Sorry to tell you that you cannot visit 5 locations plus the time it takes to get from one place to another in 7 days. Do you not see that that is not practical? You will not have any time to sight see.

Use these sites to determine travel time by car and add 25% to the time they recommend. This time does not include stopping for rest breaks so if you need the facilities you need to add more time.

mappy.com
viamichelin.com

For train transportation use either bahn.de or trenitalia.com

You should not drive in cities and Venice does not have roads so you don't have an option there.

With only 1 week choose 2 locations. My choices would be Rome and Venice and take the train between the cities. Fly into one and fly home from the other.

If you are dropping off a rental car within the same country, any fee you might get will be minimal and worth it.

But if I were doing that road trip, I would do it the other way around: I'd begin in Venice and spend 2 nights to get over my jet lag, and leave the Amalfi second-to-last in order to maximize my chances of good weather. I would order the trip

Venice
San Marino
Assisi
Sorrento
Drive the Amalfi coast, drop off car in Salerno
Take train to Rome -- fly home from Rome.

But I actually wouldn't do that road trip, because the driving is too hard and fast and the payoff becomes too little when you aren't spending enough time in any one place to enjoy it. And I certainly wouldn't bother with San Marino at all.

PS: It's true that driving around cities in Italy is a nightmare, but there are only some Italian roads outside of cities that are a pleasure to drive. It is actually very demanding to drive just to cover distance in Italy. You need to share narrow highways with lots of trucks, and Italian drivers move much faster than most people are used to. They don't drive "defensively". They are taught to drive aggressively, to keep traffic moving. Plus, if you don't speak or read Italian well, it's hard not feel anxious having signs flashing at you that you aren't sure what they mean.

A road like the Amalfi is exceptionally demanding, and the sad thing is that whomever is driving can't see the views that are the whole point of being there. In a short trip like yours, if the April day you are there is foggy (very typical for an April morning), driving along a narrow road on the side of a cliff with huge buses coming at you doesn't feel like a vacation.

So I don't think you have to pick "2 locations". That kind of rule is silly. But you need to identify what is really most important to you to experience, what is the memory you want to take home of Italy? It is very cool in the Amalfi in early April, and if you can skip it your whole trip starts to get much simpler. If it is important for you to see Assisi, then keep it in, but Italy is overflowing with spectacular art in places easier to get to (and not so mobbed with tourists year round), so if you don't need to make a pilgrimage to St Francis, you might reconsider.

Just back to the drawing board...

One more thought:

I never think it is silly to pick things to see in Italy that mean a lot to you and then make a tremendous effort to see them. Many people think it is silly. I do not. Like I said, I think it is silly to pick 2 places if you have the energy to see 5. I've done it, and it can be very rewarding . But you need to know that they itinerary you have picked would be hard on an Italian truck driver.

My thoughts would be look at the trains (a very civilised way to travel in Europe), question why you want to go to Marino which is interesting if you like stamps and not much more.

If you are flying into Naples and not going to see the ruins on volcano's side you are missing one of the high points of such a visit but you know what you like

I endorse most of what is said above, too much to do.

(This is not a recording.) I would drop a couple of places and change the order of the trip.

Fly into Venice.
Train to Rome.
Still insist of renting a car? Take car from Rome to Sorrento. I disagree about the ride to Sorrento, though I guess it's a matter of opinion. Much of that ride is on the Autostrada, and the really narrow windy parts of the coast drive are south of Sorrento. (Yes, I have made the drive.) It's not all that demanding if you're a reasonably competent driver.
Then I'd fly out of Naples. You can drop the car off in Sorrento and take the train to Naples, if you like.

eurotravelplan - thank you so much for calling me silly twice in one thread.

I looked at your itinerary and thought "what a lovely way to spend 3 weeks".

thenI spotted the reference to one week and had to reread it - one week? with the distances involved you would barely have time to check into the hotel, have dinner, then get up and have breakfast, before you had to be back in the car and on the road again.

April is not the ideal time to be going to the Amalfi, otherwise I would suggest just seeing the Amalfi and Rome; I would therefore eliminate the Amalfi and San Marino [unless you have some imperative for going there] and either do Venice and Rome [preferable] or if you really think you'll get bored just seeing those two wonderful cities, Venice, Assisi and Rome.

use the train to get between them.

depending on flight times, get open jaw tickets into Venice [the usual destination due to flights out of Venice to the US often being uncomfortably early in the morning] and out of Rome, or vice versa.

You have outlined about 14 hours of driving if you have to use Rome's airport instead of Naples. It would be about 12 hours if you were able to fly from Naples. Doing this to and from the same airport doubles that time.

It would make sense to visit Venice first, not so much to get over jet lag without having to drive (Amalfi is only an hour from Naples) but because it would require less time that you have the rental car, if you then leave from Rome.

If you go to Naples first and rent the car, you will have it with you when you go to Rome, and that is not useful or advisable. If you start in Venice, you pick up the car when you leave, use it all the way down to Amalfi, then return it upon arrival in Rome.

This is a pretty long trek with tight timeline for just a week - do you mean 7 nights or 9 (including both weekends)?

It takes about 5 hours to drive to Assisi from Venice if you route through San Marino, and only 4 hours if you don't. I don't know whether you planned to stay there or see it on the way but a 5 hour drive doesn't allow a lot of time to visit the place. As others have said - it is not that special of a place.


You could do something like this, with 8 nights;

Venice 2 - pick up car when leaving - 5 hour drive to Assisi
Assisi 2 - 4.5 hour drive to Amalfi
Amalfi 2 - 3.5 hour drive to Rome
Rome 2 - return car on arrival in Rome

Make sure you are comfortable with those drive times - they mean you will only have about 1.5 days time in each stop.

If you have 9 days, add it where you want it the most. Venice and Rome have the most to see and do, but Assisi and Amalfi have great driving options to smaller towns and sights in the vicinity.

If you only have 7 days, then it just gets tougher to work it all in and realistically, I would think that Assisi would have to become a 1 night stop sandwiched in the middle of the 9.5 hour drive from Venice to Amalfi.

Adrienne, I understand this distinction will not mollify you, but I didn't call "adrienne" silly. What I wanted to emphasize to the OP is that it is silly to blindly follow an instruction from somebody you've never met and who has never met you that "With only 1 week choose 2 locations."

An instruction like that departs from sharing travel tips on a forum into a silly and useless travel dogma.

I've taken several really fun road trips in Italy where 1 week was plenty of time to visit and enjoy more than 2 locations. It is hardly necessary to be in Italian cities for 3 or 4 days if you only want to see a few things in each and really also want to see spectacular or meaningful places outside of the cities. With a car, anybody can do that in a week.

I understand that many, many people really enjoy adhering to numerical trip "formula" that is "X locations with X time" or "3 nights in every location," etc. Just recognize that this Italy by the numbers isn't necessary for Italy. It's just your preference. It's not the truth about Italy.

Nothing wrong with you sharing it and suggesting others might like your travel style. Many will, and I'm sure the OP appreciates all responses. But millions of other people have found other enjoyable ways to travel in Italy for a week that has nothing to do with limiting oneself with 2 cities or locations.

eurotravelplan - it's just as silly for the OP or any one else to follow your advice. I notice you did not refer to any other advice as silly.

I don't care what anyone does on their vacation. The OP can go to 20 places in a week. But people come here and ask for advice and I've given my advice based on my experience. I would only go to one location in a week so I was not advising what I would do but what I thought was reasonable for the OP. The OP can follow it or not. So you should not call any advice silly.

I'm wondering if your other name is zeppole.

I agree with Adrienne ---Venice and Rome will be more than enough for only one week.

And, you missed at least 6 other names since it was Zeppole.

adrienne - me too - can i join your silly party please?

The more the merrier on the silly train to Italy!!

Wella: Welcome to Fodors. As you can see, we responders don't always agree with each other. I would suggest you do what my old physical chemistry professor called a "mind experiment," where you imagine what you plan to do, and then decide if you should really do it. Instead of worrying about exploding the lab, you will have to figure out if you can really see Italy in a week.

Mind experiment 1: The airplane lands, let's say "in Venice." The airport, of course, is not really in Venice. You collect your bags or wheel your carry-ons to passport and immigration control, wait in line, then get transportation to your hotel in Venice (land and water), check in, and probably look for some food. This sequence does not happen instantaneously. An hour here, an hour there, travel time, etc. and it mounts up. That day might have some time to see a little Venice, but the day is at least half shot, not including a jetlag slowdown.

Mind experiment 2: You leave Venice. Pack up, check out of hotel, travel to where a car can be rented, fill out papers, etc., and drive. My mind says at least 2 hours, if everything goes OK. Then, drive where your next stop is, find the hotel, if you made reservations, or, take even longer to find a hotel. Oh, you will have to find parking. Check in. The day is mostly shot.

Well you get the idea. Every time you go to a new place, you kill at least half a day. If you want to see the place, you have to stay there, not leave the next morning. If you want to get to a place, see it and leave the same day, you get a couple of hours to see it and eat lunch. Not my idea of sightseeing, although it might be yours.

Mind experiment 3: Fly into Venice, spend a few days, enjoy one of the world's great destinations. When you leave, go to the train station, and relax all the way to Rome. Tour Rome, eat great food, see some more of the world's wonders. You won't see them all. Fly home after you have had a nice time in Italy with the knowledge that you will have to go back.

Mind experiment 4: Pick a packaged tour that arranges all your hotels and travel and sets up tours in destination cities. It feels more superficial in theory, but there is no planning stress and all problems have someone to solve them for you. The tour company will make sure you see the biggest highlights. The typical one week guided itinerary is Venice, Florence, and Rome.

You still will have to go back to Italy again, but no matter what you do, whichever mind experiment you turn into a reality, you still will have to go back. It is not possible to go to Italy and not want to go back.

Any queations?

adrienne: Ignore it (a reincarnation of you know who) - Joined this month and you aren't the first one s/he has attacked. Hers is the only opinion that isn't silly. Can't help herself and in time she will go the way of the z girl - nuked by the editors.

wella77: Take a few things into account: Jet lag, being unfamiliar w/ these places and needing at least some orienting in each new destination, the 1/2 a day it eats up every time you move city/hotel.

Also, if possible fly in to Venice and home from Rome (or Naples). The flights out of Venice leave VERY early in the AM making it difficult and expensive getting to the airport.

Venice and Rome would make a wonderful week, or if you must, squeeze in ONE more location. But even just 3 is pretty darn hectic in a week.

How many days do you actually have 'on the ground'? If your whole trip (home to home) is a week than you really only have 4.5 to 5 days free.

But if your trip is nine days total - then you will have approx 6.5 days at your disposal.

AJ - nice one.

what a good way of explaining what the rest of us have been trying to say.

I appreciate all your input guys! wow...I'm finally getting the picture. I'm willing to give up the Assisi and San Marino for the Almalfi/Pompeii but hubby wouldn't. Instead of April, we are seriously considering mid-May and as soon as I'm done with the itinerary we will book our flights.

My husband had been to Italy 2 years ago on a business trip and he was "impressed" by how the cab drivers drive. He thinks he'd do perfectly well driving there. I would prefer a train but may man says he can do it. So....okay.

So no more Almalfi Coast.
Day 1 - fly into Rome
Day 2, 3, 4 - sightseeing in Rome (is 3 days enough?)
Day 5 - Assisi & San Marino (too tight in one day?) I just want to see the Basilica in Assisi and my hubby wants to see the castle in San Marino.
Day 6, 7 - Venice.
Day 8 - fly out of Venice

Is our itinerary a little feasible now?

Wella, yes of course you can do this itinerary. Though I doubt hubby will be that excited by San Marino castle but at least the view from there is pleasant. What I would suggest is don't hire your car until you want to leave Rome. It is no use there (apart from an expense) and I'd use the money to get the supplier to deliver it to your hotel, then hubby can drive out of town (it will not be bad, though GPS is a must, and you both may just need a little patience).

Assisi and SM in one day, well I would check Google, add about 25% to the journey (for local speeds abd delays) and try and estimate start times, say 4 hours in Assisi, lunch at some time, I guess should get you to SM by supper time.

So you're renting a car for only one day?

assisi and san marino in one day seems tight. 1 1/2 days there and 1 1/2 days in venice then.

hmmm..looks like it since we won't be needing car in rome and venice.

So you would basically be renting the car just to see San Marino? It will be tough to do it combined with Assisi anyways, so I would drop it and take the train to Assisi and then the train on to Venice. Saves the cost of the car!

You are definitely short-changing Venice to see San Marino. We have been to Italy 8 times and have yet to see SM; probably never will. But Venice is a treasure and deserves more time than 1 day.

I would do Rome and Venice, perhaps with a stop in Assisi.

Just want to reiterate what someone said about being sure you have a GPS in the car. Like your hubby, my hubby actually likes to drive and prefers to be on his own schedule rather than a trains. We have driven a few times in Italy (as well as other European countries), and have done it with and without a GPS. Trust me when I say that a GPS will be worth every penny, so much easier and better on the marriage too, if you are supposed to be the map navigator if no GPS!!