Since my last discussion post, my husband and I have now decided to plan our own 17-day trip to Europe, instead of taking a guided tour! Can anyone tell me if this looks like a doable itinerary in 17 days? We are planning to go in April 2016. Of course, we will research flight prices at that time to see if it's cheaper to do this itinerary in reverse (aka fly into Rome, instead of London).

Here's our itinerary so far:
Fly into London (stay 2 nights)
Head to Paris (stay 3 nights)
Then Venice (stay 3 nights)
Florence (stay 3 nights)
Last stop is Rome (stay 3 nights, then fly home from Rome)

Oh, I should also mention too that this is our first time ever visiting Europe! (Not sure if I can edit posts after I submit them).

A little too much moving around for me. I would cut it down to four cities. Keep in mind you won't have as much time as you think in each city because you will waste a lot of time traveling and especially checking into and out of hotels, etc.

have you worked out how many nights you have? you say that you have 17 days but i can only count 14 nights.

I agree that you are spreading yourselves a bit thin, especially in London, which if it is your arrival city, you will need more than 2 nights to get over the jet lag, and also to do justice to one of the greatest cities in the world. you would never have time to see it all, not even if you stayed there the whole 17 days [the same applies to all your other destinations, actually] but you certainly won't do more than scratch half the surface in 2 days.

It can be useful to set out your itinerary like this, taking account of travel time, in order to see who much time you're going to have in each place:

Day 1 - arrive at ?9am in London. Check in by 12 noon. lunch and walk around central London ? Westminster?
Day 2 - London. e.g. the Tower on London, St Paul's and ?
Day 3 - London e.g. the British Museum, the V&A....
Day 4 - take Eurostar to Paris. Arrive 12 noon. take metro/RER to hotel. check in by 3pm.

etc etc, You get the idea.

Happy planning!

Way WAY too much. You will have one jet lagged day in London, Maybe 2.5 days in Paris. 2 days in Venice. 2.5 days in Florence. And 2.5 days in Rome.

Either do Italy - or - London, Paris, and one city in Italy.

I wouldn't do London unless I had at LEAST 5 nights there because the first day or two will be a jet lagged fog. (Same would go for just about any arrival city - add a day or 2 more than you think you need)

Well, I think it looks like a fun first trip - we visited London in a series of short stays, en route to/from other destinations. Our first trip to London was measured in hours, not days. We still remember laughing as we roared around seeing Big Ben, glimpsing Buckingham palace through the fence, and chatting with a guard at No 10 Downing Street. Zero time for museums but better some than none!

Pack light, be realistic about your expectations, and have a ball. Oh, and I trust you are young, so you will have energy on your side.

Good for you for planning your own trip!

Two nights in London is just one full day. So you have one day in London, 2 each in Paris, Venice, Florence and Rome. You will spend too little time exploring these wonderful places and too much of your time getting from place to place. For 17 days, I think a maximum of four cities, and you'd be happier with three.

This is a usual first-timer's error, trying to do too much. I know, there are so many wonderful places to see! But do give yourself time to see these places.

Like annhig, I find a day by day itinerary helpful to understand my trip. If it is too early for you to be as specific example showing sights each day, try one this way to decide if you are traveling at the rate you hope. Here your itinerary:

Day 1: arrive London
Day 2: London
Day 3: travel to Paris
Day 4: Paris
Day 5: Paris
Day 6: travel to Venice
Day 7: Venice
Day 8: Venice
Day 9: travel to Florence
Day 10: Florence
Day 11: Florence
Day 12: travel to Rome
Day 13: Rome
Day 14: Rome
Day 15: fly home

For me, the two days in London seems like a waste of time—not enough time. Chances are you will be tired and jet lagged on Day 1 and perhaps Day 2. I'd drop London and add one day to Paris and one day to Rome. Then I think you have a fast-paced but enjoyable first trip.

Day 1: arrive Paris
Day 2: Paris
Day 3: Paris
Day 4: Paris
Day 5: travel to Venice
Day 6: Venice
Day 7: Venice
Day 8: travel to Florence
Day 9: Florence
Day 10: Florence
Day 11: travel to Rome
Day 12: Rome
Day 13: Rome
Day 14: Rome
Day 15: fly home

I like Ellenem's itinerary.

You have picked wonderful places to wish to visit but I think it will be best to save some for your second trip. Which places are your top priorities?

I agree that you have too many cities planned. If this were my trip, I'd cut it down to no more than 3 cities and be sure to plan for the days you'll be jet-lagged and for travel between cities and check-in/check-out.

Assume you'll be back.

Say it again .... way too many places for such a short time. You could spend the entire time in London OR Paris OR Rome and still not see everything each of those cities has to offer.

If you try to go to all these places, you will come home with no knowledge or enjoyment of any of them. It will just be a big blur, with lots of stress of chasing down trains and planes.

If I were you, I would go to the library and look at guide books for two or three of the cities you are interested in. Read how many sights there are to see in each of those cities, you will be amazed - and then choose one or two ... and plan a few nearby destinations.

If you were to choose Rome, for example, you could stay in an apartment there (easily found on VRBO, HomeAway, FlipKey, etc) for a week, then head north to Florence for a few hotel days, then finish up in Venice and fly home from there.

Or you could choose to fly into London, and stay in an apartment there for a week, then take the tunnel to Paris and stay there for a week or ten days and fly home from there.

Trust me, you will not run out of things to do in any of the larger cities you have chosen - and the next time you come back, you can visit the next place you want to see! And on and on ... because that's what visiting Europe will do to you - hook you for more trips!

Thanks for all the responses! I listed 14 nights on my itinerary because I figured there would be one night to travel from US to Europe...and one night to travel home. So that would equal 16 nights total (17 days).

Our priority is Italy, then Paris, then London. So, we'd consider dropping London if anything. Would everyone agree that London is the one to drop from our list? Hard to choose, of course, since London is also fascinating!

I'm reading Rick Steve's Guide to Italy right now Once I finish it, I'll be reading his guide on France.

Everyone has their favorites but I agree you follow your instincts and drop London. Especially as a first trip to Europe there is just something exciting about visiting a country with a different language! Our first trip to Europe was to Italy and it was wonderful introduction. Second (and third) trips were to Paris and then ultimately we got a chance to work in London for 6 years so I do love London but nothing ever beat those first experiences in Italy and France. My personal experience on that first trip was that Venice and Siena were magical, Florence was overrun with Vespa's but had fantastic food, and Rome was just insane but awesome... Happy planning!

If London is the place that call to you least, then drop it. Dropping just one city will make a vast difference in your experience.

You will have future trips to Europe, you can see other places next trip.

London deserves at the very least a week. Yes, you should drop it, and then plan to visit another time.

Like NorCal, my first trip to Europe was Rome. It's a magical place to visit, especially if it's your first trip abroad. We rented an apartment and stayed two weeks (with a two-day trip to Florence in the middle). It's like walking through a huge open-air museum, just amazing. The ancient history, the architecture, the people, the FOOD ... bella!

<<I listed 14 nights on my itinerary because I figured there would be one night to travel from US to Europe...and one night to travel home. So that would equal 16 nights total (17 days).>>

You don't quite understand time zones. Flights leave Europe to the US in the morning, afternoon, or early evening and on a time basis get there shortly after take off. Have you ever wondered why the flight from NYC to LA is like 3.5 hours and the reverse is 8 even though the reverse flight is faster? Time zones. You'll leave Europe and not fly overnight to the US. This likely gives you an extra night somewhere.

There is no way to do London (the largest of your destinations) in the rest of your trip based on your priorities. Pure waste of time and complicates matters because the UK has its own currency so fiddling about with pounds for two days is an unnecessary hassle.

Careful - it's Rick Steves. Once typed in his name as a singular (Steve) and got redirected to a website I did not want to land on.

16 nights doesn't = 17 days 'on the ground' in Europe.

What you laid out is 15 nights (1 on the flight over and 14 in Europe) and approx. 12.5 useable days