Europe by car or train?
Jan 23rd, 2007, 08:29 PM
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Europe by car or train?
We are taking our 4 daughters(15,13,8,6) to Europe for the month of July. We will each have one suitcase. After looking at the pros and cons, I'm not sure which way to go...by renting a van, or by train. The countries are Germany, Austria, Italy and France. Any words of advice?
Jan 23rd, 2007, 11:02 PM
#2
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Driving, though enjoyable can be very tedious.Planning timing schedules and sticking to them would become difficult.You tend to take it easier & end up arriving late for the destinations.Each city/country has its own (sometimes vague)set of traffic rules.You may spend a lot of time asking for directions,distances,routes etc.Unexpected traffic jams,missed turns & hungry kids in the back seat could take the fun out of travel.
These are the CONS.
Now for the PROS of train travel.
Minus all the above.Relaxed,enjoyable & more time to spend on the actual holiday.
Strictly my opinion.
These are the CONS.
Now for the PROS of train travel.
Minus all the above.Relaxed,enjoyable & more time to spend on the actual holiday.
Strictly my opinion.
Jan 24th, 2007, 12:10 AM
#3
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 17,549
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm a big advocate of rail travel in Europe and you could just as easily say that there might be difficulties planning timings for train travel and sticking to those. There is also the issue of flexibility which a rental car will give you much more of. A decent GPS can solve many of the map and directions "issues."
However, there is the issue of cost for a car to include fuel, insurance, the possible need for certain road stickers, and, of course, the issue of parking and the inconveniences/costs of that. Add the possibility of a drop charge should you rent the vehicle in one country and want to drop it off in a different one.
The train will, as Harsha points out, allow everyone to sit back and enjoy the ride and the scenery; not force anyone to "be the navigator" or to "do (all!!!) the driving."
However, there is the issue of cost for a car to include fuel, insurance, the possible need for certain road stickers, and, of course, the issue of parking and the inconveniences/costs of that. Add the possibility of a drop charge should you rent the vehicle in one country and want to drop it off in a different one.
The train will, as Harsha points out, allow everyone to sit back and enjoy the ride and the scenery; not force anyone to "be the navigator" or to "do (all!!!) the driving."
Jan 24th, 2007, 01:34 AM
#5
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 19,881
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Trains between cities, cars for countryside.
The last things you want to do in most European cities are a) drive in them & b)park in them, so get a car for those days when you just want to wander from village to village
The last things you want to do in most European cities are a) drive in them & b)park in them, so get a car for those days when you just want to wander from village to village
Jan 24th, 2007, 01:35 AM
#6
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,003
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There are a number of pros and cons both ways. Off the top of my head I would think about the following issues.
To a large extent it depends on exactly where you want to go. I have nearly always driven in Europe but we love being out in the countryside. If you are intending to hit a lot of major cities a car can be a disaster. It can be terribly frustrating coping with the traffic, finding your hotel etc. in a large city, even smaller cities. A GPS would help with these issues though but regardless it can become very stressful on occasions which is probably not what you want. Certainly if you want to do something like go from Paris to Rome, just train it.
If you do want to meander around the countryside than a car is wonderful. You don't have to worry about how to get to the various tourist sites by bus or train, or if there is one that even goes there.
Also on the plus side for the car, with six people you may well find a van to be more economical than six lots of train fares and don't forget to check out the Peugot/Renault buy back schemes since you are going for a month. They can be very cost effective. You also need to consider if you are going to be stuck with a pricey one way fee if you go with a normal rental and don't intend to return the car to the country in which you orginally rented.
I love the freedom of a car and don't like to be tied down to having to leave at a certain time because that is when the train goes regardless of whether the time suits you or not. You don't have to factor in time to get to the station, getting there a bit earlier than necessary because you can't afford to miss the train, have you allowed enough time between connections, having to carry your luggage up and down stairs to various platforms. When you get to your destination because there is six of you you won't get away with just an ordinary taxi to get you to your hotel, you will need to find a van type one.
Six suitcases (I presume it's one each for the parents as well) is a lot of luggage. Finding somewhere to put that on a train could be hard, but could be just as hard trying to fit that into a car as well. There will be more room in a van than an ordinary car but you generally will have the luggage in sight as there is no boot to lock it away in which is not good for security.
As you can see both have pros and cons. You really need to consider exactly what type of trip you want and where you are intending to go. Car's suggestion that you do a combination of both may well be the way to go.
To a large extent it depends on exactly where you want to go. I have nearly always driven in Europe but we love being out in the countryside. If you are intending to hit a lot of major cities a car can be a disaster. It can be terribly frustrating coping with the traffic, finding your hotel etc. in a large city, even smaller cities. A GPS would help with these issues though but regardless it can become very stressful on occasions which is probably not what you want. Certainly if you want to do something like go from Paris to Rome, just train it.
If you do want to meander around the countryside than a car is wonderful. You don't have to worry about how to get to the various tourist sites by bus or train, or if there is one that even goes there.
Also on the plus side for the car, with six people you may well find a van to be more economical than six lots of train fares and don't forget to check out the Peugot/Renault buy back schemes since you are going for a month. They can be very cost effective. You also need to consider if you are going to be stuck with a pricey one way fee if you go with a normal rental and don't intend to return the car to the country in which you orginally rented.
I love the freedom of a car and don't like to be tied down to having to leave at a certain time because that is when the train goes regardless of whether the time suits you or not. You don't have to factor in time to get to the station, getting there a bit earlier than necessary because you can't afford to miss the train, have you allowed enough time between connections, having to carry your luggage up and down stairs to various platforms. When you get to your destination because there is six of you you won't get away with just an ordinary taxi to get you to your hotel, you will need to find a van type one.
Six suitcases (I presume it's one each for the parents as well) is a lot of luggage. Finding somewhere to put that on a train could be hard, but could be just as hard trying to fit that into a car as well. There will be more room in a van than an ordinary car but you generally will have the luggage in sight as there is no boot to lock it away in which is not good for security.
As you can see both have pros and cons. You really need to consider exactly what type of trip you want and where you are intending to go. Car's suggestion that you do a combination of both may well be the way to go.
Jan 24th, 2007, 01:55 AM
#7
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 157
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
These points have been well made. I add only that
many day trains run every two hours, so do not much constrain your travel times
cars are better for mountains and countryside (though these are possible by train, while trains are better for seeing cities, where driving is impossible
for journeys of 500 to 700 miles you save travel time and a hotel bill if you go in 2 or 3 berth sleepers, booked a couple of days ahead of travel.
You will find many train journeys described in man in seat 61. I have on disc a note on getting the best from night trains: please tell me if you would like a copy by e mail. The reference library of a city near you may have the Thomas Cook European Rail Timetable, with times of all expresses and many other trains. I can name you travel agents in the States, but in fact you can book with a credit card and speaking English, from any big station or any agent in Europe. Examples of overnight sleeper journeys are Cologne to Vienna, Vienna to Venice or Rome, Venice to Naples, and Florence to Paris.
Ben Haines, London
[email protected]
many day trains run every two hours, so do not much constrain your travel times
cars are better for mountains and countryside (though these are possible by train, while trains are better for seeing cities, where driving is impossible
for journeys of 500 to 700 miles you save travel time and a hotel bill if you go in 2 or 3 berth sleepers, booked a couple of days ahead of travel.
You will find many train journeys described in man in seat 61. I have on disc a note on getting the best from night trains: please tell me if you would like a copy by e mail. The reference library of a city near you may have the Thomas Cook European Rail Timetable, with times of all expresses and many other trains. I can name you travel agents in the States, but in fact you can book with a credit card and speaking English, from any big station or any agent in Europe. Examples of overnight sleeper journeys are Cologne to Vienna, Vienna to Venice or Rome, Venice to Naples, and Florence to Paris.
Ben Haines, London
[email protected]
Jan 24th, 2007, 04:28 AM
#8
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 74,699
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi D,
Without knowing your itinerary, we can only give you generalizations.
If you are visiting Berlin, Vienna, Rome and Paris the answer would be different from a visit to The Romantic Road, Salzkammergut, Tuscany and Provence.
Without knowing your itinerary, we can only give you generalizations.
If you are visiting Berlin, Vienna, Rome and Paris the answer would be different from a visit to The Romantic Road, Salzkammergut, Tuscany and Provence.
Jan 24th, 2007, 04:39 AM
#9
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 6,098
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ira has it right. It is not a black or white issue with only one correct answer. It depends on where you are going; your personalities; what you like to do on vacation; time of year; and a number of other factors.
We've had trips to Europe using train only; car only; and combination of the two. Each worked very, very well for us.
What towns, cities, sights, regions, and activities are musts for you? Do you enjoy driving on vacations at home? Do you like to camp, or are you into 5-star hotels, or something in between? Do majestic mountain vistas and bucolic rural valleys float your boat, or are you into the opera and big museums?
If you are on a train and it goes past a beautiful village in a lovely setting or a scenic mountain lake, are you going to wish you could stop for an hour or two to just poke around? If you make a wrong turn out in the boondocks because your navigator was asleep, or confused, or holding the map upside down are you going to erupt in rage and consider the day ruined, or will you see it as an adventure?
We've had trips to Europe using train only; car only; and combination of the two. Each worked very, very well for us.
What towns, cities, sights, regions, and activities are musts for you? Do you enjoy driving on vacations at home? Do you like to camp, or are you into 5-star hotels, or something in between? Do majestic mountain vistas and bucolic rural valleys float your boat, or are you into the opera and big museums?
If you are on a train and it goes past a beautiful village in a lovely setting or a scenic mountain lake, are you going to wish you could stop for an hour or two to just poke around? If you make a wrong turn out in the boondocks because your navigator was asleep, or confused, or holding the map upside down are you going to erupt in rage and consider the day ruined, or will you see it as an adventure?
Jan 24th, 2007, 05:00 AM
#10
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 313
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One thing to add is that you will be likely spending a lot of time in said minivan. I think it is fair to say the even the best behaved of siblings will not be the happiest traveling companions after a month of being seatbelted to their younger/older sister for hours at a time.
By rail there is more room to spread out and at the very least, both parents will be free to referee (it's not fair!, she wont stop touching me!, I have to go the bathroom, I'm thirsty, etc. etc. etc.....)
By rail there is more room to spread out and at the very least, both parents will be free to referee (it's not fair!, she wont stop touching me!, I have to go the bathroom, I'm thirsty, etc. etc. etc.....)
Jan 24th, 2007, 05:30 AM
#11
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 313
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Also, I forgot to add that I agree with the above posters that a combination usually works best, i.e. city to city = train; countryside = car.
We are mostly going via train, but will pick up a car for a few days to explore Burgundy.
We are mostly going via train, but will pick up a car for a few days to explore Burgundy.
Jan 24th, 2007, 06:05 AM
#12
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 19,000
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To amplify somewhat on what others have suggested:
Ride the train to your base city (BC).
Explore the BC by public transit, and the immediate region by train day trips.
Rent a car for a day when the above possibilities are exhausted. Eliminates the visible luggage/capacity issue.
Ride the train to your base city (BC).
Explore the BC by public transit, and the immediate region by train day trips.
Rent a car for a day when the above possibilities are exhausted. Eliminates the visible luggage/capacity issue.
Jan 24th, 2007, 06:19 AM
#13
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 2,364
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think harsha is being way too biased in response.
You cannot beat the flexibility of a car. Many, many, sights can be more easily and efiiciently (time saving) visited by using a car. Absolutely, you do not need one in any major European city, but I imagine that if you are going for a month that you will not be spending all of your time in major cities.
I am astounded when people state that you should not rent a car because they are trouble in the larger cities. Park it! Simply factor in the cost to your calculations. If you don't pick up your rental until you leave your starting city, and then drop it in the last one before you leave the country, you can take a train to the next countries major city and start the process over again. There are almost never any drop fees in Western European countries for between rental locations in the same country. A little planning and you get the best of both worlds and save money.
Another factor to consider is cost. What is a one month rail pass for 6 people? You should be able to rent a 7 seat manual van for under 100 Euros a day, provided you drop off in the same country you originate.
The flexibility a vehicle offers is phenomenal and it could provide you with opportunities see the things that "make" your vacation. You get to stop in the Alps wherever you want, picnic beside a river in a small village with no rail connection, etc.. If the cost is close, or not a factor for you, the
If you are at all adventurous in spirit, and you want to do mroe than visit the big city attractions easily accessible by public transportation, I would recommend you seriously consider the vehicle option.
You cannot beat the flexibility of a car. Many, many, sights can be more easily and efiiciently (time saving) visited by using a car. Absolutely, you do not need one in any major European city, but I imagine that if you are going for a month that you will not be spending all of your time in major cities.
I am astounded when people state that you should not rent a car because they are trouble in the larger cities. Park it! Simply factor in the cost to your calculations. If you don't pick up your rental until you leave your starting city, and then drop it in the last one before you leave the country, you can take a train to the next countries major city and start the process over again. There are almost never any drop fees in Western European countries for between rental locations in the same country. A little planning and you get the best of both worlds and save money.
Another factor to consider is cost. What is a one month rail pass for 6 people? You should be able to rent a 7 seat manual van for under 100 Euros a day, provided you drop off in the same country you originate.
The flexibility a vehicle offers is phenomenal and it could provide you with opportunities see the things that "make" your vacation. You get to stop in the Alps wherever you want, picnic beside a river in a small village with no rail connection, etc.. If the cost is close, or not a factor for you, the
If you are at all adventurous in spirit, and you want to do mroe than visit the big city attractions easily accessible by public transportation, I would recommend you seriously consider the vehicle option.
Jan 24th, 2007, 04:10 PM
#15
Original Poster
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, I'm still out here. I've read and re-read your responses...great advise and I appreciate all the angles. I think you're right, I need to give my exact itinerary and then get your car/train advise:
Start in Munich (3 days) then to Salzburg (3 days), then to Hallstatt (3 days), then Venice (3 days), then Cannes (two weeks w/ day trips from our villa rental).
What do you think?
Start in Munich (3 days) then to Salzburg (3 days), then to Hallstatt (3 days), then Venice (3 days), then Cannes (two weeks w/ day trips from our villa rental).
What do you think?
Jan 24th, 2007, 06:10 PM
#16
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 2,364
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here is my suggestion
No car in Munich - rent one when you are leaving and use it to drive to Salzburg and Halstatt and back. The Salzkammergut is exactly where you should have a vehicle.
Take the train to Venice - no car required or even of the slightest use in the area.
Take the train from Venice to just across the French border, or straight to Cannes or to wherever there is the best rail connection, and then pick up your second car for the duration of the trip.
Maximum flexibility exactly where you need it - no drop charges.
Perfect.
No car in Munich - rent one when you are leaving and use it to drive to Salzburg and Halstatt and back. The Salzkammergut is exactly where you should have a vehicle.
Take the train to Venice - no car required or even of the slightest use in the area.
Take the train from Venice to just across the French border, or straight to Cannes or to wherever there is the best rail connection, and then pick up your second car for the duration of the trip.
Maximum flexibility exactly where you need it - no drop charges.
Perfect.
Jan 25th, 2007, 10:32 AM
#19
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 57,890
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We do almost all road trips - with a large anchor city at either end of the trip. We pick up the car on leaving the first city and drop it on arriving at the last. In between we see countryside, smaller and larger towns and sometimes another large city. (If we do the latter we simply garage the car the days we're in Florence or Venice for example.)
We do this because:
We both enjoy driving and share it fairly equally
We both have a reasonably good sense of direction and know how to read maps
We like the freedom of getting up at 7 am or 10am - depending on mood and/or what we have done the night before - and not being tied to a timetable
We enjoy being able to cut short time - or add time - to any place as the mood hits us
We love the serendipity of seeing a cute town or church or ? from the road and just taking the time to go and explore it
We take trains only if we are doing one or two short day trips from a major city where we don;t have a car (Windsor or Ascot from London) or if just going from one major city to another (versus flying) - like from London to Paris.
We both find trying to travel any route more complicated than that by train simply too confining and frustrating.
We do this because:
We both enjoy driving and share it fairly equally
We both have a reasonably good sense of direction and know how to read maps
We like the freedom of getting up at 7 am or 10am - depending on mood and/or what we have done the night before - and not being tied to a timetable
We enjoy being able to cut short time - or add time - to any place as the mood hits us
We love the serendipity of seeing a cute town or church or ? from the road and just taking the time to go and explore it
We take trains only if we are doing one or two short day trips from a major city where we don;t have a car (Windsor or Ascot from London) or if just going from one major city to another (versus flying) - like from London to Paris.
We both find trying to travel any route more complicated than that by train simply too confining and frustrating.
Jan 25th, 2007, 10:48 AM
#20
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 961
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I ditto ira's answer, about cities vs. countryside. My husband and I almost always rent a car, and much prefer it that way,,,,but the train does have some advantages, I guess. However:
When arriving by train to a town or city you do have to walk to where you are staying, OR taxi (2 perhaps).
You are "undertaking" a wonderful trip and the girls are so lucky.
When we lived overseas in the mid 70's our children were ages 10,11,12..and we drove around Europe for 3 weeks. Wouldn't have had it any other way except by car.(daughter went to camp in Switz. so there was really just the two boys for most the time). This did not include London, Rome, Paris etc..these one does not need a car!
A van will be wonderful for you...you can stop when the girls get tired or fussy, can walk the streets in small towns and villages, shop a little, get ice cream, eat a sandwich, and have your van for driving right up to your hotel or B&B, go the local laundrymat (always a fun experience) and really get to know Europe and it's "backstreets"!
WEll, it boils down to which way you would be more comfortable. I can't imagine "herding" a family of 6 off and on trains,,,,but it might work and be fun. Perhaps a combination of transportation would be the best.
When arriving by train to a town or city you do have to walk to where you are staying, OR taxi (2 perhaps).
You are "undertaking" a wonderful trip and the girls are so lucky.
When we lived overseas in the mid 70's our children were ages 10,11,12..and we drove around Europe for 3 weeks. Wouldn't have had it any other way except by car.(daughter went to camp in Switz. so there was really just the two boys for most the time). This did not include London, Rome, Paris etc..these one does not need a car!
A van will be wonderful for you...you can stop when the girls get tired or fussy, can walk the streets in small towns and villages, shop a little, get ice cream, eat a sandwich, and have your van for driving right up to your hotel or B&B, go the local laundrymat (always a fun experience) and really get to know Europe and it's "backstreets"!
WEll, it boils down to which way you would be more comfortable. I can't imagine "herding" a family of 6 off and on trains,,,,but it might work and be fun. Perhaps a combination of transportation would be the best.
