bsdubois00

First off - this is my first post so if this is in the wrong spot please move.

The girlfriend and I are looking to plan a 2 week trip to Europe and want to make the best of it. Our budget is about $3,000 each PLUS travel. This is what we are thinking and would like feedback.

Leave US on 9/19 fly to Rome arriving at 11 am on 9/20.

•Spend the 21st - 23rd exploring Rome
•Take the train early on the 24th to Venice and spend the rest of the 24th through the 26th exploring
•At some point on the 27th take the train back to Rome for an 8 PM flight to Paris
•Spend the 28th - 30th in Paris
•Take a train to London on the morning of the 1st spending the rest of the 1st - 3rd in London.
•Leave London on the 4th back to the US

Is this a good plan? Good budget? Thoughts?

Thanks

Dukey1

First: if you are going to use the rail system in Italy you are going to want the cheapest price on tickets and that means booking them 90 days out and you can do that on-line at www.trenitalia.com or www.italiarail.com (same prices as Trenitalia but some find the site easier to use; they levy a small surcharge on tickets.

Second: Venice to Paris. You can do it by rail or you can fly cheaply on at least one (or more) budget airlines such as Easyjet www.easyjet.com/en. There is NO need to go back to Rome.

Third: be aware that Venice is one of THE most expensive cities in Europe

Dukey1

re the Easyjet tickets...book them NOW

janisj

A little rushed but over all not bad.

>>At some point on the 27th take the train back to Rome for an 8 PM flight to Paris<<

Why? You can easily fly from Venice to Paris and save nearly a full day of transit.

PalenQ

At some point on the 27th take the train back to Rome for an 8 PM flight to Paris
•Spend the 28th - 30th in Paris>

You could take the direct overnight Thello train from Venice to Paris, saving you the cost of a return ticket to Rome and saving lots of time - you arrive in Paris early in the morning - flying even short hauls takes a half-day or more all in all.

www.thello.com for schedules and tickets and special deals - also save on the cost of a night in a hotel. For lots of great info on European night trains and trains in general check out www.seat61.com; www.budgeteuropetravel.com and www.ricksteves.com.

janisj

If you book early, flying will almost certainly be cheaper than the train - but assuming you can sleep on a night train, that would be another option. I personally wouldn't want to arrive in Paris after a sleepless night - but others sleep fine on trains.

isabel

why would you go back to Rome to fly to Paris? You can fly there from Venice (easyjet around 50€ if booked now, price goes up closer to date of flight).

That's a pretty fast itinerary - only about 3 days per city - and these are cities that can easily take weeks to see even just the major sites. But it would give you a 'taste'.

However, the $3000 is going to be a problem. That's only 2200€ so for 14 days that's only €157 - if you are going to try to do a double room plus food plus admissions that will be very tight in those cities. And that's assuming you mean you aren't going to have to include the intra European flights and trains in that budget. In those cities I figure I need at least 100€ per night for a budget double room, most people on this site spend two or three times that. You could look into hostles. Food doesn't have to be expensive, there is some very good 'street' food - sandwiches in London, pizza in Italy, etc. And you can buy food at markets and have picnics in parks, etc. But that budget isn't going to allow many sit down meals. Check out the admission costs of the places you might want to visit, those are not cheap either, although wandering around those beautiful cities is free - but museums, sites like the colosseum in Rome, Tower of London - those kind of things are going to be in the $20 equivalent range.

bsdubois00

The $3000 is EACH so we would have 6,000 while there. I never thought of the flight from Venice to Paris this def looks like the smarter option so we will work with that.

While it seemed a little rushed we thought 3 days in each city would give us a good variety and taste to see different cultures. Maybe scratching Venice off the list may make things easier.

Thanks so far. Keep the input coming!

Kathie

Fewer destinations means more time in each place. I'd encourage you to scratch one city. You'll still feel like you don't have enough time, but you will get more than a glance at your cities. I'm recently back from 10 full days in Paris. It was a good amount of time, we got to do lots of things on my "must" list, spent enough time to know a bit about what we didn't have time for.

Sassafrass

It is rushed, but less than some people. However, I think staying an extra day in each place and taking a day trip of some sort gives more variety than just major cities, so I would cut one city, add time to others and see something different.

Of the four, I would cut London and keep Venice. It is just so beautiful and romantic. You could then add one day to each city and if you found yourself with time, could do a day trip at the last minute from any of them. These would give lovely, relaxing days away from the business of the city, but still filled with fantastic sight seeing.
Paris: Versailles among other choices
Rome: Ostia Antica or Orvieto, even Florence
Venice: Vicenza, Verona, Padua or the nearby islands of Burano, etc.

Do fly from Venice to Paris, don't back track to Rome.

margotheangel

I agree with the others about flying to Paris from Venice.

As for dropping a city, everyone has different preferences, so I'm sure others would disagree, but I love Venice and would probably drop London rather than Venice, given your itinerary.

nytraveler

IMHO you are giving all of these cities short shrift - but I think London is the worst. So - unless you are willing to give up Venice (which I would do - not matter how romantic) to move those days to London - then I would sly into Rome and home from Paris - so you get to see a little more of each city.

As it is you have 3 days (the bare minimum) in Rome and the same (IMHO 2 days too few) in Paris.

So - I would really consider each city - and what you want to see/do the most and pick 3. Don't misunderstand me, 4 is perfectly possible, but I think would be much less satisfying.

And your budget is perfectly adequate - not generous or upscale - but adequate for everything on a modest/moderate (if you're good bargain hunters) scale.

carolyn

If you are young and will return to Europe in the future, you might keep your itinerary, see how much time you would want to spend in the different places later on, and start planning your return visit(s).

PalenQ

First time I was in Paris three days were more than enough - I was ready to see something else in Europe - ditto to what carolyn says.

Sarastro

September is high season in Paris for hotels, I would book now.

BigRuss

Cities are not equal in size, attractions or anything else. London (8,000,000 residents) is twice the size of Paris (3+ million) or Rome (also 3+ million). Venice is a village in comparison to any of the others.

If you stay in Rome or London for > 3 nights, you'll have a good choice of rental properties to pick from instead of a hotel - which usually means more room and better amenities for the price of a moderate accommodation (120E or 90-100 quid per night).

Venice is the most expensive place on your list. Consider that when accounting for your trip.

joanw

I, too, would drop London.
We spent 4 nights in Rome last Sept. in a really clean,cute, small apartment near Campo Fiori from VRBO.com #384199, priced from 110-130 Euros. It is a great location, near restaurants and piazzas. We walked almost everywhere, but it's near buses also. It is a 4 floor walk up, but we're in our 60's and had no problem.
In Venice, we also rented from True Venice.
By renting apartments, you can eat breakfast at home, and have snacks or wine and cheese as a meal to save some money. Also, check Homeaway for rentals. After seeing the price of hotels in Rome and Venice, I love having the room and convenience of an apartment. Good luck. Joan

kybourbon

>>>Rome: Ostia Antica or Orvieto, even Florence<<<

If you drop a location (I would drop London), I wouldn't day trip to Florence. If you wanted to see Florence, I would do it on the way to Venice. Take an early train from Rome to Florence, store your luggage at the station, see some Florence sites (the historic center is very compact - about 30 minute walk side-to-side), have lunch and take a late afternoon/early evening train to Venice.

Sassafrass

Kybourbon is right. I forgot about luggage storage at the station in Florence. If you did want to stop there, that is much better than a day trip. I think people doing it as a day trip were not going on to Venice.