suze

3 cities would be a lot better trip than trying to squeeze 5 in. What you list does not take into account (when you say "2 days", "3 days", etc.) is any time to move place to place. Some of those cities will take most of the day to change from one to the next. I would either cut Amsterdam at the start, or cut Florence/Rome at the end.

Personally I think Amsterdam, Paris, and Venice would make a lovely 2 week trip.

PalenQ

Amsterdam to Paris 5 hours, Paris to Rome 20 hours, Rome to Venice 5+ hours. These times would be longer by train.>

where you getting these train times from - some 1970s timetable? Paris to Rome is just 13 hours by day train vs 20 hours by car - car is much longer and if going straight thru much much more fatiguing.

iw818

Thanks for all your responses. We are still in the early stages of planning and the information you all gave us are very helpful.

The reason we tried to fit so many places is because we are not sure when we would be going back to Europe in the future. We did something similar in Asia a few years ago and were quite satisfied with that trip. We may eventually cut out one of the locations once we create an itinerary and realize how much time we really have to spend.

nytraveler

I would suggest yuo list your must sees in each place, check what days they are closed and what hours they are open, then see how long it will take you to visit you must sees. The louvre can't be done in an hour - not can Versailles. And when do you have time to spend an hour sitting in a cafe and watching whatever city go by - and get a feel for what it's really like.

Certainly you can rush through all of these cities - tours do it all the time - but what have you missed?

PalenQ

will only have about 2 weeks (15 days) total for this trip. We are thinking about Amsterdam(3-4 days) , Paris(3 days), Venice(2 days), Florence(2 days), and Rome(3-4 days) and we will be coming from the United States.>

I travel at this pace all the time and love it - and yes you may never get back to Europe, you never know - go for it - a little rushed but not all that much - I might cut a day out of Amsterdam and add it to Paris.

Most of the Americans that go to Europe go on tours and like nytraveler says they do even faster itineraries - much faster from the ones I've seen and they all seem to have a great time. At least you'll be on the train and not cooped up for the typically long bus rides group tours entail.

suze

<Most of the Americans that go to Europe go on tours>

No they don't. I don't know anyone who takes tours, everyone I know travels independently.

PalenQ

Well I've seen stats that I can't quote that says the majority of American tourists who go to Europe indeed do go on escorted trips and would never ever go on their own. Now I should not have said 'most' but 'many'.

suze

Well certainly not the "Americans" posting here on Fodor's. I'd guess "us" at about 90% traveling independently, 10% with organized tours.

adrienne

I normally plan my own trips but I've been on several tours and they have NOT been fast itineraries. Several nights (up to 5) in each location and reasonable departure times in the morning.

I don't think anyone can say what the "average American/most Americans" does or does not do.

PalenQ

adrienne - most of the large tour brochures I read have a really really fast-paced schedule that often shocks me - unfortunately I think these mass tours may have to beat the competition by offering more places, more countries - still having it seem 'if it's Tuesday it must be Berlgium' bent.

Not to say that even big tour groups may not offer snail-paced tours too and there are some tours that do go much slower. But I think typically most are fast paced.

suze

And your point?