35 Days?
 

Lisbon, Madrid, Paris, Brussels, Amsterdam, Berlin, Warsaw, Prague, Vienna, Bratislava, Budapest, Bucharest, Istanbul, Sofia, Thessaloniki, Skopje, (Prishtina?), Belgrade, Zagreb, Ljubljana, Venice, Geneva. What are your thoughts.

Not super intended on seing all the sights or taking all the culture in. This trip is more for me to do the feat of seeing most of continental Europe in a little over a month. Please don't respond with harsh comments about how absurd this is, I know what it is and what I'm getting myself into, I'm more interested to here the experience from others who have underwent such a grand EuroTrip.

22 cities . . . Not at all realistic.

Sure, you don't don't want to see 'all' the sites. But in 35 days - after subtracting all the travel time (at least 10 full days in transit), you will have barely one day in each city.

Why even bother?

(Note: I did not say it is absurd. Even though it kinda is)

OP said not to bother, but you just had to bother.....

You seem to have laid this out as a plausible directional itinerary, so can we presume you intend to do all travel by rail or bus? Madrid - Paris stands out as a long haul potentially worth flying.

In looking at the route, I see Warsaw, and then Geneva as outliers. If you dropped Geneva, and went from Vienna (Bratislava can be done as a day-trip as it is 50 minutes away) to Venice ( consider flying), before continuing back to Ljubljana, Zagreb, Belgrade, Skopje, Thessaloniki, Sofia, Istanbul, my very rough calculations suggest you might save 10 hours of travel time (road/rail).

You could also go from Budapest to Belgrade, continue the routing to Istanbul and ten fly to Zagreb and continue to Ljubljana, and Venice.

There are countless options here since you don't really have a commitment to any one place. If there are some of these that are there because they were on the way and others that are must haves, can you present it that way.

I think you would be well-suited to doing this as a series of tours to make this maximally feasible. Tours have the routine down pat to be able to cover a lot of ground quickly and you will still see something of each country ... a taster, if you like. Otherwise logistically it will be difficult to do your plan in 35 days. I don't think the idea of ticking boxes on your bucket list is absurd, but I do think if you want to do it, you need some help.

Lavandula

What are your thoughts.>

If going to half of those places by train in that quick a time look strongly at a Global Eurailpass for a month or a 10- or 15-day Eurail Flexipass. For lots on European trains and passes check www.ricksteves.com; www.budgeteuropetravel.com and www.seat61.com.

Yes, I intend on spending a large portion of the budget on a 2 month continuous global pass from Eurail in case anyone was wondering.

I hope you really, really like trains.

I would move quickly to start - perhaps Amsterdam, Brussels, Paris, Geneva in four days. Slow down a bit and then knock off another four in four days.

I know I would be “banking” a bit of time early on so I could a) slow down a touch towards the end, and b) get to some of the outliers, probably Madrid and Lisbon.

If you are American you can cross off Istanbul.

"I'm more interested to here [sic] the experience from others who have underwent [sic] such a grand EuroTrip."

I once traveled from Scotland to Saigon, with all forward travel by train, and with some detours, traveling through England, France, Spain, Portugal, (Spain), Italy, Slovenia, Croatia, Hungary, Austria, the Czech Republic, Poland, Lithuania, Russia, Mongolia and China. 17,000 miles not counting detours. But I took seven months to do it, and thought I was moving rather fast even so.

You couldn't pay me to do the trip you outline, but it's your trip. Not sure what else you want to hear.

Okay, back when I was a young Sue, I did:
London - 2
Paris - 3
Lyon - 1
Barcelona - 3
Nice - 2
Florence - 3
Rome - 3
Venice - 2
Vienna - 2
Salzburg - 1
Munich - 1
Innsbruck - 1
Lauterbrunnen, Switz - 2
Heidelberg - 1
Cologne - 1
Amsterdam - 3
near the channel ferry (yup it was a long time ago) - 1
London - 3

total 35 nights plus the plane over, 17 places (one, London, was repeated.)
I was young, energetic, and went for the journey.

Two points: I visited fewer places than you have listed, in the same amount of time. However, I looped back to London, I didn't consider doing an open-jaw flight, which you likely should do.

b) My places spanned a smaller section of real estate than the places you have listed. (No Greece, which would involve a ferry or a flight. No Turkey, which may be off your list anyway.)

Okay a third point. In my day, it wasn't so hard to just hop on a train. These days, reservations for many trains are required, even if one has a multi country pass.

And a fourth point. You have some outliers, as Aramis said, and you have some 'orphan' cities (I can't see how you are going to connect Venice to the rest easily.)

And a fifth: you are young and energetic, but train crews go on strike from time to time, or there are other delays. Even if you just go for the journey, expect snafus.

Hi I agree with the comment above that if you are from US skip Turkey. Things are too "IFFY" right now there. Check State Dept info. Sue

“IFFY”? Turkey is no longer issuing visas to US citizens, so it’s not iffy, it’s out of the question.

If you were a turkey, would you issue a visa? It IS Thanksgiving, you know. Or it will be in a month or so, take your pick...

And Cameroncassidy, for a first time visitor, you show great aplomb. (I have always wanted a plomb.)

Eurail pass is the most expensive way to travel. Add on the cost of reservation fee, and you must book a seat and you maybe better of booking each trip. That's a lot of work for you to do but you may save enough to add a cheap flight for one of the places you want to visit. Good luck and I hope you are young and energetic.

"Ljubljana, Venice"

Can easily add Trieste

Eurail pass is the most expensive way to travel. Add on the cost of reservation fee, and you must book a seat and you maybe better of booking each trip>

Depends on various factors - how many longer train trips OP takes and whether or not they want to book in stone discounted tickets - typically non-changeble non-refundable - or have flexibility to chose which trains once there - nice in case one wants to alter their itinerary for some reason and if OP is under 29 there is a cheaper Youthpass- if over 28 Eurails are first class in most cases and that has its advantages too.

but do the maths and yeh add on $5-12 or so for trains in France, Spain and Italy and OP can not really do all those cities.

Just staying at home and beating yourself over the head with a chain would be much the same effect , be much cheaper, and save people bothering to write advice....

I don't really get what we are supposed to say if we are not allowed to say that this is not realistic/enjoyable/fun/worth it.

Your plan is perfect, have a nice trip.

I guess its what you want to read.

As I read it, the OP wants advice only from others who have "underwent" such a grand "euro" trip.

Sorry, OP, they are actually probably more appropriate than you realize, but your choice of words makes me smile.

@ Sassafrass: ;-)

I don't think the OP is coming back, guys. That was their first post on the forum as 'cameroncassidy' but likely not their first troll.

Fun thought experiment, though.

Wow, I really am not impressed with the amount of unnecessary rudeness and disrespect here. I was not trolling, I have already traveled the majority of these countries and I am fully aware of the rigor and extensive effort and energy this trip contains. However, I did by no means in the question ask for such advice as received by many on here. You know who you are. I figured, have a few nights in each city as now the trip has turned into a 40 day trip. I am very experienced with European and train travel and I do not respect the amount of people on here being so hateful towards such an adventure. Maybe this trip is not for you but for someone who has already had a taste of the majority of these cities and wanted to take my adventurous and eager wife along the ride for a whirlwind of a month or so, this trip was what I envisioned and what I wanted to embark on. For anyone that disproves this or condemns it for its insanity, you can take your clos-mindedness and shove it, for this trip isn't typical nor common but it is for the traveler like myself and my wife who are willing to do something crazy. Have a wonderful day.

>> I do not respect the amount of people on here being so hateful towards such an adventure.<<

Who was 'hateful'? No one called you close minded, nor advised you to 'shove' it. The only overly rude person was . . . <i>you.

The hate was very much implied and obvious to be frank, through all of the sarcasm and churlish comments submitted by several people on this thread. And yes, no one directly called me close-minded but yours was very much evident in your response.

"Not at all realistic."
"Barely have one day in each city"
"Why even bother?"

This trip is realistic. The travel time in total is 5.8 days- not ten- we would have plenty of cities to stay in for 2 or 3 nights in fact only 4 cities would be stayed in for one night/day (Prishtina, Bratislava etc..). And yes, bother because I give a damn, and this is something I want to do. If you can't respect that then your opinion is invalid to me.

My best wishes to your wife.

<through all of the sarcasm and churlish comments submitted by several people on this thread. >

This is what Fodor's Forums have become. New posters should just go elsewhere, this place isn't worth the bother.

"this place isn't worth the bother."

Then please leave.

"The travel time in total is 5.8 days."

A genuine question: How have you confirmed this? It seems awfully optimistic, to my mind at least.

Note that the time lost to travelling will not just be the transit time of the train/bus/plane. It will be the period from checking out of one hotel to checking in to the hotel in the next place. This will include the time it takes you to get from the hotel to the station/airport, wait to board, get off at your destination, get your bearings and get to your next hotel. You should also consider that if you leave a destination before 11am-noon or arrive at a destination after 4-5pm, that day will effectively be lost.

Even removing Istanbul (due to the current lack of visas, assuming you're an American) you're still left with 21 cities on your list.

Does your 40 days include travel days to get to and from Europe? Depending on where you're starting from, it generally takes roughly a full day each way.

For giggles I threw your cities into the magical interwebs to find transfer times. I used train times when reasonable, but used 5 flight times when the trains were insane. That gives you an actual travel time of around 81 hours. That's not including the time getting to/from the airport or train station or waiting at the airport ahead of time. Most of these are between 3-5 hours of actual travel time which can really take up a good chunk of your available daytime depending on the train times available.

With a single day for travel on each end, that gives you 38 days for 21 locations, and 81 hours of actual travel time. Even adding just an hour for getting to the train station/airport and through whatever security adds an additional 20 hours. You're looking at a trip with over 100 hours of just transit time.


If it's something that you want to do, then do it. You're unlikely to hear many responses from people who have done such a trip because few people would want to do a trip like that. I've pulled some fast paced trips before but that sounds like sheer hell to me. I think you and your wife need to sit down and discuss what the goal of the trip is. Do you two want to see these places or just check off a box that you've been there? If it's the second one, then sure this will accomplish that, but unfortunately not much more. If it's the first one, then I would strongly suggest dropping the list to about half of the cities. It will still be a quick paced trip and will take you two to many amazing places, but you'll actually have a chance to see more than the inside of a train.

I think the guy was pretty clear what the trip is about:

"This trip is more for me to do the feat of seeing most of continental Europe in a little over a month."

Well good for him. Some people climb mountains without ropes. Some people race cars. Some people spend 24/7 on travel web sites. Whatever.

Good luck to the OP. I think our chances of a trip report are approaching zero. As DT would say - sad!!

""This trip is more for me to do the feat of seeing most of continental Europe in a little over a month"

Even if he is just checking off countries on the basis of visiting one city, it still does a pretty poor job of covering Euope. Skips Ireland, the UK, Norway, Sweden, Finland, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania for starters and more in the east and south.

""This trip is more for me to do the feat of seeing most of continental Europe in a little over a month">

by all means then get a one-month Eurail Global Pass as you'll be on trains about every day and I've done that when young - especially overnight trains.

<"this place isn't worth the bother."

Then please leave.>

Thanks for proving my point! The moderators seem to have no interest in deleting and banning rude posters such as yourself, but make no mistake, you and your kind are ruining these boards, all the while imagining yourselves to be oh-so-clever.

Fortunately for me, I find myself caring less and less. The spam, the junk, the trolls, the rude Fodorgarchs...drip drip drip.

Nothing rude about my remark, it even included "please". If you don't like it here, why are you still sticking around? Because you enjoy annoying people, perhaps?

Yes, that's her only purpose here, and elsewhere. Has absolutely nothing, zero, to contribute to the Europe discussion, only shows up to be rude and annoying..

massimop's twin sister, only massimop occasionally has information, not NewbE, who has nothing.

<i> Wow, I really am not impressed with the amount of unnecessary rudeness and disrespect here. </i>

Few people would be impressed with rudeness.

I was provocative, which is a poor policy.

However, you come across as demanding and curt: your first post starts with an intimidating list of 22 different places, each of which could be a thread in themselves, and you finish with an <b> order </b> demanding: "what are your thoughts." Aside from being abrupt, and lacking in courtesy (a please would go a long way) you do not specify, thoughts on what?

Next time, start more slowly. Break up a project into bite size pieces. Avoid negativity along the lines of "don't give me this, don't give me that."

Encourage more responses by acknowledging those you get, even those you decide aren't useful. This is a volunteer board, with people who will be bound to make mistakes. Just as you want patience for your mistakes, so should you display patience with others. This does not include implying that your respondents were being impertinent or nosey "in case you were wondering."

When you assume the worst of people, it can be a self fulfilling prophecy.

Next time, start more slowly.

Please.