Go Back  Fodor's Travel Talk Forums > Destinations > Asia
Reload this Page >

How much time should I spend in Sri Lanka

How much time should I spend in Sri Lanka

Old Jul 3rd, 2013, 12:07 PM
  #1  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
How much time should I spend in Sri Lanka

Hi,
I plan on travelling to Sri Lanka for 5 and a half weeks (aug-sept).
From the last time I've been in SE Asia I realized i don't like rushing through places nor taking too much time in one place, and considering I'm not surfing, I wanted to ask:
should I spend all of my time in Sri Lanka? or should I do only 3-4 weeks there and spend the rest of the time in another country ? (possibly Burma).

Thanks alot,
B.J.
ma12 is offline  
Old Jul 3rd, 2013, 12:33 PM
  #2  
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 9,365
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
We spent a month there and that was a little too much, perhaps by one week. I haven't been to Burma but from what I read here and elsewhere it is a magical place and I am sure I would love it apart from the fact have only way to get around seems to be on organised tours. With that amount of time to spend, i think I would spend more time in Burma and less in SL. 3 weeks is probably enough IMO to see most of the highlights of SL without rushing.
crellston is offline  
Old Jul 3rd, 2013, 12:57 PM
  #3  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 33,288
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
crellston, No need for organized tours in Burma, though it does help to use an agent to book accommodations and transport.

I loved both Sri Lanka and Burma. I was in Burma in both 2009 and 2011. We traveled to Sri Lanka in 2007, and would like to return. I think you could do both in 5 1/2 weeks. You will need a minimum of two weeks in Burma.
Kathie is offline  
Old Jul 3rd, 2013, 01:47 PM
  #4  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 57,091
Received 5 Likes on 3 Posts
we spent 2 weeks in SL which was definitely not enough [strangely the title - almost - of my trip report!] but I can see an argument for 3 being OK.

it depends what you want to do - we would have liked to have spent longer in the Hill Country and we didn't see the eastern coast at all. if you want to do the standard 3-4 days in the cultural triangle, the Hill country, the east, the south and Galle, AND some time on a beach, that might well take you nearer to 4 weeks unless you are going to rush about, which rather defeats the object!
annhig is offline  
Old Sep 5th, 2013, 07:51 PM
  #5  
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 511
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Five and a half weeks would be too long for Sri Lanka.

The Maldives are a short and inexpensive one hour flight away from Sri Lanka, you may want to consider a few days in the Maldives - I wouldn't spend the entire five and a half weeks in Sri Lanka and the Maldives, I only mention the Maldives as you have a long trip and can accommodate the destination in your travel plans if it appeals.

I would definitely look at flight options and combine Sri Lanka with another country given the length of your trip.
RJames is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Original Poster
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Smeagol
Asia
64
Feb 12th, 2014 12:38 PM
filmwill
Asia
14
Nov 11th, 2012 08:30 PM
tansmets
Asia
6
May 20th, 2012 01:31 PM
christo
Asia
13
Mar 31st, 2012 06:41 AM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are On


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information -