I think DC and Boston are more intersting than Chicago.

I think, and I am predjudice for sure, that you should fly into Seattle, take about 5 days here,-- take a ferry ride, a day along the water front and Pike Place Market, a day to see Mt. Rainier, take a day cruise tour into the San Juan Islands, then drive south from Seattle down 101 thru Oregon, see the coast and big waves, then go to Big Sur and see the Giant trees,, then on to Sonoma California for wine country (very beautiful) then on to San Francisto, Fisnerman's Wharf, the Golden Gate, etc....How can you lose.

Believe me, I have lived all over the world, and HERE is where it's at.!!,

The smart thing to do is to visit the places you really want to see - it's YOUR trip!

You could throw Vancouver and Victoria, BC, into the mix if you wanted to, since you mentioned Canada. Both are well worth visiting.

W/ just 17 days -- I'd skip Chicago and fly straight to Seattle. 2 - 3 days in Seattle, another 2 days either on the coast or somewhere else in WA state, 3 days on the Oregon coast, 5 days for the Redwoods/northern CA coast/wine country and 4 days in San Francisco would be a VERY full itinerary.

I really like Chicago -- but I just don't see where you have the time. Or maybe just stopover for 1 night/2 days in Chicago and cut something back on the west coast.

Thank you for your quick replies!

DC and Boston... I don't know... DC seems a bit too monumental to me, even though the museums would for sure be brilliant. Of course, it would make for an easy trip, do Boston-Philly-DC and even be able to throw in NYC while at it, hopping on trains etc.

Seattle does fascinate me, and so does San Francisco, but I might be the oddest tourist around > I would not go near Fisherman's Wharf. For same reasons I avoid Times Square and Empire State Building in NYC. I like to take the side roads and keep away from the hottest of hotspots. (But wouldn not miss the Golden Gate Bridge, I'm not THAT odd, .)

You could easily spend 17 days doing Boston-NYC-Philly-DC.

Since you like nature, you could fly into Boston and go up to Maine for a few days to see the rocky coast of the northeast, and then head to Seattle to get the northwestern experience.

Adding:

My initial thoughts circled around cities, as in fly into one, get into another and so on. But then I thought about trains and then the car came into the picture. So that's when I too started thinking about doing the sensible thing and group things slightly more together.

Flying via Chicago seemed great. I'd love to visit that city and as I hate long flights, it would cut a terribly long journey into two and give me some time to deal with jet lag and so on.

I'm slightly more westward inclined as I have been to the east coast (okay, just to NYC, but still). And even if I would take the time to drive down to SF, I would try to do it as fast as possible. Making it a 4-5 day trip perhaps. I don't feel the need to "see it all", but stop occasionally and swiftly and then move on. Or what do I know, if I go there I might feel like spending 17 days in that small quiant seaside town. Hah.

Thank you everyone for your input, it really helps me clear my head, and I will have to chew on it all.

This is the best part about travelling solo, but absolutely also the worst part, making all the decisions on my own.

With 17 days, I would do Chicago 3 nights (love this city but 3 nights, 2 full days is enough time to see some wonderful museums - do Art Institute and Grant park, take the architectural cruise, enjoy great dining), then off to the west coast. Spend 3 nights in Seattle, 3 nights in Portland/with a day trip to Multnomah Falls and then head out to the coast for 3 nights, take another 2 days to drive to San Francisco (including a stop to explore Northern california including the redwoods), spend 3 nights in SF. If you skip Chicago, I would add the Olympic Peninsula, San Juan Islands or Vancouver Island for 3 days.

17 (or 12, 13, 14) days from Seattle to SF sounds wonderful. You will see some of the most amazing country, hiking, waterfalls, ocean beaches. Great photography opportunities. Funky neighborhoods and sidewalk cafes.

Seattle down the coast to San Francisco is nearly 1000 miles - the same as Copenhagen to Nice. Not something you want to drive in a few days. Not if you want to see anything anyway.

POlson: That sounds great, thank you, I'll think about your suggestion, .

janisj: I know it's long and I know it will take me some time and I would let it take some time. What I mean is, that I don't have to see it all as in not stop at every place and so on. I'd love to see the beaches and the redwoods, so if I could cram that in along a 4-5 day long drive, I'd be happy. Wine country isn't on my must-do-list, as I really dislike wine (I know, total blasphemy), I do know that it has some nice scenery, but as this trip will be a compromise in many regards, that's something I could drive by "using the fastlane". I wouldn't do any longer hikes (not that I mind doing it normally) nor would I stay at some place for a longer period. I see myself (and of course I could be very wrong here) mostly driving, getting out of the car now and then, maybe spend half an hour to an hour on some nice place and then continue.
I have driven 1300 km (that's the length of my country from south to north) in two days, not using freeways. And felt that was a leasury pace with a lot of stops and so on. But yes, I understand the situation will be different in northwest US, and that's why I thought 4-5 days might do it.

I can understand your West Coast dream. Having lived only in North America on the East Coast (Canada & US) myself, I find I'm always in awe when I get to the west... the big trees, the big mountains, the multicoloured landscapes/canyons (reds, oranges) in places (you won't hit the latter this trip). I feel an obligation however to gently reproach you for equating been to NYC= been to East Coast. NYC is uniquely NYC and is quite different from Savannah, Baltimore, Boston and Miami. That said, I do get you as the West Coast offers something that the East Coast locales can't due to the uniquely West Coast topography.

I think POlson has a great plan that fits perfectly with the spirit of your dream.. 3 nights Chicago to break up the trip as you say, and then Seattle drive down to SF over 2 weeks, allotting some time for the two cities at either end. Sounds like bliss to me!

Enjoy your trip whatever you decide! DAN

a couple of thoughts: it will most likely be very hot and humid in Chicago at that time of year - I would suggest making this trip all about the west coast of the US - flying into Seattle, driving the Oregon coast, northern California redwoods and coastline - San Francisco area - but don't forget the Monterey peninsula and Yosemite

Boskorama, did you notice the travel dates Brightdawns posted? Late Sept. in Chicago is hardly hot and humid. This is directly from Fodors:

Avg High Temp: 70F
Avg Low Temp: 51F
Chance of Precipitation: 26%
Chance of a Humid Day: 26%

Don't take away one of the few months we have where it IS nice!

I agree with the Chicago to West. September-November can include hurricanes in the East so another reason to go West!

Are you going to "wing it" as far as hotel reservations go? Other Fodorites, is that workable? It sounds like brightdawns isn't going on a fixed itinerary.

Daniel_Williams: Hah, I know, I really don't equate NYC with the whole east coast, . It's just that I have "been" to the east, even if the place I've been to is really an area as large as an ants poo on the map, so that's why it would "feel" different going a bit further away this time. Some day I will for sure explore the area between Florida and DC, Savannah and the likes. That's another point of interest to me.

TDudette: I haven't thought that much about hotels just yet. If I, for example, decide on the Chicago-Seattle-drive-San Francisco, I would get hotels in all the cities, but I'm not sure about the drive. I understand it gets pretty quiet at the beginning of October, so I would probably be able to wing it, at least some. But that part is still pretty hazy to me so...

Thank you everyone again for your input!

Traveling solo? I would consider at least 1 trip on Amtrak.
My thought was fly to Denver perhaps by way of Chicago then take the train from Denver as far as Reno Nevada (25 hours).
The scenery is great during the daylight part of the trip on the California Zephyr. Rent your car in Reno and then drive anywhere in California you want to see. From San Francisco north along the coast stopping often in the small towns and ocean views would be good. Be sure to see Redwood National Park in Northern California. Continue up the Oregon coast as far as Astoria then cut over to Portland. If you still have the time and inclination, head up I-5 to see Seattle. Return to Reno by way of I-5 to Sacramento and I-80 to Reno. A detour if you have the time would be to get off I-5 in Roseburg and head east and then south into Crater Lake NP leaving the park through the south entrance and east on 62 to US 97 south through Klamath Falls to Weed, CA to rejoin I-5.
The California Zephyr will take you all the way to Chicago if you don't want to fly out of Reno.
The thing I like about train travel is that the train is moving all night when you would be sleeping and paying for a hotel. Take lots of pictures wherever you decide to go.

Chicago is a must, much more exciting than either Boston or DC (DC is more of a US history visit, if you're looking for that), Boston is just Boston. Chicago IMHO is the best city in US to visit. Spend couple of nights there and then take a short Amtrak train trip to western Michigan to New Buffalo and spend couple of nights there. Wonderful art galleries, antique shopping, beaches, restaurants, bike rides, wine country, etc.

Seattle and San Francisco are different, but still wonderful cities.

I think your trip seems fine. You have very strong ideas of what you want to do and you have thought at great lenghts about it, so I would keep to your schedule. With the one exception of 5 nights in Chicago, I would stay maybe 3 at most.

I don't think it is necessary to change anything - you seem to be asking if this is ok the way you have planned it and I would say yes.

tomfuller: The California Zephyr was actually a "wow, yes, this is something I want to do"-thing for me just a couple of days ago. The scenery seems absolutely breathtaking and I like travelling on trains. And yes, I also counted that even if I booked a roomette, it would be cheaper than living in a hotel and pay for food. But I guess I just read too much about it and kind of got bored of the idea.
You see, this is exactly my problem, I get so very exited about things just to get tha "blah"-moment after a little while.

It was after the train-idea that I moved to the car-idea. Mainly to have some more flexibility, be able to stop and take pictures at my own pace. Photography is number one on my travels, I have a full frame DSLR and love to keep myself occupied behind the viewfinder.

I looked at the option of starting in Denver, but didn't think about getting off before SF... That's an interesting thought. Thank you for that!

AAFrequentFlyer: I am becoming more and more sure about making Chicago one of my stops. It seems to be a great city. And I like the idea of heading out somewhere near Chicago too...

ARGH. So many places, so little time! I really need to tell myself I can come over some other time and then do another part of the country, I can't have it all now... Luckily I don't have to make a decision any time soon, can think things through for a couple of months.

nanabee: I have a strong FEELING what I want to do, that's just far away from actually making a decision about what kind of route caters to that feeling... .

Thank you again everyone! I'm grateful for all the advice you've given me. I'll have to digest this for some time, maybe take a time out from the planning and then dive back in after a little while. Maybe I then might be able to make a decision. I hope.....

Sorry - but you probably don't want to take any long distance train trips -- CA Zephyr or others. It isn't like in Europe where you can pretty much depend on arriving on time (and making 2 minute connections w/ ease).

It is not uncommon for long distance Amtrak trains to be hours (or occasionally a full day) late. In the US, passenger trains have to wait on sidings for freight trains (which have track priority) to pass.

If you had weeks - sure -- but not on a whirlwind trip trying to see a lot of the USA.

Just to be an agent provocateur, I thought I'd throw out a somewhat more aggressive possibility. 17 days in North America? Okay, here's a lot of North America.

Fly into Chicago and drive to Seattle, then drive down the coast to SF and finish there. Forget the train - you miss too much of the country because it's dark half the time.

Is it doable in your time frame? Yes, absolutely. I've done it and have taken European friends on the drive on a couple of occasions. They loved it… I mean loved it. By yourself? You bet. Load up the iPod with iconic music - road songs, Aaron Copeland… and take the highway. By European standards fuel, food and lodgings are inexpensive; there are perfectly safe, clean and comfortable roadside accommodations every few miles. People are friendly. Most of us, anyway.

In sheer road terms, it's 3-4 days from Chicago to Seattle comfortably, but you could take 5 and see some sights. My schedule wouldn't have you lingering anywhere in particular, but frankly that's the point; instead, you get a vivid idea of the scale of North America, of the mystique of the West. It's a kinetic experience as the perspective and vistas constantly change through the car windows. The Chicago suburbs end and you cross pure Americana countryside to the Mississippi. Through Wisconsin and southern Minnesota, with harvest scenes and color all around, then the Great Plains give way to low hills and the awesome vista over the Missouri River where Interstate 90 (the preferred route) crosses it in South Dakota.

Then the Badlands, the Black Hills, the Big Sky of eastern Montana; the Rockies and the wheat fields of eastern Washington, followed by the high Cascades, which will be in full autumn color, and on to Seattle, where the tunnel leading from Lake Washington into the city has the inscription - "Seattle, Portal to the Pacific."

Spend a couple of days in Seattle, then head south, via the Pacific coast as much as possible, down the Oregon coast and into northern California, through the Redwoods and the wine country, into San Francisco. At that time of year it will be a stunning, possibly life-changing drive.

Here's a conceptual timetable showing this route, follow I-90 all the way to Seattle.

Days 1 - 3, Chicago

Day 4, Chicago to Blue Earth Minnesota, home of the Jolly Green Giant (a must-see.)

Day 5, Blue Earth to Rapid City SD. Start the day in the Midwest, end it in the Old West. Stop for quick visits at the Corn Palace in Mitchell SD, at the overlook of the Missouri River at Chamberlain. Pull off for an hour's drive (easy) through Badlands National Park in west central South Dakota.

Day 6, Morning visit to Mount Rushmore, then through the Black Hills to Deadwood, where you can visit the side-by-side graves of Wild Bill Hickok and Calamity Jane, then re-join I-90 near Spearfish and continue west to Billings, Montana, stopping at the Little Big Horn battlefield, a very moving spot.

Day 7, Billings to Missoula Montana or Coeur d'Alene Idaho. Missoula is a very nice university town in the Rockies (Bitterroots, actually) while Coeur d'Alene a very scenic town on a spectacular giant lake.

Day 8, Missoula or Coeur d'Alene to Seattle, via the (harvest time) wheat fields of Eastern Washington, the Columbia River and the Cascades.

Days 9 - 11, Seattle

Day 10, Seattle to Portland, Oregon

Day 11, Portland to Bandon, Oregon - various options to get from Portland to the coast.

Day 12, Bandon to Ferndale, California (just south of Eureka) via the coast and Redwoods

Day 13, Ferndale to Sonoma, CA (wine country) OR Ferndale to Mendocino, CA, along the gorgeous coast.

Day 14, Sonoma or Mendocino to San Francisco

Days 15 - 17, San Francisco, home

Wow... Gardyloo, that seems like an amazing journey, truly tickles my sense of adventure, . Thank you!

I have noting against the northwest - it's pretty and there's a lot to see and do. While I don't like much of CA (I prefer seasons and grass to desert and brown and crunchy) I do love SF and the surroundings.

But - if it were me - and you have never been there - I would do Boston a little of New England, DC and colonial Williamsburgh. Caveat: I am a history buff and like cities - small towns leave me cold - and while I enjoy looking at mountains, islands/sea and like nature (whale watching etc) there is no way I am hiking or camping or similar.

If you think you will really love the northwest go for it. If you're not sure - consider this alternative.

>>south from Seattle down 101 thru Oregon, see the coast and big waves, then go to Big Sur and see the Giant trees,, then on to Sonoma California for wine country (very beautiful) then on to San Francisto, Fisnerman's Wharf, the Golden Gate, etc....How can you lose.<<

Big Sur is about 3 hours SOUTH of San Francisco - not between Oregon and Sonoma.

Here are my ideas of things to do in the San Francisco Bay area.
http://www.fodors.com/community/united-states/san-francisco---stu-dudleys-recommendations.cfm

Stu Dudley

The only flaw I see with guardyloo's trip plan is the drop off fee leaving the rental car in San Francisco.
My plan for flying to Denver involves boarding the train mid-morning and getting off in Reno mid-morning the next day.
Even if you arrive up to 2 hours late, the rental car counters are open at the airport or downtown.
I have been riding trains since October 2001. The first trip was 30 days by myself from Washington DC with stops as far north as Churchill Manitoba as far west as Vancouver as far south as El Paso Texas.
Flying to all of those cities would have cost at least 3 times as much.
The latest train I was ever on arrived in Winnipeg was 16 hours late after a western Ontario snowstorm.
My most recent trip on the Zephyr left Salt Lake City on time and arrived in Sacramento 10 minutes late. 11/8-9/2010
The reason I picked Reno was car rentals are cheaper and you arrive at a good time of day. What you miss in the dark in Nevada is not that interesting.
The northern route guardyloo suggested could work using the Empire Builder train for at least part of the route between Chicago and Seattle (or Portland) and using rental cars to see the things away from the tracks.
Yes Amtrak trains (and ViaRail) have to pull onto sidings to allow freight trains to pass in the opposite direction. This rarely delays the trains more than twice a day. There is a cushion built into the schedule at the fueling stops. If you can drive a rental car from point A to point B and fly home from B without a large drop off fee, go for it.

OK my 2 cents. When my friends or family from the UK come to the US they want to see the West and not the East Coast (except for NYC). Various reasons are given-- and I'm not vouching or subscribing to any of them--looks too much like the UK or parts of Europe, not different enough, the history really isn't that old or interesting to them, the museums are pale comparisons. Whereas they are absolutely fascinated by the West and it's history and geography--it's so vast that it is hard for them to comprehend. This coming fall my sister is doing a tour of Western Nat'l Parks with one of our friends who is excited beyond belief at the prospect of seeing the Black Hills, Badlands, etc. These are place names she recalls from US westerns she saw as a child and they call to her. So Gardyloo's itinery would be appealing.

Anyway this is just my way of saying brightdawns do what calls to you. What you want to see in the US, may differ vastly from what US residents think you should see.

The drop charge is a consideration regardless, and needs careful shopping. I can see Thrifty, for example, with a $900 drop charge for ORD-SFO over a two week period. Not inconsiderable, but it needs to be set against train fares, higher costs for accommodations in cities, and airfare if need be, plus in-city transportation in some areas. For example, with a car in Seattle the OP could stay outside the city center at lower cost accommodations (with free parking.) It all adds up.

Road trips are not necessarily the cheapest way to travel, just the most flexible.

If you love nature you will love the drive from Seattle to San Francisco. It is about 3 hours from Seattle to Portland, then it would be nicely broken up if you want to drive down the coast through the giant redwoods and you can see some spectacular coastline through Oregon. Or stay on interstate 5 for more direct, but less scenic drive. The Oregon beaches are beautiful and everyone should see the giant redwoods in their lifetime! You could drive to San Francisco easily in 2-3 days from Seattle with some stopping along the way.

It's true, that the west coast has a somewhat bigger appeal than the east, mostly because it is so different from anything back home, and also because it's a place not many go to from Europe. Oh yes, I like to be different...hah.

The drop-off charges are kind of mindblowing indeed but I gather one can find a good deal if one does thourough research. Perhaps.

I also like to keep things simple, which means that last year when I had a great plan about visiting both New York and San Francisco, I ended up staying in NYC alone for 10 days and skipping the other coast. Just to make it easier for myself. (It turned out to be a good thing though, because my take-off was in the middle of the ash-chaos and I had to cancel everything and rebook etc. only to still be able to fly on the day I was supposed to (the only Finnair plane in the air that day), easier to do when you have one flight and one hotel.)

But I hope I keep my composure this time and really take the opportunity to see something else than just one place.

Thank you everyone again (I sound like a broken record, but really mean it) for your input!

Hmmmm.... Just a thought: Maybe you could fly into Vancouver, BC; explore Victoria and the rest of Vancouver Island (try the Wickaninnish Inn near Tofino!); head to Seattle; drive to San Francisco and fly home from there.

Keep in mind that late September is when it's rainy in the Pacific Northwest. (When I was a kid I called it "school weather.") It can still be beautiful as long as it doesn't dampen your spirits.

>>Keep in mind that late September is when it's rainy in the Pacific Northwest<<

and that's when we have our best weather in San Francisco.

Stu Dudley

The rental car drop charge will be much less SEA-SFO than ORD-SFO (about $300 for SEA-SFO using Thrifty, versus the $900 Gardyloo found for ORD-SFO, for example).

The coastal highhway down to San Francisco is breath taking! And if you do northern CA, make sure to go to Mendocino. A little New Englandish town on the cliffs overlooking the Pacific.
As far as Canada - the Canadian rockies are wonderful if you like nature. Great hiking. Lake Louise is beautiful and so is Banff. Cute little old town. The Fairmont there was magnificent.
Enjoy!

I've actually done a Seattle to San Francisco drive and cannot recommend it highly enough. One stop you should consider - Olypmic National Park. It may seem a little out of the way, but it is one of the finest parks I've ever visited, and you'll need at least 2 days to even see the highlights. We did it on that trip, and we also loved the Oregon coast and the redwoods.

Thank you everyone for your advice!
I think I have made up my mind (at least for now... there's lots of time to change everything). I'll fly to Chicago, stay there for 3-4 nights, fly to Seattle, stay for three nights and then get on the road towards San Francisco, where I will stay for about four nights. That leaves the drive with about 6 nights.
I'm at the moment starting to dig into the various stops and researching what I'd like to see, or in fact HOW much I can see during the realtively short time I have to spend. Olympic National Park is something I really want to do, I spent the better half of last night reading about the park and looking at breathtaking photos. Hurricane Ridge and Ruby Beach are now must's for me. I'm also including at least Mendocino, Crescent City and Yachats.

Man, this is going to be so much fun!

Having recently driven from Seattle to San Fransico, I would consider taking the train unless you plan on many stops. It is a lonnnnnggg drive.

The train can be even longer -sometimes 12 hours late although better going north to south.
The trains in the US cannot be compared to European trains as they share the tracks with the freight trains who have right of way- I understand that with the economy, freight trains are not shipping as much and therefore passenger trains are better at keeping on schedule.

And there were would not be many scenic stops.

I live in Eugene so am pretty familiar with the coast from Lincoln City down to Florence- if you would like recommendations for those areas let me know.
I usually stay at the Adobe Motel, just north of Yachats. It is on the ocean, has a restaurant and bar with great views and you can easily walk into town.
If you stay there, check out the old church in town, has a museum with interesting artifacts of Oregon life.

sounds like a great adventure for you

Despite what others have said about Amtrak train travel, the Coast Starlight leaves Seattle at 11:45AM everyday and arrives in Emeryville, CA about 23 hours later. (Amtrak bus to SF)
If you wanted to take a break from the train, get tickets to Eugene, OR,rent a car and either see Florence on the coast or maybe Crater Lake. The next Coast Starlight leaves Eugene 24 hours after you got off.
Saving the drop off fee would go a long way toward your train fare.
I think that those who criticize Amtrak have ridden it less than 1000 miles in their lives. I drive where I must, fly when I have to be far away in a hurry and take the train and rent a car when I have no real time pressure. We're retired.

Actually Tom, I have ridden the train from Eugene to Sacramento and back- train was 12 hours late getting into Eugene - that was a few years ago- as I said, think times have improved since then-

Love history, love nature, love my camera and my note book. Love to sit and watch the world go around, love to just walk around and get a feel for places, sit on benches on rocks on anything. Stroll through fascinating neighbourhoods.

With this in mind, I suggest Washington DC, New Orleans, San Francisco, and the following national parks: Grand Canyon, Zion, and Bryce.

HTTY