HELP! First time to Europe!! 14 day itinerary
 

Hi! My friend and I will be traveling to Europe for two weeks in mid-July. We have these goal cities: London, Paris, Lisbon, Barcelona, Rome, and Venice.

Is this way too many cities? I would REALLY like to see them all! I'm not sure of the order in which we should do it also for maximum efficiency. Do you suggest taking the train to each one? If we had to cut one because it was too far out which would you say?
please any suggestions on a good order/past itinerary that hit these cities would be great. It will be my first time to Europe and I see so many itineraries but not with all these cities. we plan to fly into London after flying into Dublin from the US. and I guess we can fly out of wherever we are when the trip is over. or wherever is cheapest.

thanks for ANY help and advice!

6 major European cities in 14 days? NO.

Dump Lisbon and Barcelona and you might have a reasonable trip. You have to account for your travel time between places.

Trains are the way to go if all you want to see is cities. If you want to see the countryside, which you don't seem to have time for, other plans are necessary.

Get a map of Europe and study it to get a sense of what a reasonable itinerary might be.

Research open-jaw (multi-city) air tickets.

Don't be afraid to consult guidebooks and local websites to glean tons of information. You sound as though you are just winging it at this point, which is not a way to save money or make the best use of your time.

Though all rules are meant to be broken, when starting out, I think a good rule of thumb is to allot three days per city. So, yes you should pare down your list. Train tickets add to your budget as well, so you will actually get more bang for your buck with fewer stops.
At just a quick glance though, I'd say save Italy for later and do a loop. Compare cheap flights from Paris to Barcelona and there to Lisbon. If you are looking at Aer Lingus, I know they have great deals, but they often include a long layover in Dublin--great idea to take advantage of that.
Be sure to go check out some general guide book for European travel like Lonely Planet--it will be far more instructive than a bunch of rich old people like me telling you what to do, lol!

We have these goal cities: London, Paris, Lisbon, Barcelona, Rome, and Venice.>

Yes way way too much - figure a day of travel between each of those.

Workable:

Fly into London and take Eurostar train to Paris - take overnight train to Venice from Paris or fly and end in Rome and fly out of there. Barcelona and Lisbon are way off that itinerary.

London 4 nights
Paris 4 nights
Venice 2 nights
Rome 4 nights

You really have a day less in each as traveling between them takes much of day, relocating hotels and transportation, except with the overnight train to Venice *if you can sleep on overnight trains - most can some can't - there is always some noise from inside and outside the train. But get a private compartment and bring any food and drink aboard and chill!

Forget anything about railpasses - book your own tickets well in advance for nice discounted fares - www.seat61.com has loads on doing that yourselves online before leaving home and you just have to show up for your train. General info trains - www.ricksteves.com and BETS-European Rail Experts.

Paris for 4 nights followed by Venice for 2 nights nets you a mere 1 day in Venice - not worth it, especially if you're continuing on to Rome. Dump something else and limit yourself to 3 destinations. You have no idea how time flies when you're traveling in Europe, or how much time can be wasted in transit.

If they took the overnight train Paris to Venice you'd have two days. Even with one full day IMO just seeing Venice is awesome but yes even this itinerary I proposed is rather rushed.

This has all been super helpful! Now I'm thinking of following @palenQ's travel thread. and next summer going to Spain. I"m also considering saving Italy for next summer. If I saved Italy for next summer, would it be too ambitious to keep Lisbon and Barcelona?

THANK YOU ALL! Yes I do have more research to do! Just got done with finals so time for some research!

Yes 7 major cities (if you include your arrival in Dublin) in 5 different countries is "way too many" for only 14 days!!

You need to allow for the time it takes to move from place to place when you plan an itinerary (which PalQ's numbers don't include)... It takes most of a full day to go between Paris and Venice by train, for example, so either Paris is 3 not 4, or Venice is 1 not 2. See how that works?? :-)

Everyone prioritizes differently. For me I would keep Paris, Barcelona, Venice for sure, maybe add Rome. Skip London and Lisbon but only because to me those aren't of as much interest.

Do you have to backtrack all the way up to Dublin for your flight home?

Have you ever negotiated a night train with four kids, Pal?

I didn't think so.

St Cirq - This isn't the family with 4 kids and 2 adults, this is only two people together "my friend and I" on this thread.

OOppssss! Thanks, suze. But my general comments still apply, I think.

Oh believe me I agree with you 100%!

PalQ's itinerary is not realistic because you need to add in transportation time between the cities/countries to give an accurate picture. It is simply not accurate the way it is written, would not work like that since you can't magically beam yourself from one city to the next in zero time.

Yup! D'accord:)

we plan to fly into London after flying into Dublin from the US.

We really need to know if you are flying both IN and OUT of Dublin from the US. That makes a big difference if you have to get back north (say from Rome) for your flight home. Or if that's what you need to do, it might make sense to change the order of the cities IF you have to go back to Dublin that is.

Can you clarify about your plane tickets?

Agree with Suze and St Cirq. You do not have as much time as you think, especially if you cannot open jaw it to one destination and out from your last destination.

PalQ's itinerary is not realistic because you need to add in transportation time between the cities/countries to give an accurate picture. It is simply not accurate the way it is written, would not work like that since you can't magically beam yourself from one city to the next in zero time.>

Well look at my post and and I mention that there would be a day of travel between each leaving two full days in Venice (if take night train from Paris) and 3 full days each in Rome and Paris - that is workable to me:

London 3 nights
Paris 3 nights
Venice 2 nights
Rome 3 nights

full days - 4th day for transport to them - overnight train to Venice from Paris makes two full days there.

Workable for sure to me at least but I would also suggest say cutting off London and add nights to Paris, Venice and Rome/

Well sure PalQ... now that you changed your numbers from 4/4/2/4 to 3/3/2/3 :-) is more realistic. But still does not address that they need to be in Dublin at BOTH the beginning and end of the trip. Where's that accounted for in your plan?

(1) Arrive Dublin and sleep 1 night then fly to London the next morning
(3) London then train to Paris
(3) Paris then train or fly to Venice
(3) Venice
(3) left for Lisbon or Barcelona or Rome
(1) fly back to Dublin for your flight home
=
(14) days total

OK here's the details from pk (being a new poster they can't reply to this thread yet often enough to answer our questions)!

we plan to fly the cheapest route into Europe and flying into Dublin and connecting to London seemed like a good option. this isn't set in stone though and we are not bound to fly out of Dublin. I'll prefer to fly out of wherever we end. or wherever you all think is best. thank you so much for your help!!!! I really appreciate all the advice.

Knowing these details really frees up the planning, if Dublin isn't even necessarily in the mix.

pk - Since you don't seem interested in Dublin, I would continue researching airfares and try to get the best price you can flying into one city (that you actually want to see) and out of the last city (again choosing a place you actually want to be). Unless you are saving thousands of dollars, a cheap flight to where you don't want to go... isn't really worth it (ha-ha).

yes as of now we are just trying to fly into any of those cities that is cheapest and we heard from others to fly into Dublin and then fly into London. but we are by no means bound to this, especially if there is a reasonably priced flight into one of the other cities on our list. if we were to fly into a city, which city would you suggest? I plan to do some research into flights into Paris, London, etc and see which is cheapest. any advice on what would be the best city to flight into is appreciated! thank you ALL!

There is no one answer. But you're on the right track. You don't mention where you are coming from (what is your closest international airport to where you live) so we can't really help specifically without knowing that.

You just need to play around online and see which cities have good prices. Just use a general website like Expedia and try different cities, different airlines, different dates, different times.

Also remember it's not only about money, if you take flights with a bunch of stops, long layovers, whatever, probably isn't worth saving $50 bucks (for example). I look for the best flight times, the best airports, the best connections (least amount of them), along with a low price.

For me, from Seattle, London/Heathrow is usually my best bet (then a flight onward to Amsterdam or Geneva or whatever).

There is no one "best city" is what I'm trying to say :-)

Listen to suze and follow her advice. You do have to devote a bunch of time to playing around online and researching to get the best deals. For some of us, this is the joy of travel planning - for others, I suspect, it's a PITA. We live in France and can get fabulous deals to travel to other spots in Europe, but I spend HOURS looking up flights from Bergerac and Bordeaux and Toulouse to a gazillion places in Europe and North Africa. I suppose it all comes down to how much it means to you to save a few hundred dollars on airfare, but it does mean a lot to me. I feel like a "winner" when I can get to Marrakech for under USA$50. Or Milan for 19 euros.

Very true. It is a lot of researching. Luckily my friend is also looking into the best flights so I'm not alone. but I'm thinking overall to follow suze's travel plan unless a good flight comes my way and its better to fly into one of those cities :)

found a $1200 roundtrip from Paris from RDU. do you think this is a good option? my proposed itinerary modified from the great one Suze made:


(1) Paris then train or fly to Venice
(3) Venice
(3) left for Lisbon or Barcelona or Rome
(2) London?
3) back to Paris?

Thoughts? Thank you so much for your help!

I do not think the time you have allotted for London and Paris is sufficient. I would drop (3) or just do Paris, Venice and Rome. You would already be in Italy if you go to Venice and Rome is a very easy train ride.

There is a reason you don't see this itinerary. Everyone is trying to get you to see the reason. ;) You seem like a young person. You will be back. Just pick your top two or three cities and then keep the rest on the back burner for the next trip. You can't do it all in two weeks...

Don't discount the option to use discount airlines and possibly one-way fares.

Eg Fly OW RDU to Lisbon (or RT Dublin and then on to Lisbon via Ryanair). With a red-eye you can arrive in the morning. Three days Lisbon. Lisbon airport is very close to the city center and you can reach the airport by Metro or Uber in less than an hour (20 minutes with Uber) $20 or less

Lisbon to BCN (Vueling).. Three days Barcelona.

BCN to Paris (EasyJet or others) Three days Paris

Paris to London (train is only 2-3 hours and you wouldn't need to deal with the London airports). Three Days London

London to Dublin (Ryanair) connecting to your flight home.

That is 12 days sightseeing plus two travel days (assuming that the final day is lost entirely to travel) . I don't think I would add another city but you can get a taste of the above 4 cities in 14 days.

I assume you're young and have more energy than most Fodorites.

I am! that is a great itinerary! thank you very much!! will post if more questions arise!! if anyone else has other ideas/advice feel free to post or private message me! thank you ALL!

Found a great itinerary we are thinking of doing. Thoughts on this? we would fly into Barcelona:
day 1-3 barcelona
day 4 train Barcelona to Paris
day 5-8 Paris
day 8 to 9 - overnight train to Venice
day 9 and 10 - venice
day 11 - Venice + train to rome
day 12-14 - rome, then fly back to barcelona
fly back from Barcelona to home

Thoughts?? my friend got it from this itinerary: https://www.zigzagonearth.com/2-week...ain/#tab-con-8

I think its good but open to other opinions!

Flying into and out of Barcelona means that you have to back track, which is rarely a good option. It is usually better in terms of time and money to fly into one city and out of another (aka "open jaw").

For me, this trip would be unsatisfying and frustrating, as it would not give me enough time as I would want in any of these wonderful cities. But maybe it will work for you.

Note that you will likely "lose" a chunk of time in Barcelona to jet lag.

Hope that helps!

To earlier posts, yes, this itinerary where all the cities of Europe are visited with enough time in 2 weeks doesn't seem to exist! darn!

It is cheaper to fly home from Barcelona than from rome. Flying home from rome is very $$! but a flight from rome back to Barcelona is only $50! thats why I chose to backtrack

Open jaw flights ideally are preferred when possible. Unfortunately, for many the cost of flying in or out of certain airports, or open jaw possibilities, can be a lot more expensive, at least in "money." The individual traveler has to decide how to value their "time". I have backtracked numerous times, where an extra couple of hours of travel might save us $1,000 or more.

Beyond that, your newest itinerary is do-able. If the cost of flying between some of your destinations is not dramatically more than rail, I might consider that. It might give you more time in your various destinations. We do enjoy rail travel, though, and often meet interesting people and see a lot of countryside.