Hi,
My husband and I are going to Europe in late April 2006 and I am interested in visiting the following places on our trip:

Rome
Florence
Venice
Zagreb
Vienna
Munich
Brussells
Paris

We are planning on spending three weeks in Europe and I would greatly appreciate some experienced opinion(s) on how long I should spend in each city. Also, I am debating whether to rent a car or rely on other transportation, such as trains. Can anyone advise? Thank you so much in advance!!

Pat

I would spend 4 days in each of the following==Rome, Paris, Venice. 1 day in Florence. 3 in Munich. 1/2 in Brussels. 2 in Vienna. 2 in Zagreb.

I'm not sure why you would put Brussels & Zagreb in there (?) Instead maybe add Amsterdam & Bratislava & perhaps Salzburg (?). Personally I would not undertake this as you will spend an enormous amount of time getting from place to place. Leaving out Brussels & Paris (as much as I love Paris) & Zagreb would make better use of your time. You could daytrip to Bratislava & Salzburg from Vienna & Munich. So about 4 days each w/the places I have taken off.

For train info i always suggest getting the free European Planning & Rail Guide (www.budgeteuropetravel.com) which tells you everything you want to know about European train travel - rail maps, dozens of possible passes detailed, and non-train stuff like packing tips, etc. It's really the best rail guide i've seen and it's free. You may also hit www.ricksteves.com for tips on both trains and other useful European travel tips.

If spending only two full days in each city, it leaves you 5 days to travel between the cities. Except for possibly Zagreb, each of these cities deserves two full days at a minimum. I think that you should cut down on your itinerary.

Hi C,

8 cities in 21 days is not a vacation - it is an expedition.

You lose 1/2 day each time you change locations.

Get train schedules and travel times at www.bahn.de

Look at a map at www.viamichelin.com.

I suggest that you narrow your focus to 3 or 4 cities.

8 cities in 3 weeks is way too many, in my opinion. I like 3-4 days per city and allow 1 day travel between.

Have you been to Europe before? I ask because every one of the overly ambitious itineraries posted on Fodor's lately (and there have been many) are from 1st time travelers to Europe.

I agree with the others. Its easy to get caught up in the fantasy of traveling around Europe and seeing all of these places in a short time. In reality, it takes longer to get from place to place than you realize, and each of these places deserve ample time. You won't really be "seeing" any of them if you try to do them in 1-2 days, and you will likely end up exhausted afterwards. I would pick 4 or 5 places to stay, which would give enough time to get to know the city and perhaps do a few daytrips from each.

Tracy

These 6 countries in 20 days type- itineraries are REALLY tiring, REALLY expensive, and often impossible.

A reasonable 3 week itinerary would look something like
4 days Rome
4 days Florence
3 or 4 days Venice
2 days Vienna
2 days Munich
and 5 days in Paris

But even that would be rushed.

Lots of people spend 3 weeks in Italy ever year or two and don't see everything. Same for all the other places you want to see.

You don't tell us what sorts of things you enjoy - but a first European visit entirely spent in major cities gets really tiring really fast.

depending on which places pull at you stronger - consider:
3 wks in Italy,
2 wks in Italy and about a week in Paris
3 wks split between Zagreb/Vienna/Munich/Bavaria.