I have looked up driving times in via-michelein and I am wondering how accurate they are? We are driving VIenna-Budapest
Budpest-Prague
Prague-CeskyKrumlov-Salzburg-Vienna
Any ones experience with driving these routes would be great.THanks

I usually find that Michelin thinks I can get there faster than I actually can. I think www.mappy.com is a bit more realistic.

The problem with "real driving times" is that it all depends on whose "real" do you mean? The time required for someone who lives there, and has no objective other than getting from point A to B, no fuel stops ( for trips under say.. five hours), no meals or "looking out the window" - - that's the figure I would expect to get if I wanted to look up driving info from my house to Wheeling, West Virgina, for example.

Or the time required by the average tourist who drives a little slower because of lack of confidence in the local language, driving habits or simply not being in a hurry?

Both are "real".

Of the city pairs you mention, the only I have specifically driven is Prague-Cesky Krumlov (and I did this one starting east of Prague, so I wouldn't even have had the "time to get out of the city and on to the highway as part of my time to drive)...

... anyhow, their estimate of 167 minutes to cover 179 km seem fairly accurate to me. The one thing I do remember about driving Cesky Krumlov is that you think you're "there", and then you drive another several miles, and then you think you're there, and then you drive another several miles, and then you think you're there... so, the final 20 minutes or so seem to "drag out"!

Best wishes,

Rex

I'm the opposite of StCirq. We usually beat the Michelin times. It just depends on your driving style, plus traffic and road conditions on the day you happen to be driving.

We usually find that times on both sites are longer than it actually takes for driving time.

Just realize you need to factor in gas/potty stops, any meal stops and time to get off the road and see interesting stuff.

So - if the times listed is 4 hours I would think actual driving is about 3.5 - but then you need to figure the add-ons.

Two caveats:

Neither one of us has ever been know to drive under the limit on highways anywhere - and one of the things we like about europe is the chance to see what a car can really do.

If you include getting to your hotel in the city center you MUST make sure you have really accurte driving (not walking) maps showing block by block and one-way streets - otherwise that part can take forever.

<<one of the things we like about europe is the chance to see what a car can really do>>

me too - - but increasingly (or so I hear, at least) - - is that Europe is discovering robot speed ticket cameras, in jurisdictionss all over the place.

Be forewarned. I enjoy being able to compute the driving time by simple dividing the km by 3 = the number of minutes (i.e., driving 180 km/hr).

These days may be vanishing and gone.

There are those who would drive over 100mph such as rex, but if I were you I would abide by the speed limits all over Europe. You have to decide for yourself whether to drive over 100mph if no speed limits are posted. I think it is not really safe for any person to drive more than about 80mph, which translates roughly on the European speedometer to 135 km/hr. The Mercedes and BMW sedans that fly by you on the autobahns at 100 plus mph are not always driving safely -- but you'd better be sure to get out of their way.

Your real question was about driving times. And I suppose by "real driving times" you mean the actual time behind the wheel on the road. Ignoring that much of the time between two cities can be spent in just getting out of or into the cities, the driving times you find on Michelin or Mappy websites are pretty close for NORMAL driving conditions. The problem is that I have rarely seen normal driving conditions anywhere in Europe for long stretches of road. There's almost always a delay or a detour here or there. To that you add your rest stops, meal stops, sightseeing stops, and so forth.

My rule of thumb is to add about 10 to 15 percent to the stated driving times, then add my own estimate of times for various kinds of stops, plus time to get out of and into the more congested cities.

By the time you add all these things together, an average day of driving increases from perhaps 5 hours of "real" driving times to 6-8 hours. Make your own estimates based on this advice, and you will never be far off.

One final caution: I have found it wise, in 30 years of driving in Europe, to never plan a drive of more than about 500 km in a day. Even with the possibility of autobahn/autostrada/autoroute roads all the way, you will generally find a need to take more time. Good luck.

I have made driving trips that even a madman would consider razy - - and STILL - - I think that this is good advice not to exceed 500 km a day.

And I did not drive over 140 kph on my most recent trip to France. No one was doing it. It would have felt more than slightly ludicrous to be the only one going that speed.

Even when I have <i>enjoyed</i> fast driving in europe, I have also given this advice quite routinely. LEt your reflexes get used to it if you want to driver over 150 kph. Probably never above 150 kph your first several hours (days?) of driving. And above 170 kph means that you must concentrate, and be distraction-free. No conversation.

I'm not sure that this advice will be relevant to Europe driving of the remainder of this century.

Wayne - you don't need to go to europe to drive at 80mph. Even here in the NYC area - where top speed limits are 65 the left lane routinely moves at 80 to 85. (And the police very rarely ticket at that speed unless there are additional issues - like tailgating or cutting in/out.)

I would agree with you a lot of these people shouldn;t be doing it - it seems to me a lot of these people shouldn;t be allowed out of their driveways. But I don;t think it's the speed that's really the issue - it;'s the fact that most American drivers never really get any training in how to drive properly.

So many people are dangerous at any speed (tailgate, can;t stay in lane, don;t know how to take curves, talking on the phone or eating or fighting with their kids). IMHO any time you're driving you shouldn;t be doing any other things at the same time - including long conversations with the navigator.

If you know what you're doing - and road conditions allow - higher speeds are not really any more dangerous - it's poor driving skills/habits that are the major issues - as well as unfamiliarity with the car. (No - we don;t go that fast til we've figured out what the car can really do. Esp in europe the cars can have surprisingly small engines - and you simply don;t have the power you;re used to - which can be very dangerous on the highway.)

&gt;we don;t go that fast til we've figured out what the car can really do. Esp in europe the cars can have surprisingly small engines ...&lt;

Also, just because it is a sporty looking car doesn't mean that it is a sports car.

&lt;&lt;higher speeds are not really any more dangerous&gt;&gt;

While I love talking about (and I love actually) getting to drive fast - - it feels disingenuous, maybe even dishonest if I were to fail to challenge this statement.

Higher speeds, in the right driving conditions, NOT more dangerous to the driver properly trained and accustomed to them. But they may provoke poorer driving performance in others on the same highway who become intimidated or frightened or enraged by them, or simply fail to judge distances, approach times and velocities accurately. So speed alone COULD lead to an accident.

And IF an accident occurs... involving a high-speed vehicle, it has inherently greater risk for higher morbidity injuries or higher probability of death - - than an accident involving lower speed vehicles.

Simple physics, anatomy and physiology.

Higher speeds (over 70 or 80 mph) are inherently more dangerous. You simply have less reaction time at higher speeds.

It's not that the driver necessarily does anything wrong, but if an animal darts in front of your car, or another driver swerves in front of you, or there is debris on the road, you'll just be on them that much faster no matter how good your reflexes are.

But I used to enjoy driving very fast anyway when road and traffic conditions permitted.

We routinely drove 100-110 mph on the open highways in Texas and New Mexico back in the 60s and early 70s, and seldom passed anyone.

Accident, injury, and death rates were pretty bad back then.

I won;t disagree that an accident at higher speed is more dangerous to the occupants than one at lower speed - it is obviuosly true.

However, very few accidents are due to any rational speeds (150 on a country road is just nuts) - by far the vast majority are due to drink/drugs, followed by poor driving skills/bad judgement (frequently among the very young and the very old) and bad weather/road conditions.

I have heard it said, for years, that the single greatest cause of accidents is... someone hurrying back from somewhere they weren't really supposed to be...

So, the impaired judgment applies twice.

I think I read recently that about 40% of car accidents resulting in death were &quot;alcohol-related,&quot; whatever &quot;alcohol-related&quot; means. And that some lower percentage (one-third?)of all car accidents were &quot;alcohol-related.&quot;

That is quite a lot.

As far as speed vs safety goes, the German autobahns are known to easily have the lowest accident rate of any cateory of road in the country. But .. when there is an accident it really racks up the casualties.

As to driving only 500km in a day I find that somewhat timid. If you want to spend your time in B and not in A where you are right now, and it means a 600+km drive, then go for it.

I recently flew in to Frankfurt from Australia, arriving after 20 hours in transit at 5.30am, then trained down to Strasbourg to pick up the hire car, then drove over 600km across to the vicinity of Passau, was there by 6pm, in time to find a nice place to stay for a few days and never exceeded 130kph. Two wee stops and a wee/hamburger stop and steady as she goes for the remainder.

Harzer

I use viamichelin and add 10%--works for me.