I'm having a hard time deciding what tickets to buy for my trip. One option is Swissair. So this leads me to this question: How would you compare Lucerne vs. Chamonix/Aiguille du Midi?

I do not plan to spend more than two days in either. (I'm trying to decide if I'll tag this on, or if I'll just go to Paris and Rome only.)

With Lucerne, obviously I'll fly to Zurich and take the train. With Chamonix I think that I need to fly to Geneva. As I see it, Geneva is good for Paris because there's a TGV that connects with Paris. Maybe I can even go to Paris via another city in France.

If I fly to Zurich and go to Lucerne, then I need to worry about getting to Paris afterwards.

Regarding Switzerland, I've been to Bernese Oberland, Geneva and the Engadine Valley. I've also passed through Zurich. Lucerne will be new. So will Chamonix.

But I'd love to hear your thoughts. Thanks!

We were underwhelmed with Chamonix the city - but "blow away" by Mt Blanc. Not sure there is 2 days worth of things to do there unless you want to do some serious hiking.

If you're doing this trip by train, there might be more stuff to see in the Lucerne area - but we didn't find the city as interesting as other cities we've visited in Europe - but better than Chamonix.

Stu Dudley

Thanks. How does Mont Blanc compare with the other Alpine peaks?

No serious hiking. I'm going with my parents, so I think that it will be cable car only.

To me Lucerne is much easier to get to. By contrast Chamonix is accessible by a 2h bus ride from Geneva airport.

I'm having a hard time deciding because my choice of itinerary is also driven by a few airfare considerations and it's hard for me to decide what's good. Of course sticking to Paris and Rome only is also an option.

I've spent considerable time in both, and without the hiking, I think Lucerne is more for you. The round trip to Pilatus (up by cog, then down the other side by cable cars) is a great day trip. And you also have the boats for simply riding around the lake to other villages -- beautiful, when the weather's great.
And yes, Chamonix is quite a project to get to from Geneva unless you rent a car.

Thanks. No car for me -- public transportation only.

Forgot to mention time period: Around early/mid June.

I agree with NeoPatric's more detailed explanation.

Stu Dudley

Are you sure Stu? You didn't sound too excited about Lucerne, whereas Patrick seemed more enthusiastic.

Chamonix has a more stunning view. You could consider one day in Chamonix and one day in Annecy.

I agree with his assessment of the Chamonix region vs Lucerne region. I didn't see any raves by Patrick about Lucern itself - just the surrounding area.

Stu Dudley

In a departure from my usual style (like five cities in one day), I'm thinking of slowing down and going to two places (Paris and Rome) in one week with my parents.

But when I started researching prices, I realized that I shouldn't discount flying Swissair if I can get a competitive price. So this is what led me to ask.

I probably should add a day or two to the trip. But I don't know if this means that I can/should go to Chamonix + Annecy in 2 days. Will this be too rushed for them?

To me if I fly Swissair, I should think about stopping briefly. Otherwise the times wasted on connections doesn't make sense to me (especially if I'm thinking of flying them on business class). I mean, I don't want to pay extra and yet waste time connectng unless there's some reason to do so.

Chamonix AND Annecy. Oops. Now you've reminded me that we once spent a few days in Annecy without a car. And we decided to do a day trip from there to Chamonix. By the time we made the connections, had lunch, and came back the day was pretty well shot. Again, let me say, if you are talking about public transportation, Chamonix and Annecy are probably not where you want to go for a day or two.

Meanwhile, regarding getting from Luzern to Paris -- you can leave Luzern at 9:45, change to a TGV in Basel and arrive in Paris at 14:34.

Because one's enjoyment of mountain scenery is so heavily dependent on the weather, I'd hesitate to make plans for a specific place on a specific date.

What if, after all the effort, the designated day turns out to be rainy and/or foggy?

This is the reason why, on our visits to the Alps, I've built flexibility into our plans. (Of course, we've had the use of a car.)

Sorry -- is Annecy a "must see"? It's a naive question, I know, but there're always priorities.

By the way I mentioned Chamonix and Lucerne, but I'm open to other stopover suggestions too. I just mentioned the ones that seem to be the most highly acclaimed. My constraint is that they should be close to Geneva or Zurich. The rest of the trip will be Paris and Rome, as I mentioned.

I agree with you, TuckH. I was lucky last year when I went to the Engadine Valley. When I went to the Bernese Oberland, the weather was horrible. I think we were even there for 2-3 days. Every day I remember turning on the TV to see what the weather on the mountain tops was like.

But then I also realize that you just have to take a chance. I don't mind taking a chance for Chamonix/Mont Blanc if it's worth it. I mean, I don't usually get to travel with my parents, so it's a special occasion. If I let it pass, another opportunity may be long in the coming.

Just to echo what NeoPatrick has told you about Annecy-Chamonix without a car. I don't think that 2 days would do the area justice, and public transportation to Chamonix from Annecy or vice versa would eat up a considerable amount of that time.

We had a car and spent 4 days touring around the Haute Savoie (mid June) while based on Lake Annecy in Talloires (gorgeous, BTW, we loved it!). We did day trips to Annecy, Le Grand Bornand, Mt. Blanc (blown away), Chamonix and Megève (didn't find the former that appealing but thought the latter, much smaller, was really lovely).

If these were my 2 days, I'd save the Haute Savoie for another visit with a car and with more time. And for me, Annecy and Talloires are truly "must sees". Spectacular scenery-the boat trip between the two was indeed a must for us!

A "special occasion", would give me all the more reason to play it safe.

The anxiety and nervous anticipation leading up to the trip and then, if the weather is lousy... oh my, what a let-down!

I know. I see your point, TuckH. I'm feeling really anxious about this whole trip. I'm thinking of leaving in a month, and I've not even booked my tickets yet, partly because the idea of spending Business class airfares (2x) is giving me a lot of pause.

To make this more interesting -- is there someone where who will drop Paris or Rome in favor of more time in Switzerland or the French Alps?

I'm not a big fan of nature. My mom does love Switzerland. My dad has never traveled to Europe (hence the special occasion). I figured that Paris is a safe choice, and everyone must see Rome at one point. Of course everyone has different criteria, but I do think that an "objective ranking" is partially possible.

I need to wrap this up soon and start working on the hotels.

Hello 111op

I have been to both Lucerne and Chamonix several times. In fact, I just returned from a trip to France, which included a week in Chamonix (no skiing).

It is a tough choice to make between the two cities, as they both have their pluses.

The boat rides on Lake Lucerne are absolutely lovely, some of my favorite anywhere. The excursions to Pilatus, Rigi, and even Titlis in Engelberg are definitely worthy.

However, IMHO, they do not compare to the spectacular scenery of Chamonix. When you are up at the Aiguille du Midi, walking up and down the various terraces they've built on the top of the mountain, well, it's absolutely breathtaking. It is easy to be swept away by the magnificence of this area, truly.

Once up there, be sure to take the cable car to Helbroner. You literally fly across the glaciers and crevasses. Definitely a top tier on my all-time Alps excursions.

The downside, if there can possibly be one, is the very small cafe they've got up there. It's a fairly small area (maybe 20 tables), and they serve sandwiches and some hot dishes, as well as very delicious hot chocolate. But it's not the full-service restaurants that you find at some mountaintop peaks (such as First or Kleine Scheidegg in Grindelwald).

As you say you're taking your parents, know that there are a number of stairs to climb at the Aiguille du Midi. Once you get off the tram, it is flat but then you go to the terraces for the views, and several of the terraces have 20 or more steps.

Try this idea:

Start with Paris. Keep your eye on the weather forecasts. When you see good weather in the Alps, take advantage of it and take a flight there. Ideally this would be near the end of your Paris stay and then, after a couple of days in Switz, you could head on to Rome.

And if the weather doesn't co-operate, there'd be nothing lost...

On a short trip, I always advise others to limit their itinerary to only 1 big city. If you do Paris & Rome back-to-back - the noise, congestion, traffic (especially Rome), crowds, concrete, waiting in lines, etc. can be quite exhausting.

I would either do Paris and Switzerland or Annecy or Chamonix/Mt Blanc.

OR

Venice, Tuscany (countryside around Pienza - by car - not Florence or even Siena) and Venice. You can pick up & drop off a car in Chuisi & you'll never see a freeway or major thoroughfare - just small (often dirt) roads with fabulous small villages & spectacular scenery. We spend 2 months in Europe every year (80% France, 15% Italy) and I think the Venice, Tuscany countryside, and Rome is the best first-timer itinerary.

Stu Dudley