Is this feasible? - Driving southern England
 

Hi all - before I research myself crazy, can you give me a general idea if I am insane to consider driving from say Dover to Bristol in 3 days?

I tentatively want to see Dover, Canterbury, then head west via Brighton, Winchester, Salisbury (with Stonehenge & Andover), Bath & a touch of the Cotswolds.

I'm Australian and do not think anything of driving long distances, but not sure if this is just crazy.

Other idea is to cut the Dover & Canterbury part and stay to the area between Winchester and Bristol (flying out of Bristol so that part stays as the base).

Thanks for your help!

You were fine until you threw in teh Cotswolds.

Canterbury to Dover to Brighton to Winchester to Salisbury to Stonehenge to Bath to Bristol is doable in 3 days (but rushed if you really want to see a lot)

The Cotswolds just adds too much - both in distance and sites . . . .

I agree with janis, leave the Cotswolds for another time.You'll have plenty to do & see without venturing into the Cotswolds.

Hi,I am Australian and used to driving long distances as well but when you are on holidays it is nice to experience these places rather than just drive from one to another. I have been to all of those areas and couldnt imagine doing them all in 3 days. Pick one area and work around that. The driving is easy and there are so many beautiful villages around these areas to see as well. Take your time and enjoy everything instead of the just the car interior!

Thanks everyone. I think I will leave it to the smaller area as I want to spend time exploring. I'll just have to go back - which I will be doing as my sister will be living there for 3 years. Just hard to limit it when I'm so close :)

The last part of my trip involves getting from Bristol to Banbury, so I may end up passing through the Cotswolds by car (if we don't catch the train).

I am sorry but I disagree with the others. I think you would be crazy NOT to at least drive through the Cotswolds given that you are going to be so close to them.

We have absoolutely no idea of :

1. How fast you travel

2. How long you plan to spend in any of these places

3. What you are interested in seeing.

GO FOR IT..otherwise it will be:

"Well, you know I was right next to the Cotswolds but I decided not to go there because a bunch of people said it would be 'too much.'"

If you are staying in Bristol for a while and then going up to Banbury you will indeed travel right through the Cotswolds. Banbury is sort of on the northern boundry of the Cotswolds and Bristol/Bath are just to the south. So from one to the other is a perfect Cotswold meander.

Dukey is right - we do not know your travel style. But even IF you do like to rush about, your original plan was too much. Just the logistics/traffic/opening times for various sites means you could not see all those places in 3 days/2 nights.

Just to give you an idea, Dover Castle is huge and just seeing a bit of it takes a few hours. - So 1/2 a day is taken right there.

Dukey

There could also be another take on it.

"I was very close to the Cotswold's, but it would've been too much. I'll see it next time."

Agree that your problem is not distances (although on some places youmay be on local raods with slow traffic) - it's that you're just trying to see too many things. To see much in the Costwolds you need 2 days just for that.

So - go for the rest of the trip but bag the Cotswolds - or vice versa. (You can easily spend a full day in Winchester or Salisbury or ??? - as it is you are rushing through only one or 2 main things in each place - rather than enjoying the atmosphere, realxing in a pub for a while, etc.)

It's not a question of your travel style, but of the point of travelling.

Dover is a dump. But it has a fascinating castle on top, and the view of the White Cliffs from the sea is of limited aesthetic value but immense psychological importance (the view FROM the White Cliffs is of zero aesthetic value - it's just bloody France- and of zero importance in any other way). Seeing both of these properly (rushing them really is is a waste of time: they're not the Sydney Opera House) takes time.

Similarly, the Cotswolds are alright to look at. But (and I write as someone who's chosen to invest a significant amount both of the flannerfortune and of my time in the area) they're hardly heart-stopping to look at. I spent a huge slug of my youth driving through and never saw the point. They get interesting, IMHO, only if you devote the time to detour in a car, get out and walk a good deal through small towns and along the local footpaths, preferably armed with a considerable degree of imformation.

You can manage a day's gentle Cotswold meandering before or after a day in Winchester, Salisbury and Stonehenge. Unless you've got relatives there, ignore Andover (though there's a concentration of Jane Austen sites nearby which addicts might like). Don't even think of ignoring Avebury (which I hope is what you meant when you wrote Andover), and personally I'd give Winchester, Salisbury, Stonehenge and Avebury two good days. It's tough (I'd say impossible) to do them any kind of justice in one.

What you probably don't understand is it's not a question of distance. Getting into and out of any decent-sized town from the nearest major road, and finding an available parking spot, will take at least 90 minutes each time. Hit the place on a busy shopping day (practically any day with a "y" in)and you'll easily add at least another hour.

And drop Brighton. It might look halfway between Kent and the Salisbury/Cotswold area, but it isn't when you come to drive it. It's 2.5 hours from the nearest bit of the Cotswolds by the fastest route, driven by a maniac, and several lifetimes any other way.

flanneruk has once again expressed it better than I could.

I lived in Australia and driving great distances there is considerably different from driving great distances in England.

Thank you all! And yes flanneruk, I did mean Avebury!

On your excellent advise I am now set on sticking to Winchester, Salisbury, Stonehenge, Avebury & Bath.

I prefer to take it easy when travelling - life is stressed enough. We're (my sister and I) going to Rome (5 days), Venice (10 days), Paris (10 days) then London (4 days), then the Southern England driving bit before a quick dash to Dublin for St Patrick's Day, then back to Bristol and straight on to Banbury (as my sister starts work orientation there the next day). I head to London and my homeward flight the next day - probably exhausted :)

I planned the first part, my sister threw on the end flurry to Dublin as "hey, we're so close". I'm now just smoothing out logistics :)
Thank You!

Congratulations! There seem to be a number of people who seek advice and then don't like the responses they get. I guess they follow through with their original itineraries. I always wonder how they managed.

Have a great trip.

:) I've been grateful for all the excellent advice - though I rarely solicit it directly as the search function is a goldmine of info.

Couple of years ago, I wanted to do a "nostalgia" drive from Kent (near Canterbury) along the south coast to Dorchester in Dorset. It was a great drive, and I really enjoyed it (also got to visit long-missed friends in Sussex).

What surprised me was how long it took -- I purposely avoided the M routes, going instead through small towns. The traffic/road works/parking scenario is definitely a factor! I did all the things I wanted to, but it took much longer than I thought. Wouldn't have done it differently, though.