vscp

My husband and I are planning a trip to Thailand next spring. We will have 16 days on the ground there (last week or so of March and first week of April). It will likely be our first, last and only trip to Thailand, so we want to do it right. We will be 61 and 62 respectively. Cost isn't really an issue, and I, at least, want to stay at lovely places with character. However, I won't go so far as to spend $2,700 a day at the Four Seasons Tented Camp in the Golden Triangle. We also consider ourselves very active and would like to have the opportunity to do things like hike, bike, kayak etc as well as tour. We are tentatively looking at:

3 nights in Bangkok, probably staying with a friend who lives there;
3 nights in the Golden Triangle at the Anantara;
3 nights in Chiang Mai;
3 nights at Siem Riep to see Angkor Wat;
4 nights in the Phuket area

My questions are:

1. Does this itinerary sound right , or are there places that we should be adding/eliminating?

2. We're looking at the all-inclusive package at the Anantara since it includes the elephants, a 3-country tour, a spa treatment and most meals. Any thoughts on this, as opposed to doing it a la carte? Also, does it make any sense to have a car there, especially if we do the all-inclusive, which includes transportation to and from Chiang Rai? We will likely be driving from Anantara to Chiang Mai.

3. Any recommendations on places to stay in Chiang Mai? I found the Rachamanka to be intriguing. Also suggestions on things to do in Chiang Mai. Should we try to do any hill tribe stuff, or is that just a tourist trap?

4. Siem Riep -- we were looking at La Residence d'Angkor. Is adding Cambodia too much? Are we better off spending those days in Thailand? If so, where?

5. Phuket -- I really like the looks of the Six Senses Hideaway Yao Noi, although it's pricey. This will be the end of our trip and I'd like to relax in someplace luxurious, but I also tend to get bored and sunburned quickly so want a place where there are opportunities to do other things besides go to the beach. I welcome all thoughts about the Six Senses and any other places people recommend in that general area.

Kathie

Do you have the flexibility to add a day or two to yoru trip? I ask because it takes three full days just to see the major temples at Angkor. I consider four nights to be a minimum stay for someone who has an interst in Angkor. We spent a week there, but that isn't for everyone. Do buy Dawn Rooney's book, Angkor: A Guide to Cambodia's Wondrous Temples to prepare for your stop there.

Another option would be to cut one place from your itinerary, if it were me (and it isn't) I'd cut Chiang Mai and add more time to other places. Remember that three nights somewhere is a mere two days. Indeed, I'd make all of the stops four nights so you have a chance to experince soem of what each place has to offer.

If you are doing an all-inclusive package at the Anantara you don't need a car. I think the three countries tour is just awful - see the worst of Laos and Burma. If you are intersted in Laos and Burma take a trip there, don't visit a border town (or with Laos, a border market set up for tourists). Maybe they would substitute a day trip to Doi Tung instead.

If you do decide to go to Chaing Mai, I'd recommend skipping Hill Tribe visits, most of which are of the human zoo variety. Doi Suthep is the highlight of the Chiang Mai area for me. We toured the Rachamanka last time we were there (which was several years ago) and were very unimpressed. The cells, I mean rooms were stark, the bathrooms were full of mildew. I have known people who have stayed there and liked it, but perhaps the hotel has been remodeled. The restaurant was very good.

The end of March beginning of April mis not an ideal time to visit Thailand and Cambodia. It is hottest time of the year. Any chance you can move your trip earlier? February is very nice, January even better,

Craig

I agree with Kathie that you should either extend your trip by a few days or cut out one location. I'm not a big fan of Chiang Mai so that's what I'd cut. We usually visit SE Asia in February and it is VERY hot. In late March/early April it is also VERY hot but it will rain more, though not so much as to ruin your visit.

mcbg1

I disagree about 3 full days needed to see Angkor. Yes, there is a lot to see but not everybody will want to spend 3 full days touring temples. After 2 days, I was templed out.

BillT

I agree cut out one of your destinations. I would spend more time in Bangkok. You will be there at the hottest time of the year so you need to take things slow. If it was up to me I would cut out both Chiang Mai and Angkor Wat(we would both be templed out in about 1-2 hours).I personally prefer the temples in Bangkok - which I never tire of visiting when we are in Bangkok.

Kathie

mcbg and BillT are quite right to point out that how long you want to spend at Angkor is a "know thyself" question.

How long it takes to tour just the major temples is an emperical question, and it takes three full touring days as per Dawn Rooney. A touring day usually starts about dawn, goes until noon or so, resumes about 3 and goes until dusk.

rhkkmk

i agree 100% with kathie, except i would want a car--rent at chiang rai airport..

SKIP CM---UGH..

the marriott khoa lak, north of phuket is an exceptional location/hotel..

we are 5 years older than you guys..

i'd want more time in bkk... a riverside hotel (peninsula/shangri-la/ anantara) at the end of your trip would be my choice to finish things off nicely...

hotel de la paix in siem reap

vscp

Thanks for all your suggestions. Our daughter was in Bangkok earlier this summer and didn't love it, which is why we didn't think of spending too much time there. I'd be interested in suggestions for things to do and see there if we decide to nix one or more of our locations and spend more time there. Our dates are pretty much set in stone given work commitments. I think my husband would go completely out of his mind if he had to look at temples for 3 full days, so, if we do Siem Riep, 2 full days is probably OK. What's so awful about Chiang Mai?

Craig

The reason I said I'd skip CM is that once you've done Doi Su Thep and perhaps some smaller temples, you've seen CM. Yes, you can go to one of the elephant places but I believe there is mahout training right on the grounds of the Anantara. There is also some unique shopping on the crafts road outside of CM - colorful painted umbrellas, silks and a style of lacquerware that we have not seen anywhere else. I think we had 2-1/2 days in CM and thought that it was a 1/2 day too much.

Bangkok has tons to do. There are many posts on this board but Grand Palace, Wat Po, Wat Arun, and Jim Thompson house are all must-sees. Do a klong tour, have some clothes custom-made (cheap!) and visit the weekend market if it's on when you are there. Spend a day at the floating market and feed the monkeys with tour guide Tong. Do a day trip to Ayuttya. Visit the Teak Palace, Marble Wat and Vimanmek Palace. Take a private tour at the Prasart Museum or do a Thai cooking class on a boat from the Marriott or at the Blue Elephant.

Kathie

I consider the temples of Angkor one of the wonders of the world, but if your husband isn't into it, do reconsider. It's an expensive side trip - especially if he's not interested.

There is nothing awful about CM - oh, except the air pollution. They burn their trash, so there are lots of particulates in the air. The traffic is bad because there is no public transport, unlike Bangkok with its Skytrain, subway and the water taxis. I just find not a lot to do there. Doi Suthep is lovely, but that's another temple. The shopping isn't as good as Bangkok, and it's generally more expensive. The restaurants aren't as good as Bangkok either.

Bangkok is my favorite city in the world. I find it endlessly fascinating. There is so much to do/see/experience. I don't know where your friends live, but unless they are located next to a skytrain station or on the water taxi route, staying with them may make access to places in Bangkok difficult. I'd recommend you stay at one of the properties on the river, perhaps the Oriental.

rhkkmk

again i agree with kathie--CM is just boring--i've been 3 times trying to figure out what it is that people rave about.. its not there for me..

tons to do in bkk.. a stay can be made or ruined by your hotel choice... riverside hotels will give you a unique perspective of the city... taking it easy is another method of increasing enjoyment.. using taxis and the skytrain also increases enjoyment... walking distances will increase your frustrations...

vscp

Again, many thanks. This has been really helpful. Keep those post coming, and I will contact our friend in Bangkok for his suggestions.

shelleyk

Well I guess I am in the minority, but I like Chang Mai. I spent 3 full days there and was not bored in the least. What did I do there besides visit Doi Sutthep, which took half a day and was well worth the time spent. I visited many wats . The Lanna style architecture is very attractive. I walked through the old city. I made merit. I visited a very well maintained elephant camp for half a day, and went to the zoo to see the pandas, I visited the crafts villages and ate some really good meals. All in all, I'd give my 3 days there a 10.

WillJame

In Feb. 1999 we spent three weeks in Luang Prabang, Siem Reap, Phuket, and Bangkok. Nine years earlier we had spent 10-12 days in Thailand--Bangkok, Ko Samui, and Chiang Mai. I liked Chiang Mai a lot, but don't care if I never see Bangkok again. I grew weary of the scams, for one thing.
We spent a month in Vietnam this past March and would prefer to go back there than to Thailand. I tend to agree with people who say that Vietnam now is like what Thailand used to be--more charming, innocent, welcoming, and friendly.
We had six nights/five days in Siem Reap in 1999, and I'd return to Angkor Wat for more any time. Which all goes to show how subjective are the views of travellers.

LeighTravelClub

For our very first trip to the Far East, way back in the nineties, we did an organized package somewhat similar to that which you are planning. We have returned at least once a year ever since, independently.
That first trip was 4 nights Bangkok, 4 nights Krabi, 4 nights Phi Phi and 2 further nights in Bangkok.
You have 16 nights so can fit in a little more.....maybe.

We became hopelessly addicted to Phi Phi, and always end our trips there. Over the years we have combined our visits with many of the other destinations in the area. eg. Cambodia/Phi Phi, Borneo/Phi Phi, Singapore/Phi Phi, etc etc.

Like Kathie, I consider the Angkor Complex to be one of the wonders of the world so I would definitely include this in your trip. Apart from the temples, a visit to Tonle Sap Lake is very interesting.
I like Phuket, but these days prefer Krabi, so I would include some time there.
Phi Phi doesn't suit everyone. The north east of the island is where you will find the better resorts. Island Village, Holiday Inn, Zeavola, for example. You might find it too quiet, but most certainly, the hotels I have mentioned are not typical international beach resorts. Beautiful scenery, wonderful beaches, with crystal clear water offering excellent snorkeling.
Of course, Bangkok is a must.
I sort of love/hate this city. I'm always thrilled and excited when I arrive there, but a few days at a time is enough for me. Royal Orchid Sheraton and Shangri-La are a couple of good hotel choices, but for sure, you should try to book a hotel on the river, with a river view. I never tire of watching the action on that river.
There are lots of different options when visiting the far east and lots of different opinions, but, the common thread is that most people who visit this part of the world, want to return again, and again!
Enjoy your planning and ultimately your trip.

crellston

I liek Chiang Mai and really do not understand why some dislike it so much. We have been several times both to the town itself and the surrounding region and thoroughly enjoyed it. It is easy to get around, has some nice wats and markets and some great places to eat (the food is a lot different from the south.

Kathie rightly points out the air quality at the time of year you are going can be awful, but this has been largely due to the slash and burn agriculture methods employed in the region which has been less prevalent in the last few years. Rather than trash burning or traffic. This applies as much to Chiang Rai as it does to CM. We were at the Anantara in march 2007 and found it difficult to breathe and smoke and soot was everywhere. This was a particularly bad year but it does happen most years although, thankfully, not to the same degree.
You can check air quality past and present @

http://www.pcd.go.th/airquality/regional/default.cfm

Like Bob, I liked Khao Lak a lot (although we were there just pre tsunami so I suppose a lot has changed). I much prefer it to Phuket. Krabi or some of the Andaman island would also be preferable. If however. you are intending just to relax at the hotel then Six senses are great resorts

jmsesq12

Have been to Thailand 2 times and am going again in Feb. My son lives in Bangkok. We are also early 60s. My wife and I are also not big fans of Bangkok, but as it is your 1st time, you do need to see the "major" sights and get a flavor of the city. All this is easily done in 3 days. It will be very hot, humid and probably rainy, but mostly only in the afternoon for a few hours- March to May is called the hot season. Like a water fall on your head!
I liked Chang Mai which is a much smaller Bangkok. Some nice temples and shopping. Unless you do go treking to the hill tribes ( I did not) 3 days may be a little long, unless this includes to and from.
I do not agree your itinerary is too much. As long as you are good travelers go for it. You'll probably not come back.

Kathie

As you can see, even frequent travelers to Thailand are divided on the Bangkok/Chiang Mai question. If you are someone who loves cities, I expect you'll love Bangkok. If you tend to feel overwhelmed by big cities, you might prefer Chiang Mai.

How much you enjoy Bangkok depends a lot on where you stay. If you are somewhere inconvenient to the skytrain and the water taxis, you may well feel frustrated by the traffic. I always recommend that first-times stay by the river. The river is fascinating the life blood of Bangkok. It's also just a bit cooler - well, less hot - by the river and the air is clearer as there are no canyons of tall buildings holding in the exhaust fumes. I've been traveling to Bangkok regularly for over 25 years and I always stay by the river.

khunwilko

I've posted some tips on visiting Thailand here....


http://www.fodors.com/community/asia...g-thailand.cfm


It might prove useful for a fist-time visitor.