Europe by Train?
 

I am planning a vacation in Europe (1st time) with my husband. I have a friend who lives in La Spezia, Italy, so Italy is a must. I'd like to visit around Lake Como, Milan, Florence and Rome. However, I figure since I'm traveling such a long way, I might as well see as much as possible. Would it be a costly proposition to travel by train starting London, Paris and then to Italy on an independent basis (flying back to US from somewhere in Italy)? Could I do all this on a budget of about $4000 for two? Or am I better off forgetting about London and Paris this time and go straight to Italy? Time would not be an issue.

The Thomas Cook European Timetable for January showed the basic second class single fare from Paris to Rome as 128 US dollars. A ticket London, Dover, Calais, Paris, bought at Charing Cross station, costs 60 US dollars, and a berth on a three berth sleeper from Paris to Milan 45 dollars. Then you add forty dollars for seat reservations and supplements in France and Italy, and forty for the kink in your route to take you to Milan and Lake Como.<BR><BR>I hear that travel agents in north Ametica charge a twenty percent commission. So you might try first phoning in English office hours for an estimate to Trainseurope Ltd, ++44 1354 660 222, or to Network Leisure Travel at Cannon Street station on ++44 20 7904 0540.<BR><BR>London costs about a third as much again as Paris or the cities of Italy.<BR><BR>Please write if I can help further. Welcome to Europe <BR><BR>Ben Haines, London<BR>

Linda,<BR><BR>Ben Haines is a "near-legendary" resource here on this forum, and as is his custom, his answers provide excellent detail on train travel.<BR><BR>But I think that your question is about much more than train travel. It's about how to make the most of your trip and four thousand dollars. And I suspect that given your goals in Italy, adding London or Paris or both will DIMINISH your enjoyment of your first trip to Europe, not add to it.<BR><BR>You've given us your budget constraints, but two (or three) other issues will help, in advising you with the decisions you want to make:<BR><BR>1. How many days would you like this trip to last - - or is the duration of this trip not really a constraint? For many travelers to europe, an extra day equates to extra cost (lost wages, childcare costs etc), but it isn't true for every one. Some couples can stay three nights traversing the continent more cheaply than another couple spends on a single night in one place. If time does not equal money for you, then it could impact itinerary decisions. For $4000 (a couple), few people could stretch a trip to Europe beyond 15 days (though some could); others might spend that on a 3-day weekend. And both might swear they got excellent bang for their buck. Which takes us to the next question:<BR><BR>2. What season will work best for you? and how much advance planning do you intend to do? If you HAVE to go in mid-July of THIS year, you might eat up two-thirds of the $4000 on airfare alone. But next February, you might be able to spend as little on $200 (per person) to fly across the Atlantic (maybe not to Italy though). There are not many experienced travelers on this forum who recommend the cheapest off-season travel (Nov 1 to Feb 28) for FIRST-time visitors to Europe (especially not Lake Como), but mid-to-late October amd Mar 15-May 31 (maybe even into June) could see your travel budget go 50-150% further.<BR><BR>3. Last of all, what are your expectations for "style" of travel? At the simplest level, this means basic questions like are you willing to give up a bathroom IN your room (you'll have one down the hall, and the door will lock) or the convenience of an elevator to save on hotel costs? will you stay in the home of your friend in La Spezia? but it can also apply to your willingness to make a lunch of fresh fruit bought at a farmer's market, instead of a $40 sit-down lunch. Walking your feet off (and maybe taking in all the more) in Rome, and never spending a penny on taxis.<BR><BR>You CAN eke out the money needed to do the train you ask about, and still stay within your $4000 budget. You can also fly to and from London much cheaper than taking the train. It's all about choices.<BR><BR>Write a short essay answer to my questions 1, 2 and 3, and you will get ons of useful advice from this forum.<BR><BR>And have a great first trip to Europe.<BR><BR>As well as dozens more after that, with any luck.<BR><BR>Best wishes,<BR><BR>Rex Bickers<BR>Westerville, Ohio<BR>www.rexbickers.italy.com<BR><BR>(the webpage listed above gives information on a trip to Italy this fall, put together by - - and still open to - - any and all visitors to this forum; it's totally non-profit and non-commercial).<BR><BR>

Thank you both for your very prompt replies. I have much time to plan as I don't think we'll be able to do it until at least spring of 2002. Preference to travel is either spring or fall of 2002, whichever holds hope of better weather. We would hope to stay at least two weeks and would not mind budget accomodations along as clean. We also do not need "sit-down" meals every day and picnicking would suit us fine. We want not to get caught up in all the rush of touring but take it easy while seeing the most important museums in Italy if at all possible. The Vatican would be important to us to see as well. Although I've always wanted to tour Europe by train, I am willing to narrow it down to touring within Italy for my lst trip if $4000 would be cutting it too close. Thanks for any further replies!

There is much wisdom in your considering Italy only. But Italy CAN pair with (one of) several other countries, and NOT add to your budget much. Look into some of the cheap intra-europe air carriers (RyanAir, EuropeByAir, Virgin-Express - - all of these are "dot-com") and you will find that you can add two-three days - - as a sort of "palate-cleansing" contrast without breaking your budget: Portugal, Spain, Austria (by land), France (south by land, Paris perhaps by air, via Brussels), Belgium, Germany or England.<BR><BR>To make the most of your $4000, one key will be to get your trans-atlantic air travel down to $600 (the couple) or less - - to do this you need to scout - - and be prepared to buy, possibly in early January - - though maybe as late as March - - to try to get May, rather than April or March (face it, March might be good spring weather and might not).<BR> <BR>I don't know where you're originating, but from many parts of the US, you CAN do this. Allow $400 for moving around transportation costs withIN Europe, less if you stay in a small "circle" (and withIN one country), more if you reach further out. That leaves $3000 for 14 days for lodging, meals and attractions (and shopping?). That's only $220 per day, or $250 for 12 days. Treat your self to at least 4 nights of $150 (double) or better - - in 2 of the 4 destinations you list. Then pick some places where you can "dollar-cost-average" your lodging cost down to say $60-80 per night so that you can eat nicely some of the time.<BR><BR>You will not have to travel like a pauper this way - - it won't be princely either (well maybe sprinkled here and there it can be). And you can have just as wonderful a trip as the couple who spend $6000 or $8000, EurailPass-ing all over the place, and not thinking as carefully about how they are using their travel budget.<BR>

There is a lot more to Europe than just Italy, so I think you are wise to attempt to do a bit more, on your first trip.<BR>Going back to your own original idea, I think I would delete London for this trip. as being in London is not cheap, and the train ride to Paris can also be expensive, unless you happen to coincide with a special offer.<BR>Weather wise I think Spring, May/early June is more reliable than Fall usually (although a lot of rain this Spring by all accounts).<BR>In you shoes I would fly into Paris. out of Rome. I would also buy a suitable rail pass - shop carefully here and decide whether you need a 14 day continuous, or a an 8 day in a month type pass. Europass will probably be the best. For the distances you will be covering I think a pass will give you a lot more flexibility as you can also use them on some lake steamers etc. and will probably be better value overall. Also saves a heck of a lot of line ups for tickets and language problems.<BR>I would plan 2/3 days in Paris, and then head by train for Switzerland, which leads you directly to Lake Como. Skip Milan, not worth the time, so Florence, La Spezia, and finally Rome.

Tony,<BR><BR>I have to respectfully disagree (the "old me" would have said "you're nuts") on the economics of buying a pass. The passes you propose will cost $500 to $750 (per couple) - - and unless one is in love with TRANSPORTATION, this is just too much to spend (out of a $4000 budget total), and seduces Linda and husband to TRAVEL more withIN Europe.<BR><BR>Better idea: travel LESS - - see where you are MORE.<BR><BR>I do NOT quarrel with you that they can and should see "more" than just Italy. They can do this much more cheaply with point-to-point fares - - and their "more" Europe might be the south of France, Salzburg, Brussels or even England - - all without incurring the HIGH cost of a pass, which is quite UNsuited to their needs for THIS trip.<BR>

Rex..<BR><BR>Your're entitled to your opinion - even when you are wrong.

This is an interesting question, and I think a close one. Let's take an itinerary something like what Tony suggested:<BR><BR>Paris - 3 nights<BR>Night train, Paris to Zurich - 1 night<BR>Lucerne - 1 night<BR>Como - 2 nights<BR>Florence - 2 nights<BR>La Spezia - 2 nights<BR>Rome - 3 nights<BR><BR>This totals 14 nights; add or subtract as you like. If you were to get a rail pass, I think the best one would be the Eurail Selectpass Saver, which is for two or more people traveling together in three adjacent countries (here, France, Switzerland, and Italy). The shortest one gives you five days of first-class travel in a two-month period for $280 each.<BR><BR>Your first travel day would be the night train, plus Zurich to Lucerne in the morning. (Night trains that leave after 7 p.m. only count as the following day). Day two would be your second day in Switzerland, traveling from Lucerne to Como. Day three, Como to Florence; day four, Florence to La Spezia; day five, La Spezia to Rome.<BR><BR>The point-to-point second-class fares for this would be as follows:<BR><BR>Paris-Zurich: 432 French Francs<BR>Zurich-Lucerne: 22 Swiss Francs<BR><BR>Lucerne-Como: Let's say you were to spend this day traveling in a roundabout way, taking in some of the more scenic train journeys through Switzerland. You could go Lucerne-Interlaken-Spiez-Montreux-Lausanne-Olten-Chiasso for 150 Swiss Francs. (I can't get a price for the five-minute journey across the border from Chiasso to Como, but it can't be much.) To go directly from Lucerne to Chiasso would be 62 Swiss Francs.<BR><BR>Como-Florence: 48,800 Lire<BR>Florence-La Spezia: 19,000 Lire<BR>La Spezia-Rome: 53,600 Lire<BR><BR>If we add all this up and convert it to US dollars, it comes to about $158 with the direct route from Lucerne to Chiasso, or $208 for the long route. Either way, it's a lot cheaper than the $280 pass. But it's second class instead of first (they don't sell this pass in second class), and it would be less convenient than having the pass. Also, as Tony suggested, the pass covers boat rides on Lake Lucerne, which could run you another $40 or so.<BR><BR>Again, I think it's a close call. In my opinion, the pass would be worth while if you're interested in spending a couple of days seeing a lot of the Swiss countryside; if not, probably not.

Jahoulih..<BR><BR>Assuming you wish to retain maximum flexibility, by not booking all your train tickets in advance, which in itself would cost you more anyway, then you have forgotten to add in the value of all your time spent in lines in various booking offices, which was the whole point of my opting for a pass in the first place. <BR>Say 4 hours in total at $30 per hour adds another $120 to the bill, plus a possible small charge for the necessary blood pressure pills.<BR>Joking aside the REAL benefits of passes, which a lot of people miss here, is the ability go when and where you want, and avoid all the hassles of booking tickets, where quite often the could'nt care less attitude of the booking clerks is enough to spoil your holiday in itself. I believe that this convenience alone is well worth any extra money paid, if any, which I doubt in the Paris to Rome scenario we are discussing.

&lt;&lt;Assuming you wish to retain maximum flexibility&gt;&gt; - - then get a rental car to be used throughout Italy for four-seven days - - but NOT in Florence or Rome. My point remains - - keep the TIME and MONEY spent on traveling around withIN Europe as low as possible, if staying within this particular budget is important.<BR>

We traveled by train. We flew into Nice, took the train to La Spezia, Italy. From there we took the train to Milan, then to Paris and the last stop was London. The cost was reasonable. I would recommend buying tickets in the host country--much cheaper.

Hi Linda,<BR><BR>I'm doing with my family in August what you want to do on your budget. This is how I managed I booked the fare with Continental/Virgin Atlantic when they ran a special you should watch out for Airline specials they are running them right now or call you travel agent for a consolidator price @ $600 per person to London, bought eurostar leisure roundtrip 1st class London to Paris @ $160.00 per person, purchased select saver pass from RailEurope any 3 adjoining countries @ $300.00 per person and booked my hotels directly by calling the hotels. <BR><BR>My schedule goes like this, <BR>USA-London<BR>London-Paris<BR>Paris-Rome<BR>Rome-Venice<BR>Venice-Milan<BR>Milan-Geneva<BR>Geneva-Paris<BR>Paris-London<BR>London-USA <BR><BR>As you can see the key was to book a few round-trips. I'm returning to London and Paris to do a little souvenier shopping it saves me from carrying a bunch of stuff around on the train, it also gives you the opportunity to do something in each country that you thought you didn't have time for. I hope this helps. <BR>

After reading the additional replies to my original post, I am still hooked on "more than Italy" but now am ruling out London as a starting point. What do you think of this itinerary considering my prior posts regarding budget: NY or Phila to Paris for 2 nights,to Switzerland through Bern and the Berner Oberland stopping for at least 2 nights, pass through Milan directly to La Spezia to stay with my friend for 2 nights, on to Florence for 3 nights and the Tuscany region 2 nights and finally, Rome for 3 nights, then back to US. Another possibility: arrive NY or Phila in Nice, France for 2 nights. Take train along coast of southern France into northern Italy, with a stop in Cinque Terre 2 nights. From there to my friend in La Spezia for 2 nights staying with her. Then to Florence for 3 nights and Tuscany region for 2 nights, and finally Rome for 3 nights, then home. Also, I went on a site called "railsaver" where it recommends type of rail pass according to criteria you set and information you fill in. Is that site accurate?

Either itinerary sounds very nice. The first would be more to my taste (I like cities and mountains, and don't care much for beaches), but the second would be cheaper. I checked the point-to-point fares and came up with $138 for second class for Paris-Interlaken-La Spezia-Florence-Siena-Rome, and only $53 for Nice-Manarola-La Spezia-Florence-Siena-Rome. In the latter case, I don't think even Tony Albury would advise getting rail passes; in the former case, you might want to consider it. The passes would be good for boat rides on Lakes Thun and Brienz and for a 25% discount on train rides into the mountains.<BR><BR>Another consideration is that it might be a little cheaper to fly to Paris than to Nice. I tried Travelocity and came up with $418 New York to Nice and $384 New York to Paris in March.<BR><BR>The point-to-point prices on Railsaver seem to be about 25% higher than what the railways' own websites say. I think this is due in part to the fact that the dollar is very strong at the moment; also, I have a feeling that the Railsaver site is picking quicker and more expensive trains when slightly slower and much cheaper options are available.

topping<BR>