yk: Great topic!

Oaktown traveller: Terrific response! If a good drink can make you so loquacious, then imbibe some more! :)

I'm kind of a newbie, altho being dubbed part of the Borg probably makes me an oldbie.

At this moment my take is that I don't know how much is too much for any particular poster. So, if the trip is anywhere within reason, I always try to look at it from the poster's point of view and go from there. After all, each poster is sole judge of what is too much or too little for himself/herself.

If someone wants to drive from San Diego to Eureka in one day and stop by nine different attractions - well, it's possible. After all, I once drove over 1000 miles east to west across the US in one day ( I was in a hurry to get home).

BUT, I always read with interest what others have to say on this board, especially those who say "too much!!!" and give wonderful, rational, and experienced reasons. It's all part of the fun of travel that there is a plethora of styles out there and each one as interesting as the last.

My personal style is to zoom along - I love to drive. Just the drive is enough for me. In Europe, zooming along has its disadvantages, because there are only so many old castles and paintings that one can take in one day. So, it's skip this or skip that, like driving right past Melk or Vienna to some quiet little spot that no one has heard of. But that's OK too - at least for me. I don't have a need to hit all the "big" ones.

So, generally, in response, I'd say, "It's possible, but not advisable", detail why, give a few alternatives and leave it at that. If the poster takes my advice, fine; if not, fine too. There's always another poster, another destination, another interesting thread to read. :)

Now, back to my glass of red wine ((d))

Thank you to all for your thoughts and comments. As I mentioned in my original post, there is no right/wrong answer to my question. Everybody has his/her own travel style.

I would say for the most part, I belong to the "quantity" group for now. I recently bought the book "1000 places to see before you die". It makes me realize how many different places I want to visit. Even though I am only in my early 30's, I figure that I have to visit 20 places every year for the next 50yrs in order to see it all! No, don't get me wrong, I am not traveling just to cross things off from the book, rather, the book opens up more ideas & places for me to travel to. So, maybe when I am 85, older and wiser, I will switch to a "quality" traveler.

Carmen, I so relate with your experience. I lived in Florence for a while a few moons ago. I left thinking that I would be back before too long. Have been to Europe a few times since then, but for various reasons never made it to Firenze.

Last year (and 20 years later), while in Rome and with little time to spare, decided that I had to go back if only for a couple of hours. Took an early morning train, spent an amazing 10 hours in Florence visiting with old friends and enjoying a few of my old haunts and got back to Rome in time for a dinner appointment. It was rushed, but a wonderful experience nevertheless.

So, while I agree with the ?more slowly, is better? camp most of the time, not all traveling can or should be done slowly. It all depends on the circumstances, and in many instances seeing just the surface is more than enough.

"... actually people on this board did suggest my hotel budget in Paris was too low for what I wanted. I considered the issue extensively, and decided they were right!"

Willtravel, I guess I didn't explain it very well. I was trying to point out that respondents to posts don't usually draw conclusions about what is too much (as opposed to too low) for a hotel budget without knowing, as you said, what the poster wanted. In this instance, they recognize that it would make no sense to say, 'you're spending way too much for hotels' without knowing something about the poster's specific goals, including their desired hotel category and season (and assuming, of course,that they aren't asking a question about whether the vendor of a given hotel is overcharging). Yet our views on time budgets are often more absolute, yet not necessarily with justification. Isn't it similarly a premature conclusion to say "you're trying to do too much" unless something about the person's overall travel goals are known? Clifton and Carmen make the excellent point that people often don't make it back. How often have we heard people who are shoppers say, "I wish I had bought it when I first saw it, instead of waiting for a better opportunity."

I love this post. Every time I read this board I think of the times I have taken whirlwind trips and how much fun
I had. I spent one day in Paris (What a waste!) with my father when I was 19 where we saw very little but I remember
almost every second of that day.
I remember the outdoor cafe where we had bread, cheese and wine. I remember laughing because we almost missed our train. Maybe we should have "saved" it for another trip and spent more time in Germany, but guess what? There hasn't been another trip to Paris; I've had kids and illnesses and different trips. But I had one glorious day in Paris and eventually I will return.

Sometimes when I've seen the "you're trying to go too many places" responses I've been tempted to post the itinerary of my 1976 EurailPass trip (not saying I'd already done it), ask for advice and see what responses I'd get. I imagine they'd start with "it's impossible", since it involved 85 trains in 30 days. These days I'm more likely to rent a car than take trains, but I still like to cover a lot of ground and seldom stay in the same place 2 nights in a row. If I tried staying in each place for a week like some people advise, I'd be bored silly.

Interesting thread. I was rather amused to see someone describe 6-8 countries in 6-7 weeks as "not a whirlwind trip". But its a personal thing. I tend toward the whirlwind myself, but that's only because the cost of getting to Europe makes it a once-in-a-lifetime treat for people from my part of the world. I've been lucky, I've been several times, but the pressure to justify the outlay still applies. But if things get too much and I have to drop something from my itinerary, I don't fret - I take the philosophical view that "what I did see was every bit as great as what I didn't see". It helps cope.

My personal opinion is that the transport and administration (like checking into a hotel, hanging around the train station, etc.) part of a trip is usually not that fun (or at least not as fun as the sightseeing part).

So if X% of your time is spent in transport and admin, that means you get fewer hours on the ground to sightsee, walk around, take tours, or whatever you like to do. The lower the value of X, the more time you actually get for the enjoyable parts. Thus, if you try to see 10 places in 10 days, you have much less time to actually see things than if you see 3 places in 10 days.

I have taken slower paced trips and "whirlwind" trips. When I take a fast paced trip, I spend more money to do things quickly; more taxis,etc. I also find that I don't spend less time sightseeing, I just have much longer days. I am also not much on food, I like simple healthy food so on a whirlwind trip I may eat a sandwich on a train while others are unwinding with a big meal at a fancy restaurant. It also depends on how fast paced your life is. At times when my life is busy, I like a slower itinerary. Right now, life is easy going and a fast paced trip gets my adrenaline going. To each his own.

85 trains in 30 days would not be an ideal vacation for me. And I will never be bored silly by spending a week in London, Paris, Rome or any of the other great European destinations. But I also feel that it is your vacation. Whatever gives you the most enjoyment - vacations are for having a great time and taking a break from the everyday routine.

I agree with Patrick - I don't go to Europe to rest. That is what work is for!!

Yes, my first trip through Europe was whirlwind, and I've regretted the waste of time and money ever since. I was expert at European transportation systems, and I had photos of me in front of the Eiffel Tower, me in front of Basilica San Marco, me in front of the Trevi Fountain, me in front of the statue of David, me in front of this and that.

And that was the sum total of my experience. I've gotten more out of the travel channel.

When I read this title about 3 hours ago, I thought I would make a few comments. Now after Scotch before dinner, wine during dinner and strawberry liqueur after dinner, I don't know if I should bother.

Well, I will.

As age takes its toll on our bodies, we realize that there are many things and places that still attract us. Though we had never taken guided tours until a few years ago, we decided that to see some of the things we wanted to see, it might be the only way.

A guided tour of France enabled us to see Carcasonne and Mont St. Michel in one visit to France. I know, you really have to be there after the tour buses have left say the experts. Do I regret not spending more time in either? Sure, but the brief visit was a lot better than never.

Many may make only a single or at most a few trips to Europe and to discourage what appears to be a rushed itinerary is wrong just because you have had the luxury of leisurely and frequent visits.

One size will never fit all when travelling. I think people need to be very realistic when planning, and consider how much time they have total, how much time they will spend on "productive" holiday time vs. "logistical/unproductive" holiday time. Unfortunately this only comes with travel experience...and so many novices underestimate the hassles and fatigue associated with airports these days! Personally, I hate packing and unpacking...I consider all time transfering to, waiting in airports and travelling on trains completely unproductive. So I minimize that. Trains may actually be enjoyable in Europe, and (other than packing and unpacking) this could even be fun. Most intercity driving--not fun...unless in a scenic area, where you need to allow time to take it slow.

And they often don't understand their own preferences in this regard until they have done a couple trips of different types.

I think what makes a successful and enjoyable trip is to be honest & match your travel pace to your personality. If you are the kind of person who does a dozen things before noon on Saturday, well then have at 5 cities in 5 days! You'll probably love it.

I am a sit on the sofa and read a library book for hours person, so my happiest travel involves only one or two destinations, with at least 5 days in any place I visit, lots of time for sitting in parks, going to local markets, drinking wine in sidewalk cafes.

I disagree, suze: I'm a total Type A personality at home and a total go-with-the-flow person on vacation. I take well-planned vacations if I'm going somewhere new, and no-plan vacations if I'm going somewhere I've been before and feel comfortable with, but I do take VACATIONS from my usual frenetic routines no matter where I'm going. I definitely do not transfer my regular lifestyle to my vacation lifestyle except in the odd case where I am going to a completely new and unknown vacation spot where I have to do a huge amount of planning in advance just because of all the unknowns - and even then I am laid back when I get there and ready to deal with the unexpected.

I recently took my daughter on a 5-day college visit trip to Northern California, for example. I think I put ten times more effort into planning that trip than I have ever put into visiting Europe. I felt I was a total Type-A plan-this-down-to-the-minute mother when it came to planning it, calling and e-mailing friends in CA, researching on the web, buying guides, calling the SF Chamber of Commerce, contacting all the colleges of course, you name it. But when we actually got there, we had a very relaxed time - in part because we knew what we were doing but also because, hey, this WAS basically vacation time.
So I don't think one's vacation style is necessarily ANYTHING like one's normal style of living. Mine's definitely NOT!

StCirq brings up an interesting paradox. My husband is a typeA personality until he clocks out on vacation...couldn't find a more mellow, go-with-the-flow, change-your-plan-if-you-want-to guy around.

As a reformed plan-everything-down-to-the last-second personality, I kind of like it his way. Spontaneous = adventure.

Not to say pre-planning shouldn't be done as it helps you be aware of options available so that it is Successful spontaneous.

yk: I'm such a newbie, I thought you were an oldie!

I had exactly the experience you described ("Too much! too much!" they cried at once!) and at first felt somewhat discouraged until I realized that for any topic, any sight, any style of travel - I could find mixed opinions. And what better preparation for the variety we seek in our travels than the differences we find on this information highway? I am touched by the generosity shown by so many, whether the advice I read suits me or not.

Now I must go back to my evolving itinerary. There are a few more stops I need to add...thanks for the encouragement.

I stumbled upon this old thread while searching for information on Montauroux and think it's a gem. A couple of years ago our children (in their early 20's) traveled from London to Paris, Innsbruck, Venice, and Rome, then met us in a house on top of a hill outside of Lucca that was 30 minutes from anywhere. Although they're glad they've seen the other places and had the experience of traveling on their own, those lazy days by the pool next to the vineyard and the outdoor dinners with family and friends are what they talk about now (and where they want to return).

Rex, I loved your "scouting" itinerary! It made me feel much better about my October scouting trip that will only cover from Vence to Seillans.
(I'm trying to find a place similar to the one outside of Lucca in the hills of the Cote d'Azur/Var. We can make a trip to the coast, hit a few perched villages, and see some of my beloved Matisse, but mostly just relax and enjoy being in France.)

Thanks to all on this board. I love the philosophical postings as much as the practical advice.