SHAREEN3

So I'm headed to Paris in April and have decided to extend my trip so that I can visit Amsterdam and EITHER London or Brussels.

I am soooo torn between the 2. I plan to spend only 2, the max 3 days in the city I decide on. We are 3 people in the group traveling - ages 29, 31 & 52.

We are not into the night club thing but like beautiful views & scenery, history, restaurants and a trendy nightlife more towards a lounge or bar just for a few drinks at night.

Which do you think would be best for us? If you think another city would be better to include than London or Brussels, please let me know.

Thanks!!!

vanne

I'd definitely choose London -- next to Paris my favorite European city so far (haven't been to Rome). Fabulous museums, historic sites, fine restaurants, great parks, the Thames; sounds like you'd enjoy the pubs, excellent public transportation, wonderful theater. I was in Brussels for a couple days many years ago and just didn't find it very appealing -- too many massive government buildings -- but I imagine there's more to it than what I saw. Still, London definitely.

SHAREEN3

Thanks so much! All those things you mentioned is def. what we are looking for.

nytraveler

On a scale of 1 to 10 London is about a 12 and Brussels (that's what I assume you mean by Belgium, which is a country) is about a 2. If instead you mean Bruges that's a charming small town for a day or two - but nothing comes lose to London.

London is a world capital. Brussels is the capital of the EU and largely a government city with a cute old downtown.

greg

Each has pros and cons.
If Belgium, I would choose Bruges for scenery over Brussels.
So, Bruges + Amsterdam is more logical geographically. However, they are both canal cities and culturally closer than the London + Amsterdam pair.
London is an enormous cultural hub with no shortage of things to do. London to Amsterdam in either direction is a chore over ground.
Paris+London+Amsterdam are all huge cities, while Bruges adds a smaller city experience.

If you are a garden person, mid April is "usually" the tulip season and the Keukenhof gardens is not to be missed if you luck out with the timing.

SHAREEN3

@nytraveler, I stated Belgium since I would go between Bruges & Brussels.

@greg, thanks for the info! That sounds great including a smaller city feel to the 2 large cities I have already planned.

vanne

There are many lovely small cities and towns a short distance outside London that you could visit (Oxford, Richmond, Windsor to name a few -- and of course Windsor Castle and Hampton Court along with them. Also for gardens, there's Kew Gardens, Regents Park, Kensington Gardens, etc. Each borough of London has it's own character.

Sassafrass

Either would be great.
If you choose Belgium, include Ghent rather than Brussels, short train ride from Bruges.

I would probably choose London if I had three days, but with only two extra, I would probably see a bit of Belgium.

Flying out of London can be more expensive. If you choose London, it might work best to fly into London, train to Paris, train to Amsterdam and home from there.

Tulips

There's no contest here, London is a far more interesting place to visit then Brussels.

BUT if you have only 2 days, and are going to Paris and Amsterdam anyway, I would spend those 2 days in Belgium; Brugge, Gent, Antwerp or Brussels.
Looking at your interests, I would go for Gent or Antwerp, and visit Brugge as a day trip.

kja

With only 2 or 3 days, I would go for Bruges and maybe somewhere else in Belgium. JMO.

I like to fit my destinations to the time I have (and vice versa); I don't like spending my limited travel time going to places that I can't really see in the time I have -- which would mean that I've "wasted" time on transportation to a place I will end up seeing again another time. So my suggestion is that you consider deferring London until you can give it the time it deserves.

The good news = you don't have a bad choice here!

annhig

I agree with kJ and others that with such a short time, somewhere in Belgium may be a better bet than London, just because there is so much to do there. Leave London until you have a good long time to devote to it.

Ackislander

Partly it depends on where you are flying home from.

If Paris or Amsterdam, I agree to Belgium. Bruges is still on my bucket list, but if you are an art lover, the Museum in Brussels is one of the great ones, and I like the center of the city better than many here appear to.

If you fly home from London, then London is a no brainier, but not if your three days include travel from Amsterdam and to home.

sandralist

Given your interests, I think Belgium has more of what you enjoy (especially when it comes to food and lovely historic architecture) and I would recommend Antwerp for your base. Brussels suffered the worst in WW2 and, when rebuilt, became overall an unattractive city, and while still has a handful of truly exceptional sights, you can see them on a day trip.

A lot of the things people feel are "must sees" in London and why they say there is "so much to do there" may not interest you. What a great many people do in London in go to the theater, shop and tour sights having to do with the Royal Family or Harry Potter. But if your agenda is some iconic views, history sights, restaurants and a congenial nightlife scene, you easily enjoy 2 or 3 days in London and not feel rushed at all.

mamcalice

Given the things you are looking for, I would suggest London. As someone above said, London is a 12 and Brussels, a 2. A 3-day trip to London will just give you a taste of it and will encourage you to return.

sandralist

The assertions that "London is a 12 and Brussels is a 2" only tells you about the mindsets of the people posting that, not whether you would enjoy London this trip over Brussels or Belgium. I great prefer Belgium as a travel destination in general, and would be much more excited to return to Beligum than I ever am to return to London.

There are many interesting things to see and do in London, and if you want to see them, it will be a "12" for you and repay the effort to get there. But don't go expecting much in the way of beautiful views & scenery, affordable good restaurants and one either likes London's drinking scene or one doesn't (count me out). I think Antwerp's is a lot more congenial and the drinks themselves are much more delicious (and the food is a 12 to London's -4 for what I am willing to pay).

As someone else said above, both are worthy choices for a 2 or 3 day visit.

WeisserTee

Given your short time frame, Belgium makes a better choice than London. FWIW, Brussels does have sights worth seeing -- for example, the Grand'Place and the Sablon. I never found Antwerp all that compelling. And I thought Ghent was still undergoing a lot of construction work in its historic center. IMO, you should base in Bruges and daytrip to Ieper or Brussels. Bruges is magical at night after the daytrippers have left or early in the morning before they arrive.

And if you can, definitely try to fit in a visit to Keukenhof while you're in the Netherlands.

sandralist

Also, just as a heads up, the two people who think that travel destinations ought be rated numerically repeatedly post on Fodor's that they cannot understand for the life of them why anybody would go to a long list of very popular European travel destinations that other people love. They are very dismissive of anything but their own favorite things to do when they travel and if they don't get that instant gratification of their narrow idea of travel, they are bewildered.

Fra_Diavolo

sandra, darling, you ought to be careful disparaging people as "very dismissive of anything but their own favorite things to do when they travel." Really, you ought.

annhig

pots and kettles spring to mind.

Percy

Very good assessment sandralist and WeisserTee.

I was in Brussels, Waterloo, Antwerp Ghent Bruges, Amsterdam and Kuekenhof Gardens 10 months ago.

I have been to London several times ( have friends there),saw all I have wanted to see there.

Let me see on a scale of 1 to 10 London is a 12!!

So 10 is perfect and London is above perfect. Really !!!

Gee I would like to know the numbers on New York, LA, Paris, Berlin, Amsterdam, Lisbon Vienna, Rome etc.

Sorry, my opinion is as good as the next person's and I would repeat my trip of 10 months ago before I would go to London again.