|
Help! I am overwhelmed!
Hello! A friend and I are thinking about a trip to Europe in the summer. We were thinking about 2 weeks. One basic itinerary I saw on a website was Paris-Zurich-Venice-Florence-Rome. Though we would love to see more cities in other countries, we want to be able to experience the cities we visit and not feel too rushed.
I am not sure whether we should plan our own trip or take a tour. We are both 22 years old, and although we want to do plenty of sightseeing, we also want to have flexibility and leisure time to do our own thing. We would like to stay at least 2 nights in each of the cities if possible. We want to keep the trip inexpensive, but comfortable, meaning that we would like to have adequate accomodations that are within the heart of the city attractions, and would prefer private bathroom facilities if at all possible. We are not sure whether or not a tour would be best for us, or planning our own trip. If tours are significantly cheaper, we would consider. I would love to get whatever advice I can about planning a trip, taking a tour, finding cheap airfare (we are willing to fly into London if cheaper, and would prefer the open jaw flights), etc. I realize that we have picked rather expensive cities for a hopefully affordable European trip, but I have always wanted to see Italy (mom was born there!) and I want to visit someone I met in Paris (hope we can sleep on the floor!) Again, any and all experiences/tips/resources would be greatly appreciated. Thank you! |
at your age, I would say not to take a tour...I've taken a tour and liked it but it is usually people in their mid-30's and above.
Also, I would suggest that you cut back on the number of cities. I've done it both ways, being in a city for only 2 nights and staying longer in cities, and it is truly more enjoyable if you spend a bit longer in a city and really get to see the city as opposed to barely getting a grasp for it. I think 3 nights at the least for each city. |
I'd definitely recommend doing your own thing. Maybe it's just me but I can't abide being told what to do and when to do it. Don't forget, you might be out one night, find a fabulous bar, get chatting to some brilliant people and the last thing that you'll want to do is have to go home because you've got to be up and on a coach at 7am the next morning to go and visit yet another museum.
You have LOADS of time to investigate where to go and what to do - and you may even change your minds when you get somewhere. For example, Zurich? Not sure that you're going to want to stay there too long.... Hope you have fun! |
Definitely do it yourself! You may miss a few things and make some mistakes, but the freedom you will have will make up for those, and the triumphs will be all yours! MUCH more fun.
I've never seen 20-somethings happy on a tour unless it was specifically for younger travellers. Those can be great, though. Still, I'd advise planning it yourselves...and book afforeable hotels early, as in...now. I agree with the other posters about spending a little mire time in each place; although some travellers will tell you to spend the whole 2 weeks in one country, 5 cities in 2 weeks could be great. Be sure to spend at least 3 or 4 days in the first city since you'll be tired and overwhelmed at first. Check out a 2-week railpass for your age group - it could be the best and cheapest way for you to travel, and it could mean you can stop along the way (in a drop-dead gorgeous part of Switzerland, for instance, instead of Zurich). |
Ditto that at your age a tour is not the best choice - most tours are primarily (but not solely) seniors. And there are lots of 7am starts and drive-bys vs visits. (I know there are special youth tours - but from what I;ve read here they seem to be primarily booze and vomit bashes.)
Also agree that you should relax the pace a little. IMHO Paris and Rome should be at least 5 nights each if you really want to see anything. I know a lot of people do less than that - but you lose a full day every time you switch from city to city (check out, to ariport or train station, travel, find way to hotel, check in, figure out where you are and where everything else in town is) - so with you present itinerary you have lost 6 days in travel (including your arrival day). I would stick to 4 cities in that time - with perhaps a day trip from each. Also agree that Zurich is not exactly a hotbed of excitement. If you want mountains I suggest Lucerne - or even Interlaken - both of which are much cuter and more "Swiss" - and with easy day trips to the tops of local peaks. Also, you may want to check out the guides/web sites for the younger, shoestring type travelers: Lonely Planet guides etc. |
There are dozens of "threads" here on this forum on ths subject of "where to start" in planning a first trip to Europe, and the ... indeed... <i><b>overwhelming</b></i> excess of information and choices/decisions you need to process - - to make some basic selections. Often, I am good about combing through the archives and pointing you to some of those earlier threads - - perhaps someone else can/will do it for you this time.
In general, the best answers have this common theme - - you need to explain better (and often times, this means you need to sit down and think through yourselves; because truth is, maybe you really don't know yet) - - why is it that <i><b>you think</b></i> you want to go to Europe at all? What do you see when you close your eyes and think "I can't wait to get to Europe so that I can....."? Given the cities you initially listed, it probably has a lot to do with "classical" art, architecture, cuisine and "culture" of the 15th through 19th centuries - - though there is so, so much to like about all of Europe from the 5-20 centuries before that - - and the two centuries all of us have been living in, "of late". How <b><i>you</i></b> are connected to the Europe you so want to visit is also very, VERY important, in my opinion. Did you study French, Italian or German in school? Or history, art, fashion or architecture? Do you have family roots, from a generation ago? or even ten generations ago? Is <i><b>geography</b></i> important to you (Alps, the sea, rural settings)? This forum has a particular bias against advising tour group travel, even though (I think) well over 50% of "us" (regulars, "veterans") first went to Europe by way of tour group travel. I did, at age 15. And I have been back 23 times since, without a tour group. In general - - once you know what you are doing (and that is SO much what this forum is about) - - you can have a better trip, more cheaply, and most importantly, more focused on what is important to YOU, by traveling "on your own". Assuming that this trip will involve spending more than a week's salary (for a professional baseball player, for example, that might not be true) - - then you really do owe it to yourself, to get thee to yon public library or the biggest local bookstore near you - - and I'm serious here: spend 2-5 <i>hours</i> just browsing through which books to bring home, and 10-30 hours of <i>reading</i> to start to make some of the basic decisions on destinations. Then come back here - - read the "FAQ" here (see "HELP", in the upper lefthand corner) and how to post your next question(s) - - and enjoy some of the best travel advice the internet has to offer. You can and should immerse yourself in the planning and preparation for this trip so that it lasts not merely two weeks, but the entire six months - - in your heart and head - - from now until you get back, and fill you with anticipation for the <i>next</i> trip, for months after that! Best wishes, Rex |
Hi penguin,
> I have always wanted to see Italy (mom was born there!) and I want to visit someone I met in Paris ..< I suggest that you visit Italy and have the "someone" in Paris meet you in Florence. (See www.whichbudget.com for flights from Paris Orly to Pisa.) Two weeks is perfect for visiting the Big Three (Venice, Florence, Rome) on your own. See Helpful Information: Italy http://www.fodors.com/forums/threads...p;tid=34443340 for help with visiting Italy. ((I)) |
I went to Europe for the first time when I was 22. We saw 9 countries and lots of cities in 5 weeks. We didn't see anything very well. Based on that experience and that from over a dozen trips since, I sincerely recommend that you spend more than 2 days in the places you visit. Your current plans will be beyond rushed. If you want to see Paris and Italy, eliminate Switzerland and spend 5 days in Paris and 9 days seeing two of the three cities in Italy or, as Ira suggests, just visit Italy this time. And follow Rex's advice to think about why you want to go to Europe and then decide where you want to go. And, like other posters, I don't think you would enjoy a tour.
|
To expound a bit on the good advice you've gotten so far, whether or not to plan your own trip depends upon what sort of a trip you want and what sort of travellers you both are. There <i>are</i> tour cos. that specialize for younger people. I think it's Contiki that requires you must be under 35 to go. But it sounds to me like these tours are mostly about a lot of drinking and "fraternizin'" There are many threads here on tour vs. no tour. If you do a text search and put the words in the search box above you can read. I suspect from the way you wrote your question, you would probably prefer to do it on your own.
Next is the how many stops question. Just as this board is bias against tours, we are also bias against quick stops. You say 2 nights per city. For at least 2 of the cities you've chosen (Paris and Rome) most people would say 2 nights is just not enough. But as Rex points out, many of us took our first trip to Europe with a tour and probably with one that just skimmed each location. I think these 2 issues (tour and how many days/nights to stop) are related. While I don't subscribe to either, I think you can more afford to do 2 days in big cities when you're on a tour and they're going to take care of everything from showing you the highlights to transporting you around so you don't have to figure anything out yourselves. I've never been to Zurich and you don't say why you want to go there. I'd do the reading that's already been suggested but I'd also start checking airfares now. You say summer, but I suggest if you can go in June or September you'd be much better off both from an airfare pov and crowds etc. In addition to checking airlines own websites, some other places I've book marked from this board are http://airtravelcenter.com/onetrav.htm http://www.itasoftware.com/ http://www.mobissimo.com/travel/search_airfare.php You should also start a "fare watcher" on travelcity for the routes you're likely to travel. I am sympathetic to Ira's suggestion of doing the big 3 in Italy but I also love Paris and can relate that you'd want to go, esp. if you can manage free accomodation. |
..just to reiterate...I think you have 2 clear chices. 1. If you want to see many countries and many cites in 2 weeks (truly a snapshot) take a tour...It will just be a glimpse but may allow you to think about where to return in the future...OR do it by yourself and carefully limit yourself with each stop being at least 3 nights(or 2 as an absolute minimum..a lot better IMO to stay in one place a few days and take a one hour day trip than to shlep bags move hotels ect)..As others have said look at your interests and decide where and what.
|
In short, pay attention to Rex.
|
You've gotten good advice. I'd start by eliminating Zurich and probably Florence. Concentrate on an itinerary that will have you staying a minimum of three nights in once place.
|
Well said Rex !
My 2 cents, as a lousy typist: Average 3 nites per location Max of 4 hours travel time to next destination Spend half your time in big cities--half in small villages. |
Here's a thought...it is basically my first trip to Europe, which was the start of a lifelong love affair with France and Italy.
Fly into Paris and spend 3 nights. Take the overnight train from Paris to Venice and spend two more nights in Venice. Then take the train to Florence and spend 3 nights. Then I would rent a car and take my time getting from Florence to Rome by seeing some of the Tuscan countryside -- let's say two nights in Tuscany somewhere. That leaves you 4 nights in Rome (if you have a total of 14 nights to play with). The train from Paris to Venice is 12 hours. You may prefer to fly. When I took it, there was a day train and we enjoyed seeing the Alps. I didn't see a day train when I checked the Rail Europe web site a few minutes ago. Some folks might find that a frantic pace but I thought it was a great way to see Europe for the first time. Of course, I wanted to go back to all of those places and I have. I priced the open-jaw itinerary on Air France out of DC (I don't know where you're travelling from) -- in March it's $405 round-trip; in June it's $626. |
I have done a tour and also gone on my own. I agree that you should cut out a city or two if you want to go on your own. I think if you do go on your own and take it a little bit slower you will be able to enjoy the ambience of the cities your visit a lot more. When on the tour we were three nights in London, Paris, and Rome. We were on the go a lot. One advantage was we got a good "taste" of a lot of the sites and didn't have to wait in line for many of the attractions. However, we did not have a lot of time to "smell the roses" but it did clue me into places I wanted to return and I have been back to London and Paris on my own. I was a week in each and even THAT was not enough. Lots left to see and do. You just think you have all this time but it just whizzes by. It is so nice to have the freedom to decide your day but by the time you get up, have breakfast, get to where you're going, it's later than you think. All of a sudden you are starving and you look at your watch and it's already 2:00!!!! Good grief where did the time go!!!!! At least that's the way it was for me. Then of course there are always intriging things to see along the way and there should be time for just wandering down a street, sitting at a cafe, things like that. So just don't try to do too much because you really will end up overwhelmed and you want a chance to savor and enjoy what you are seeing. What ever you decide to do it certainly can't be bad...after all, you're going to Europe!!!!!!!
|
Just keep in mind that two nights in a city means you really have one day to see the city and then one day to travel. Do you really want to go to Europe and spend HALF your time getting places and only half your time left to actually enjoy or see places?
I agree that 3 nights in almost minimal to enjoy or begin to experience a city. Two weeks? Paris -- Venice -- Rome and a bit of day tripping out from those places, will be more than enough to overwhelm you. |
Keep in mind also that it's OK to see fewer places on each trip. You can choose to travel Europe in any style you see fit, of course. ;) But, since you're heading there at 22 you've got a lifetime to "see it all" so to speak. You can certainly choose to see a few places on this trip, then keep heading back for more in the future!
|
I think there is a basic choice that needs to be made.
On the one hand, there is a lot to be said for settling in and spending several days in each place. The overhead of moving from place to place is minimized, and you get to experience each place more fully. The other way is to pack light(er) and move around a lot, at the cost of somewhat more checking in and out and traveling. The obvious advantage to this approach is that you get to sample more places, and for a first trip that is certainly a desirable goal. As far as travel is concerned: I highly recommend doing as much of it in "down" time (evening or night) as possible, regardless of how long you spend in each place. On the day of travel, check out of your lodgings when you get up, check your baggage (at the train station if possible), and go out for a full day of sightseeing, wending your way back to the station in time to board a train that reaches your next destination in the 22:00-23:00 time frame. Check in, sack out, and arise refreshed to start the new day. This way, you get to relax at the <i>end</i> of a strenuous day instead of being travel-weary at the <i>beginning</i> of your time in each place. Shifting travel to the evening also nullifies the depletion of your sightseeeing time by more travel, because most sights are closed at that time. Since there's not a helluva lot of difference between <u>two</u> days in, say, Paris, and <u>three</u> days*, I would recommend the "sampler" approach for your first trip, not staying in one place more than a day or two. That will give you plenty of time to decide where you want to <i>return</i> to and experience in depth. That said, there's nothing to prevent you from saying "let's stay here tomorrow and take a day trip to [___]." There are two (sometimes conflicting) reasons for getting a rail pass: 1) it's cheaper than point-to-point tickets in a fixed-itinerary scenario, or 2) you plan to move around enough that it will <i>probably</i> save you money - but you don't care, and the convenience of being able to hop on a train any time is worth whatever the additional outlay may be. Many subway and commuter rail systems are covered by EurailPass, as are several boat services. I have taken trips without hotel reservations, and they worked out fine (with some minor exceptions). Every city has a tourist information bureau (often in the train station) having lodging directories, and they can usually secure a place for you by telephone. Whatever you decide, good luck and <i>bon voyage</i>! * You <u>could</u> spend the entire two weeks in the Louvre and still not see as much as you might want to. |
An organized tour or traveling independent is a decision only you can make, knowing your own comfort zone.
But of course I say do it yourself! Because I would never want to drag around Europe on a big with a bunch of strangers on a strick time schedule (is how I picture a tour, granted having never taken one). There's really nothing to planning *absolutely* required other than a valid passport, money, plane ticket (and I'll throw in hotel reservations because I think that makes it easier). Sure guidebooks, maps, etc. are good but you *could* figure this out as you go along. 2-star hotels will give you private double room with bath at a reasonable budget. I would definitely cut 1 or 2 cities from your list, with only 2 weeks travel time. |
Adding to what suze just said: an organized tour is the most restrictive. You <u>have</u> to leave when the bus does. A planned itinerary is somewhat less confining, but if you have pre-paid hotel accommodations, you still have to move on when you might not want to. Winging it is fun, but I would <u>not</u> recommend it unless both you and your friend are adventurous and resilient, and can take the unexpected in stride.
|
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:30 PM. |