nygvic0326

Flying from USA into DUS. Have 14 days (including day of arrival). Contemplating an itinerary of Dusseldorf (1 night), Frankfurt (2 nights), Nuremburg (2 nights), Prague (3 nights), Vienna (3 nights), Budapest (3 nights). Thoughts on suitability. Trying to do too much ?? Realize 2 weeks is not enough to scratch the surface of these countries.

nygvic0326

Plan to do this trip in early May 2014.

joannyc

Instead of Frankfurt, I'd spend those nights in a small town along the Rhine such as St. Goar, Boppard, Rudesheim, etc. Or maybe in Cochem along the Mozel.

Castles, river cruises and wine in quaint towns!

sparkchaser

Just realize that travel days will eat up at least half of a day. Also, there is an express bus that runs several times a day from Nürnberg to Prague and it takes 3.5 hours.

adrienne

Yes, way too much moving around in 14 days. Why not get off the plane and take a bus or train to Nuremburg for 1 day and then go on to Prague, Vienna, and Budapest. That will cut down on a couple of moves and give you more time in each location.

sparkchaser

I can see staying in Dusseldorf the first night just to recover from the flight. Unless there is something you absolutely must see there, Frankfurt is skipabble.

yodababe

Are you flying into Dusseldorf? Here is a suggestion: fly into Munich instead and skip Dusseldorf/Frankfurt/Nuremberg entirely. Unless you have a compelling reason to visit any of those 3 cities, you would probably enjoy Munich more. Believe me we do, and we only live 20 miles from Nuremberg.

That would give you a bit more time in the other 3 cities, and they are well worth it. I would suggest adding a night in Vienna if you can, it is a wonderful city.

yodababe

Sorry, forgot you said you ARE flying into Dusseldorf. I would still just overnight there and then go directly to Munich. It's a great town!

KL467

Last month I stayed three nights in each of these cities: Budapest, Vienna, and Prague. I really needed at least four nights. That was my first visit to Budapest and Prague, and there was so much to see and do. That was my third trip to Vienna, but I still needed at least four nights. I traveled by train between the cities. The cities are amazing!

Delaine

Unless, you have a compelling reason to go, I would skip Frankfurt. There are a few nice museums, but the historical part of town remaining is very small. Use that time in Munich or one of the Rhine towns (Rudesheim, Boppard, St. Goar) as others have suggested. Or, use the time to add to one of the other cities you are visiting.

Improviser

Same old, same old, trying to see/do too much in too little time. If what you want is to tick places off a list it's fine. If what you want is to see/do much of anything it sucks.

They usual phrase is 'I want to see/do as much as possible'. But the word 'much' is not synonymous with the word 'many' nygic. The way to see/do as much as possible is to spend time IN places, not in BETWEEN places.

A rule of thumb you can use for planning is the rule of 3s which for travel says, never spend less than 3 full days/4 nights in a place unless it is just an overnight stop between A and B. Note the 'less than', it is a minimum. Most people would agree tha somewhere like Rome or Paris, etc. needs more than 3 full days. Also note the 3/4. That allows for a travel day between places. Even when the actual travel time is only a few hours between places, you still end up losing most of a day making the move.

Using that rule you deduct your arrival/departure days first as they are basically a write off and that leaves you with 12 days to actually spend in places or moving. So the maximum would be 3 places for 3 days/4 nights each.

yodababe

I disagree. Lonely Planet books excel in the 'if you have 1/2/3 days, see these things' area. Some people don't need to get an in-depth experience of a city. Depending on the size of the city, a night can be sufficient.

That being said, Prague/Vienna/Budapest are all large enough that you could easily spend a week there and not run out of things to do or see.

THAT being said, depending on what you want out of your city experience, you can easily get the highlights in each city in 2 full days of sightseeing each.

I think that there is a happy medium--and wouldn't you know, it is somewhere in the middle? That's where the rule of 3s comes in handy, but the best thing any traveler can do is figure out what they 1) can't leave the city without seeing, 2) really would like to see, 3) what would be cool if they have time, and 4) leave an extra half day to full day for sanity's sake. That will be a much better guide in the long run than any arbitrary rule.

That's where the Lonely Planet type of sightseeing plan comes in so handy. It helps organize all that stuff into something that is reasonable and doable. And that means different things for all of us.

Why not take a look at the LP books and see if they help you get a better sense of how long you need in each city?

Improviser

Why would they not look at a Fodor's book yodababe? LOL, you're on a Fodor's site promoting LP.

As I said yoda, "Same old, same old, trying to see/do too much in too little time. If what you want is to tick places off a list it's fine. If what you want is to see/do much of anything it sucks."

Yes, you can see something in one day and tick off the box. But it is the time lost to moving that is the important factor. If you spend 10 days IN 10 cities and then 10 days moving from one to the other, then you have only spent 50% of your total time IN places.

The Rule of 3s is intended to give someone a reasonable balance of time in places and time lost to travel. In fact it gives you a 75/25% split of your time. personally, I don't even consider that a good balance. I prefer to try for 85/15% or better. But the 75/25% is the happy medium as you call it.

yodababe

Okay, tongue-in-cheek mode on. I am not an employee of Lonely Planet, nor do I promote their books exclusively. I only mentioned them because they, as I said, excel in the 'I have this much time and this is what I can reasonably expect to do' area. Fodor's I find helpful for other stuff. They have more comprehensive lists of stuff that appeals to the non-British traveler.

Depending on the type of transportation chosen, there isn't too much time lost between these cities. I think the itinerary is doable with a bit of tweaking. I don't think this poster is being unreasonable. Saying that they can't do justice to a city unless they are there for 4 nights min is a bit rigid IMO. It all comes down to what they want to see. And nobody knows what that is but them.