Plitvice Lakes - is it worth it for a short visit?
 

We are staying in Split later in the year prior to a cruise of the Croatian islands. We have planned to have 2 nights in Split prior to the cruise. Given we have such a short time in Split, do you think it is worth spending the time travelling to the Plitvice Lakes for a day trip (we appreciate that this is a very long day), or are we better to concentrate on seeing Split the city??

Your call!

The Plitvice Lakes National Park is, IMO, the single most un-missable of Croatia's many splendors. Not only are the lakes connected by travertine waterfall formations, each lake has unique microbiota, and as a result, the lakes are different colors. The best way to see that is, IMO, to make a single, long loop through the park -- something on the order of 6 hours or more (including time for the boat that connects the lower and upper lakes), and by all means, start at the lowest part of the park so you are facing the falls as you proceed. That said, park rangers at each entrance will work with visitors to devise shorter routes as necessary.

Split is one of my favorite destinations in Croatia -- and that says a LOT! Still, some people don't like it.... I enjoy its vibrancy and energy, it spectacular Diocletian's Palace and the many purposes to which its various nooks and corners have since been put, its glorious waterfront and lively public squares, and its great markets. JMO!

Tough choice -- good luck!

We will arrive in the morning on the first day, which will give us the afternoon/evening to explore.. Then I was thinking Plitvice Lakes on the second full day and we then don't have to be boarding the cruise until 1pm on the day after, so there is some time to see Split.. I just didn't want to be one of those nutters trying to fit in far too much and regretting it..

we hate to rush when we travel... but in this case, i would say, yes!

you are right. it will be a long, long day.

just do a tour... relax and enjoy the landscape from the bus. you will have a few hours to enjoy the park, but that's a few hours that you won't forget.

As an alternative, you could choose to visit Krka National Park which is a lot closer to Split. I didn't like Krka nearly as much as Plitvice (which is unique and amazing), but Krka has a fantastic, huge cascading waterfall (Skradinski Buk), the highlight of the park and much larger than any one waterfall at Plitvice. You can get a bus to the town of Skradin and take a nice boat ride up to the falls and walk around it for an hour or two then take the same boat back. You can even swim below the falls if it is warm enough (you can't swim at Plitvice).

The general opinion is that Plitvice Lakes are THE main attraction of Croatia.

From Split, driving time is a little more than 2 hours, so it is doable for a daytrip which would be neither a long day nor exhausting (my son did it last summer). There are bus tours from Split or you can rent a car for a day (recommended).

Split itsself is a stunning city which is built into a Roman palace, with many antique structures left, but you need only 2 or 3 hours to explore the Old Town thoroughly. Make sure to walk through the palace's basement, to see the cathedral within the antique basilica with peristyle and Jupiter's temple, one of the few fully intact temples of Roman times at all (is easily overlooked because tucked in a side alley).

Well, I think I am sold… Plitvice Lakes here we come!!

I'm thinking that renting a car to get out there is probably going to be the quickest and most flexible option, unless people think otherwise?

I would rent a car, so you can make your own tour through the park. And you will enjoy the drive - there are two possible routes. Rental cars are cheap in Split.

I'm a bit confused about the driving times: When I check viamichelin -- which has, IME, given the most accurate times for routes in that area -- it offers an estimate of 3'15" for the shortest available route from Split to the Plitvice Lakes.

And I'm puzzled by the suggestion that Split can be "thoroughly" explored in 2 to 3 hours -- I spent better a very full day, and thought I'd barely skimmed the surface. I guess it depends on what one wants to see and experience. JMO.

you are probably a lot younger than i -- but i really would consider going on a bus/tour this one time. views from a higher bus will be great. you will be super tired after hiking all around for a few hours. it's quite a long haul up the hill when you get to the end. why not tahke a bus and enjoy the ride... and relax on the way home. ?? if you could spend the night at a wonderful wooded spot, it would be different-- then definitely rent a car.

Google maps says 2:27. I am driving every day with Google Maps in Europe and it is always extremely reliable, to the minute.

In Split, 3 hours are enough to see the main attractions - the outer palace walls, the cathedral/basilica, the peristyle, Jupiter temple, the basement of the palace, the Medieval Old Town, the historic pharmacy, the market and the boardwalk. It is a fairly compact area.

Of course, you can spend 2 hours more walking up the hill (mediocre view) and another 2 hours seeing the ugly beaches from socialist times and 2 hours sitting in a café, but I would recommend to invest the time in driving to Plitvice.

Interesting -- I consistently find that google maps underestimates travel times by 1/4 to 1/3. In contrast, I find viamichelin consistently accurate.

Google Maps has always seemed fairly accurate to me. I have no doubt it has been improved over the years as well, so if you used it a few years ago it is surely much better now. I doubt Viamichelin has kept up; hard to imagine they have the resources that Google has. And many people use their phones now to do mapping, and Google maps uses real-time traffic (when available) to navigate around delays. Viamichelin doesn't seem to be people's default phone app, if there even is one.

Checking Google Maps now, when I enter "Plitvice Lakes" it estimates 2:29 travel time from Split via A1/E71 then D1 (2:15 without traffic) but guides me only to the south end of the park for some reason and not quite to the park entrances. I'd guess three hours is a realistic guess with traffic.