Italy in late June - 10 days. Should we do Rome, Florence AND Venice?
Jan 23rd, 2015, 07:29 AM
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Italy in late June - 10 days. Should we do Rome, Florence AND Venice?
We are trying to plan a trip to Italy with our young adult kids - 24 and 21.
Need advice:
How many days in each city?
Rome and Florence are musts…do we have enough time to get to Venice if we spend about 10 days total? (I've been to all 3 many years ago, but my kids and husband have not).
Where should we fly into/ out of and should we plan on train or air transportation between cities?
Thanks!!!!
Need advice:
How many days in each city?
Rome and Florence are musts…do we have enough time to get to Venice if we spend about 10 days total? (I've been to all 3 many years ago, but my kids and husband have not).
Where should we fly into/ out of and should we plan on train or air transportation between cities?
Thanks!!!!
Jan 23rd, 2015, 07:39 AM
#2
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 6,534
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just as a point of reference, the first time I went to Italy I did not attempt to see all 3 cities, and I had more time than you do.
If you are going to include Venice, then it should be one of your airports. But if you are not going to Venice, then you should probably fly in and out of Rome unless you can find a great flight into or out of Florence to combine with Rome.
How much time you spend in each city, in my view, depends on what your group enjoys doing. If you've already decided that Rome and Florence are "musts", the you must have a reason for saying that. How long will it take you to visit what you want to visit in Rome? Florence? Is your family the type that stops for a short lunch and keeps going, or do you all enjoy Italian food and wine and plan to enjoy long lunches too? Do you want to go shopping in either of these cities in addition to seeing historic sights -- or vice versa? Do you want to have a leisurely time in your 2 must-see cities, or is your group go-getters, let's keep moving types?
Without knowing why you think you must go to Florence and Rome, it is hard to know if you have any time for Venice, and ditto without knowing whether your group is organized and fast, or spontaneous and kick-back types..... etc
If you are going to include Venice, then it should be one of your airports. But if you are not going to Venice, then you should probably fly in and out of Rome unless you can find a great flight into or out of Florence to combine with Rome.
How much time you spend in each city, in my view, depends on what your group enjoys doing. If you've already decided that Rome and Florence are "musts", the you must have a reason for saying that. How long will it take you to visit what you want to visit in Rome? Florence? Is your family the type that stops for a short lunch and keeps going, or do you all enjoy Italian food and wine and plan to enjoy long lunches too? Do you want to go shopping in either of these cities in addition to seeing historic sights -- or vice versa? Do you want to have a leisurely time in your 2 must-see cities, or is your group go-getters, let's keep moving types?
Without knowing why you think you must go to Florence and Rome, it is hard to know if you have any time for Venice, and ditto without knowing whether your group is organized and fast, or spontaneous and kick-back types..... etc
Jan 23rd, 2015, 08:11 AM
#3
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 204
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A few years ago, we flew in to Venice, spent two nights, took the train to Florence and spent 4 nights just outside the city. Explored Florence and then rented a car and did some day trips to Pisa and Lucca, then drove and dropped the car in Orvieto and took the train down to Rome for 3 nights there before flying out of Rome. It was totally doable and we didn't feel rushed or that we were cramming things in. And I wouldn't have wanted to miss any of it! The key was flying in to one city, and out of another. But I agree with Sandralist that it really depends on what you are wanting to experience and how!
Jan 23rd, 2015, 08:34 AM
#4
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 3,358
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Does the 10 days include coming and going and therefore yielding only 8 fill days on the ground? If so I advise your sticking to 2 cities. One plan for Florence and Rome is to fly in and out of Rome and head to Florence directly on the train [1.5 hours], doing Rome last.
Jan 23rd, 2015, 09:37 AM
#5
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 57,890
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Agree that you need to tell us how many days you actually have on the ground - not including the day you arrive and the day you depart. If that total is 8 two cities will be max if you want to see anything. If 10 full days you can cram in all 3 cities - but you will doing a quick a tour and may not have much time for la dolce vita.
With that itinerary only train makes sense.
With that itinerary only train makes sense.
Jan 23rd, 2015, 12:53 PM
#6
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 7,956
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I also on my first trip to Italy (over 20 years ago) I totally skipped Venice. I had originally intended to spend at least one day in Venice, but the time ran out before the plans did. In those days, I didn't use the internet to reserve rooms, but usually just showed up in a city and found something at the tourist office.
I know a lot of people do manage to visit Venice, Florence and Rome in as little as 10 nights (which would be 11 nights). If you want to do that, you should fly into Venice and fly home from Rome. You could do it the other way around, but I think Venice is a good place to start. It's absolutely heaving with tourists in the summer, but it's easy to get away from them, as most of them don't stray from the overly beaten path.
If you have 9 nights, you probably should prioritize your cities, and spend 4 nights in the city where there are the most things you want to see, three nights in the next, and two nights in the city you just want a glimpse of.
I know a lot of people do manage to visit Venice, Florence and Rome in as little as 10 nights (which would be 11 nights). If you want to do that, you should fly into Venice and fly home from Rome. You could do it the other way around, but I think Venice is a good place to start. It's absolutely heaving with tourists in the summer, but it's easy to get away from them, as most of them don't stray from the overly beaten path.
If you have 9 nights, you probably should prioritize your cities, and spend 4 nights in the city where there are the most things you want to see, three nights in the next, and two nights in the city you just want a glimpse of.
Jan 23rd, 2015, 02:54 PM
#7
Original Poster
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ok - From reading this feedback, I am pretty sure we will skip Venice, cause I really don't want to be rushed.
I am hoping to have a total of 9 nights on the ground, in hotels, aside from travel dates.
I wanted to do Venice only b/c it is beautiful, and I think it would be cool to see the canals, etc with my kids, but from what I remember it is very expensive, etc and in any case I wasn't planning to spend longer than 2 nights there, maximum.
Seeing the historic sites/ places of interest is very important to us. Of course we like to mix that up with some shopping, and the food and culinary culture is also very important and a big part of the trip, but I am much more of a planned, organized traveler especially for a trip like this, so although I expect we will enjoy some great meals, they will more likely be mostly dinners, not long leisurely lunches.
So with that in mind, it looks like flying round trip to Rome makes sense, with a train to Florence probably right at the beginning, then back to stay in Rome in the second half of the trip?
I am hoping to have a total of 9 nights on the ground, in hotels, aside from travel dates.
I wanted to do Venice only b/c it is beautiful, and I think it would be cool to see the canals, etc with my kids, but from what I remember it is very expensive, etc and in any case I wasn't planning to spend longer than 2 nights there, maximum.
Seeing the historic sites/ places of interest is very important to us. Of course we like to mix that up with some shopping, and the food and culinary culture is also very important and a big part of the trip, but I am much more of a planned, organized traveler especially for a trip like this, so although I expect we will enjoy some great meals, they will more likely be mostly dinners, not long leisurely lunches.
So with that in mind, it looks like flying round trip to Rome makes sense, with a train to Florence probably right at the beginning, then back to stay in Rome in the second half of the trip?
Jan 24th, 2015, 09:03 AM
#8
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 3,141
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am going to be the one to recommend that you do include Venice although I see no problem with Florence and Rome for your time. You are spending so much money just to get to Italy that a minor increase in cost to go to Venice should not be an issue. Try your best to get a few extra days if you can. Assuming that there are 4 of you with a airfare of $1000 to $1500 you are spending between $4000 to $6000 just to get to Italy. If you have 10days on the ground that works out to $400 to $600 a day. A slightly longer trip is a better value and worth more as you are also losing a day just to get to Europe and a day to go home.
Venice is so unique that I highly recommend it if only for a full day. Luckily train service between Venice to Florence to Rome is frequent and fast so changing locations is quite simple with a 3 hour train ride between Venice and Florence and 2 hours between Florence and Rome. Change cities in the evening and you have really lost little time. Check the Trentalia website for fares and times. Cheaper fares can be had if you book ahead.
Venice is so unique that I highly recommend it if only for a full day. Luckily train service between Venice to Florence to Rome is frequent and fast so changing locations is quite simple with a 3 hour train ride between Venice and Florence and 2 hours between Florence and Rome. Change cities in the evening and you have really lost little time. Check the Trentalia website for fares and times. Cheaper fares can be had if you book ahead.
Jan 24th, 2015, 09:11 AM
#10
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 3,141
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Also fly into Venice and out of Rome or vis versa although I like the idea of Venice first as you can use what part of your first jet lagged day in Italy just wandering around Venice. I think this is a bit easier to do in Venice than Rome. Try to wonder away from the Train station-Rialto bridge-st Marks crowd.
Jan 24th, 2015, 09:13 AM
#11
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 229
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree with mjs; I'm not one of those who seem to believe that you must spend 40 days and 40 nights in a city before moving on to the next on.
About 10 years ago I convinced a cousin to take advantage of some ultra-low airfares to Italy. We flew into Rome and out of Venice, with a total of 7 nights.
We spent two nights in Rome, which meant we had one full day plus the almost worthless day of arrival and a few hours the morning of departure. A single day is plenty of time to see the Vatican and Sistine Chapel, the Coliseum, the Spanish Steps, the Pantheon, plus have a nice dinner at the end of the day.
Since you have nine nights, you can do a 4-3-2 split Rome-Florence-Venice or a 3-4-2 split. Even if you did only a single night in Venice it is better than skipping it all together. If doing a single night, just plan to arrive early and try to book a flight home that leaves fairly late.
As for transportation, the Rome-Florence-Venice trains are very fast. I would guess you could take a train from Rome to Venice in less time than it would take to fly, when you add in travel time to and from the airport plus security lines, etc. Needless to say, the train is cheaper.
About 10 years ago I convinced a cousin to take advantage of some ultra-low airfares to Italy. We flew into Rome and out of Venice, with a total of 7 nights.
We spent two nights in Rome, which meant we had one full day plus the almost worthless day of arrival and a few hours the morning of departure. A single day is plenty of time to see the Vatican and Sistine Chapel, the Coliseum, the Spanish Steps, the Pantheon, plus have a nice dinner at the end of the day.
Since you have nine nights, you can do a 4-3-2 split Rome-Florence-Venice or a 3-4-2 split. Even if you did only a single night in Venice it is better than skipping it all together. If doing a single night, just plan to arrive early and try to book a flight home that leaves fairly late.
As for transportation, the Rome-Florence-Venice trains are very fast. I would guess you could take a train from Rome to Venice in less time than it would take to fly, when you add in travel time to and from the airport plus security lines, etc. Needless to say, the train is cheaper.
Jan 24th, 2015, 10:05 AM
#12
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 2,893
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For a 24 and 21-year-old, I think Venice would be the most eye-popping experience of the three. Equal to that might be Rome, but with traffic fumes and an intense Mediterranean sun at the end of June, it could drop a notch. And Florence would be a close third, unless your kids really, really enjoy over-heated art museums and won't mind the vast number of crowds, long lines, tour buses, and Vespas clogging the streets at that time of year.
I'm going to step outside of my world for a minute and imagine having two kids that age, a limited number of days, a limited budget, and a strong desire to experience Italy's big-3 with the entire family. I would follow my gut and find a way to visit all three.
I would definitely try to add more days and a higher budget, but if 9 nights is all you have, I would consider an even split: 3 nights Rome, 3 Florence, 3 Venice. Ideally, you'd want to fly into Rome and out of Venice, and perhaps accept a reasonable connecting flight. Three nights in each place would give your family a lot to talk about, comparing and contrasting all three. If you can add one more night to Rome to allow one good night's sleep to get over jet lag, even better.
<i><font color=#555555>"I really don't want to be rushed."</font></i>
Nine nights in one place defines "rushed" for me, so I don't see how you avoid that feeling by leaving one fabulous city out, especially when you're planning activities for four people. No matter what you perceive or how many cities you pick, this isn't going to be a relaxing vacation. Unless you are hell-bent on doing nothing, expect to return home exhausted, even if you limit yourself to one city.
To avoid the feeling of "rush," one must plan well and realistically. The internet can be your friend here, as long as you hold firm on what you truly want, and you know how to prioritize people's varying opinions.
You can only fit so many things to do in one day, and the urge to squeeze in one more thing will be difficult to control. Planning a 9-night trip to Italy's big-3 takes a lot of work and perseverance, but if you're willing to let go of certain things from the to-do list, and you get lucky with opening days and times, you can plan a worthwhile visit that gives you a taste of all three fabulous cities without pulling your hair out and driving your family crazy. Just don't expect this trip to feel like a beach vacation, and fully embrace what you're trying to accomplish. Good luck.
I'm going to step outside of my world for a minute and imagine having two kids that age, a limited number of days, a limited budget, and a strong desire to experience Italy's big-3 with the entire family. I would follow my gut and find a way to visit all three.
I would definitely try to add more days and a higher budget, but if 9 nights is all you have, I would consider an even split: 3 nights Rome, 3 Florence, 3 Venice. Ideally, you'd want to fly into Rome and out of Venice, and perhaps accept a reasonable connecting flight. Three nights in each place would give your family a lot to talk about, comparing and contrasting all three. If you can add one more night to Rome to allow one good night's sleep to get over jet lag, even better.
<i><font color=#555555>"I really don't want to be rushed."</font></i>
Nine nights in one place defines "rushed" for me, so I don't see how you avoid that feeling by leaving one fabulous city out, especially when you're planning activities for four people. No matter what you perceive or how many cities you pick, this isn't going to be a relaxing vacation. Unless you are hell-bent on doing nothing, expect to return home exhausted, even if you limit yourself to one city.
To avoid the feeling of "rush," one must plan well and realistically. The internet can be your friend here, as long as you hold firm on what you truly want, and you know how to prioritize people's varying opinions.
You can only fit so many things to do in one day, and the urge to squeeze in one more thing will be difficult to control. Planning a 9-night trip to Italy's big-3 takes a lot of work and perseverance, but if you're willing to let go of certain things from the to-do list, and you get lucky with opening days and times, you can plan a worthwhile visit that gives you a taste of all three fabulous cities without pulling your hair out and driving your family crazy. Just don't expect this trip to feel like a beach vacation, and fully embrace what you're trying to accomplish. Good luck.
Jan 24th, 2015, 10:33 AM
#13
I wanted to do Venice only b/c it is beautiful, and I think it would be cool to see the canals, etc with my kids, but from what I remember it is very expensive, etc and in any case I wasn't planning to spend longer than 2 nights there, maximum.>>
I have visited all three cities for a week each [not all together but within a year] with my kids who were only a little younger than yours at the time, and of them all, they liked Florence the least; Venice and Rome they loved.
Venice is the most wonderful introduction to Italy - beautiful, fascinating, and unique. I see that you are only thinking of spending 2 nights there [really?] but if you were fly in there, it would make sense to spend 3 nights there, recover from jet lag, and make sure that you see this gem before the acqua alta [high water] finally claims it. Then make for Rome, and perhaps go to Florence as a day trip.
BTW, even if Venice IS expensive, how much difference do you think it's going to make if you are only staying 2-3 nights?
Why do i leave Florence out as a destination? simply because most of what Florence has to offer is art and unless you are real art buffs, you will soon begin to lose track of what you have seen where. Both Venice and Rome offer more variety and there is less chance that you will get home feeling that everything you saw is just a blur. I know, because it's happened to me!
I have visited all three cities for a week each [not all together but within a year] with my kids who were only a little younger than yours at the time, and of them all, they liked Florence the least; Venice and Rome they loved.
Venice is the most wonderful introduction to Italy - beautiful, fascinating, and unique. I see that you are only thinking of spending 2 nights there [really?] but if you were fly in there, it would make sense to spend 3 nights there, recover from jet lag, and make sure that you see this gem before the acqua alta [high water] finally claims it. Then make for Rome, and perhaps go to Florence as a day trip.
BTW, even if Venice IS expensive, how much difference do you think it's going to make if you are only staying 2-3 nights?
Why do i leave Florence out as a destination? simply because most of what Florence has to offer is art and unless you are real art buffs, you will soon begin to lose track of what you have seen where. Both Venice and Rome offer more variety and there is less chance that you will get home feeling that everything you saw is just a blur. I know, because it's happened to me!
Jan 24th, 2015, 11:27 AM
#14
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 23,112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For me, that would be too rushed. For you, ??? I recommend that you get some good guidebooks (or spend some time with a few in your local library), identify the things you most want to see in each location, note their opening/closing times, and mark them on a calendar. Then pencil in your transportation, add some time on either side (for getting to/from the train/bus station or whatever, checking in/out, packing/unpacking, getting oriented, etc.). Then see how things fit together. Enjoy!
Jan 24th, 2015, 11:32 AM
#15
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 6,534
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Two young adults 24 and 21 are hardly children who are going to be wide-eyed at anything.
I suggest you ask your kids where they would like to go. Many younger people love Florence for its friendly nighttime scene (I do too, and I am not in my twenties!) Ditto Rome. But they might want to substitute the more sleepy, dreamy Venice. They're individuals. I wouldn't generalize.
I also think you are not wrong to take into the account the expense of Venice. A lot of people are taken aback by having to pay so much at every turn, and they are glad to get out of there.
I would really take this arm twisting with a grain of salt (to mix my metaphors!)
I suggest you ask your kids where they would like to go. Many younger people love Florence for its friendly nighttime scene (I do too, and I am not in my twenties!) Ditto Rome. But they might want to substitute the more sleepy, dreamy Venice. They're individuals. I wouldn't generalize.
I also think you are not wrong to take into the account the expense of Venice. A lot of people are taken aback by having to pay so much at every turn, and they are glad to get out of there.
I would really take this arm twisting with a grain of salt (to mix my metaphors!)
Jan 24th, 2015, 12:54 PM
#16
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 790
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I so agree with the crowd who suggests that you visit all three cities. In fact, we are planning something similar for this summer and Venice is absolutely at the top of the list--a unique, iconic city with a distinct charm. How can you leave it out? We are actually doing the trip most of all to show our son Venice before he goes to college in the fall.
It is only marginally more expensive than Florence. I agree with annhig that we should make sure to see the "gem before the acqua alta [high water] finally claims it." Florence will always be there.
"To avoid the feeling of "rush," one must plan well and realistically." So true. You will not feel rushed if you do not plan to do and see everything. Just plan reasonably full days of activities, having in mind opening/closing hours, including time slots for sitting in cafes and people-watching and leave the rest for next time. In any city in the world, you can manage to see/do a lot in 2-3 days if you use your time efficiently. Forget about doing everything and focus on enjoying whatever you pick to do.
I also agree that you will be exhausted but it will be the same whether you visit just one place or all three.
Flying into Rome and out of Venice or vice versa would help a lot with saving time and energy.
It is only marginally more expensive than Florence. I agree with annhig that we should make sure to see the "gem before the acqua alta [high water] finally claims it." Florence will always be there.
"To avoid the feeling of "rush," one must plan well and realistically." So true. You will not feel rushed if you do not plan to do and see everything. Just plan reasonably full days of activities, having in mind opening/closing hours, including time slots for sitting in cafes and people-watching and leave the rest for next time. In any city in the world, you can manage to see/do a lot in 2-3 days if you use your time efficiently. Forget about doing everything and focus on enjoying whatever you pick to do.
I also agree that you will be exhausted but it will be the same whether you visit just one place or all three.
Flying into Rome and out of Venice or vice versa would help a lot with saving time and energy.
