shveta86

Greetings to the wonderful people at Fodors!

Our family of 5 - Dad-in-law, Mom-in-law, Brother-in-law, Husband and me - planning a two week trip to Iceland + central Europe (maybe Paris / Rome / Venice / Switzerland)

So our plan is to go to Iceland for a week (to visit my parents) and then spend a week checking out the famous touristy sites.

Option I
1) Paris - 2 nights
2) Train / Fly to Venice - 1 night
3) Train / Fly to Rome - 3 nights
4) Train / Fly to Paris - 1 night
5) Fly to Iceland for a week

Option II
1) Paris - 3 nights
2) Train / Fly to Basel - 2 nights
(Need more suggestions here - Interlaken etc.??)

Just need to know.. Will such an itinerary work?? Are the number of days allotted to these cities enough? Do you guys have better suggestions for other places?

Looking forward to your replies

bluemeansgo

No way near enough. You'll spend most of your time travelling. Option 2 would be better.

Paris is a huge city. A lot of time will be spent just getting to a site or two per day. Sacre coeur, Notre Dame, Eiffel Tower, arc de triomphe are far apart for the big name sights. Versailles is a ( highly recommended) day trip. The Louvre is at least half a day.

Why not spend 3 days in Paris and take the TGV to Switzerland or London or Marseille or barcelona. Or if you must go further fly and chose one city like Rome that has direct connections to Reykjavik so you can minimize transfers.

What exactly do you want to see in Europe. Castles, history, art, food, culture, monuments, nature, wineries, beaches, boat tours...

nytraveler

I would do one week in Iceland with parents and one week in Paris. This will give you enough time (presumably 5 or 6 days) to actually get to see something and have time for a day trip (Versailles? Chartres? Giverney?).

You first itinerary is a nonsense - you will be spending half your time in travel - and you haven't accounted for your transit time from one city to anohter so you have less time than you think in every city.

And why fly back to Paris just to to go Iceland? Why not from Rome to Iceland.

Since you really have only 1 week free I would concentrate on learning enough about the cities to determine which one you really want to see and jut stay there.

StCirq

The first itinerary is unthinkable unless you're flying your own plane.

The second is marginally better, but not by much.

I would pick a week in Paris and a week in Iceland, or a week in Iceland and a week divided between Paris and Rome (but even that would be shortchanging both of them).

kraines

I agree with others, too much in too short of time. We spent 3 weeks our first time to Europe and did London, Paris, Rome, Florence, Venice, Strasburg and Vienna. By the time we left we were sick of it. Now I go and spend 3-4 weeks in one country. Much better!

bilboburgler

Not clear on when in the year this is. It makes most sense to have jut two stops, but take care if there is a local festival which may bump local prices.

scigirl

Oh Darling, No. No. No. No. You have a trip that will mostly lead to seeing a lot of airport waiting areas and taxis. And a lot of extra cost to get from one place to another with no chance of actually seeing anything. A waste of time, money, and energy.

Iceland is great - and with a week or so you can make a nice tour around KEF and see all sorts of things. So, that will be fine.

After that, pick one destination - yes, one, and see it. See it top to bottom (actually that isn't possible with the amount of time you have and only *one* destination). Enjoy it, take a walk, eat in a couple great restaurants, poke through markets, marvel. Do not try to cram an extra day in by train to AMS or Switzerland or whatever. All you will be left with is a story of the lousy sandwich you bought on the train and the ability to say "I"ve been there" without having actually seen anything.

My personal vote would be for Paris or Rome. Both can keep a traveler busy for many many weeks. Icelandic air will fly you there and back, via KEF, and is quite handy with routes.

shveta86

Thank you so much for the response!
I feel the same about cramming too much in very little time.

But to my husband, this trip feels like one of those 'once in a lifetime' trips where everyone is together and so he wants to cover as many places as possible. But now I guess he will be convinced!

Also, I've just seen direct flights to Iceland via Sweden, Norway, Germany, Netherlands etc. Closest to France and Italy was Frankfurt we felt. That's why we planned our return from Frankfurt.

I just checked.. Rome/Paris - Iceland is also possible and will be cheaper too! Thanks a ton!

Option I
1) Paris - 4 nights
2) Train / Fly to Venice - 2 night
3) Train / Fly to Rome - 3 nights
4) Train / Fly to Paris to fly to Iceland - 1 night

Can interchange Rome and Paris according to flight availability etc.

Option II
1) Paris - 4 nights
2) Train / Fly to Zurich - 3 nights
3) Train / Fly to Paris for Iceland - 1 night

We would prefer Option 1 though Option 2 seems more feasible?
Can we do something about Option 1?

bilboburgler

But, who wants to go to Zurich for 3 nights? I've been stuck there many a-time and have friends nearby but really Zurich!

Option 1 is really the only real option. Try not to do Paris twice, do take the train from Venice to Rome.

annhig

But to my husband, this trip feels like one of those 'once in a lifetime' trips where everyone is together and so he wants to cover as many places as possible. But now I guess he will be convinced! >>

it absolutely would be a once in a lifetime trip as neither of you would want to come back again, if you inflicted the first itinerary in yourselves. Europe isn't going anywhere any time soon, and by the sound of it, you're both pretty young.

If you just must fit in 2 places as well as Iceland, I suggest Italy - fly into Venice, stay 3 nights, get the train to Rome, stay 4. Try to fit Paris in as well and chances are you'll end up at best needing another holiday, and at worst in the divorce court. you won't run out of things to do in any of those places.

StCirq

3 nights in Zürich is 3 nights too many. Horrible place, IMO, and I usually like everything about traveling anywhere. Keep working on this. And I see no reason to go back to Paris just to scoot over to Iceland for one night. Do Iceland on the way over, for more than a night.

ellenem

I agree with StCirq. Why are you passing through Paris twice?

For the two options you propose, what about . . .

Option I
3) Fly to Rome - 4 nights
2) Train to Venice - 2 night
1) Fly to Paris - 4 nights
4) Fly to Iceland

Option II
1) Fly to Zurich - 4 nights
2) Paris - 4 nights
3) Fly to Iceland

ellenem

oops

Option I
1) Fly to Rome - 4 nights
2) Train to Venice - 2 night
3) Fly to Paris - 4 nights
4) Fly to Iceland

annhig

option 1 - too much time at airports, getting to airports and getting away from them.

option 2 - too much time in Zurich.

Kathie

Remember that 4 nights in a place gives you three full days to explore ; 1 night in a place is 0 days.

I think the best option is to choose two cities in addition to Iceland. But I wouldn't choose Zurich as one of them. What about Paris and Amsterdam?

shveta86

Thank you guys.. Looks like I really need to dig deep, read up and thennnn move to finalizing the itinerary..

Will come back for more questions..

shveta86

So I'm back..

This is what I've come up with after half a day's research..

25: Del - Paris (Fly)
26: Paris
27: Paris - Venice (Fly)
28: Venice
29: Venice - Rome (Train)
30: Rome
1: Rome
2: Rome - Paris (Fly)
2: Paris - Iceland (Fly)
9: Iceland - Paris (Fly)
10: Paris - Del (Fly)

So I know this still looks quite cramped.. But maybe slightly more do-able than my earlier plans? Haha..

Happily showed this to my husband who just had one thing to say, 'So we're not doing Switzerland'! Looks like he really wants to go.. I'm considering leaving for a train to Basel/Geneva from Paris on 27th June and return to Paris by flight/train on 2nd July to proceed to Iceland. Is it possible?

If it is possible, what are the places we should go to.. How should I route my plan such that we see worthy (all of them are surely) places in Switzerland and also can return to Paris without having to re-do stuff on the way back.

Looking forward to your comments..

MarthaT

Why would you go back to Paris to fly to Iceland? Your day on the 2nd is all traveling. I am sure Rome has flights to Iceland from there. And then why Paris again at the end? Why not all at one time?

bilboburgler

Ask what he wants to see in Switzerland, for me it would be the mountains, the food, maybe the mountain streams. Does he really want to see the cities?

It is a bit of a drive but why not have a day in The Dolomites from Venice. Just like Switzerland but the food is better and the prices lower

janisj

>>25: Del - Paris (Fly)
26: Paris
27: Paris - Venice (Fly)
28: Venice
29: Venice - Rome (Train)
30: Rome
1: Rome
2: Rome - Paris (Fly)
2: Paris - Iceland (Fly)
9: Iceland - Paris (Fly)
10: Paris - Del (Fly)<<

Not very good really

You will have one day in Paris at the beginning and half a day in Paris before flying to Iceland then next day.

Why not put all of Paris together?. But even two days in Paris is not very much. You are trying to squeeze a size 13 trip into a size five shoe. If Switzerland is a must, then Paris and Switzerland (but not Zurich IMO) then on to Iceland. If Switzerland is not a must, then Paris and Venice and/or Rome then on to Iceland.