as anyone else can. Let them look it all up through them and work it all out and see their own timings. Is that an answer which suits you more????

annhig

Would dropping Budapest be more satisfactory for you? That's interesting but not helpful at all if the OP wants to see Budapest, is it?>>

it was the OP who suggested dropping Budapest, Aramis, not me.

and perhaps before you work out your personal demons on the rest of us, you might wait to see what the OP thinks of the others' suggestions. You're right - of course the OP MAY know these things and MAY want just to spend limited time in a lot of places, but if you read what I wrote carefully, you will see that i referred to MANY people, and didn't PRESUME anything.

nor did I denigrate anyone, or their plans, but simply suggested alternative ways of thinking about the way they approach their trip. It's up to them what they do with my suggestions, or yours.

PalenQ

I do know that hetismij2 and annhig are two of the mos polite and helpful posters on Fodor's - I too think aramis comments are over the line, more done in personal hubris than being helpful.