Should we cut Paris short to visit Rome?
 

My fiancé and I are going to Europe for 8 days in March/April. We originally were going to spend the whole time in Paris, but now are considering splitting time between Rome and Paris. I am wondering what you think the better option is: stay in Paris or split the week? We could also do like 3 days in Rome and 5 days in Paris.

Neither of us has been to Europe yet, so we both want to make the most of it, although we know it won't be our last trip abroad.

We enjoy eating great food, walking, exploring, tours, architecture, musuems, all the touristy stuff, but on a fairly limited budget.

Thanks!!

Stick with Paris for this trip, especially if you have a limited budget. There is plenty to keep you occupied and interested, and you can daytrip to Versailles or elsewhere to get out of Paris for a bit.

I agree with Hazel. You'll be glad you don't waste a day travelling and there is so much to do. Giverny might also be nice for a day trip, depending on the weather, or even Normandy.

Since you are on a limited time as well as money budget, I would stick with just Paris. I prefer Rome to Paris personally and could easily spend 8 nights there but if Paris is your first choice for this trip, I would stick with that.

The easiest city to add would be London if you really want a second destination.

I would stay in Paris because your trip is so short and it will be expensive to do that and take up a lot of time. If you are even considering this, you must not have your air tickets yet or any reservations, which kind of surprises me. Not the reservations so much, but often airfare goes up closer to the date.

I actually bought roundtrip tickets to Paris for October, but with the strikes we decided to put it off until the spring. Flights to and from Paris or into Rome and out of Paris during the first week of April are actually cheaper than our previous credit we have for Delta, so that's why we are down to those two options.

If we did Rome, we were planning on taking an overnight train to get to Paris as opposed to flying.

No, I would stay in Paris and maybe take a daytrip or two. Taking an overnight train doesn't necessarily mean not losing a day. Most people don't sleep much on those trains. Eight days is not much time to visit a major attraction like Paris - it will fly by.

NO NO NO NO NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Agree, stay in Paris. Transport to airport in Paris, flight to Rome, transport from Rome airport into Rome, etc. That would take an entire day and also really add up money wise. There is plenty to do in Paris and plenty of day trips to do closeby.

Rome is absolutely fantastic and therefore merits its own trip. Two cities of comparable caliber are impossible to digest when visited during the same journey.

I would split the trip. See some of each city, experience both cultures. You sound young and will probably sleep fine on the night train. As an alternative sightsee all day then take an evening flight to the next city not to waste a day touring. Make a list of the top sights you want to see and concentrate your 3 or 4 days of sightseeing on them. You do not need to see everything there is to see to enjoy a place. I suspect this will just be the first in a lifetime of international trips. Really whatever you choose you can't go wrong you will have a wonderful time.

Hi L,

With only 8 days, I suggest that you stay in one place.

You can always visit Rome later.

((I))

It's your honeymoon--stay in Paris! It's a wonderfully romantic city. There is so much to see and do there, 8 days will barely scratch the surface.

My husband and I spent our 41st anniversary in Paris last year, and are going back this year. We are going to Italy for three weeks--but only AFTER we get our Paris fix!

Best wishes to you, and have a lovely perfect honeymoon!

Paris with day trips.

day 1 is a jet lagged fog and day 8 is lost to packing and getting to the airport. Stay in Paris . . .

Usually I'd say split the two, because what if you didn't like Paris and here it is, you getting married, how awful that would be?! Then I thought about it again. Paris. In April.

My husband and I went in stone cold November as our first out of the country honeymoon and went nowhere else. It was his first trip abroad. Even in the freezing cold (and he HATES being cold), he LOVED Paris. Of course, I don't think our marriage would have lasted had he not loved it!

I think there are no wrong answers here. I could see a great trip either way, and I've done both these things: spent a week in Paris and split eight days between Paris and Rome. Staying put is more relaxing. But going from Paris to Rome does not have to take a whole day. When I did this trip we flew out of Paris early and had lunch in Rome. And seeing two very different but wonderful cities with different languages, food, culture, and types of attractions is incredibly stimulating.

Split the two. 4 & 4 sounds great! Overnight train between the 2 cities sounds very romantic! Ignore the naysayers; go for it!!

I love Rome and I love Paris (though I might give the edge to Rome, but of course that's just a personal reaction). If you're young, energetic and don't feel you need a comprehensive experience of either city, I say split the week.

The only thing is that for many people--not me!--it's easier to fall in love with Paris in just a few days than Rome. For whatever reason, Rome seems to take time. It's like it wasn't built in a day. So my advice would be if you do include Rome, just go for kicks and don't marry yourselves to a "We must see the Vatican. We must see the Sistine Chapel. We must spend hours in the Forum" agenda.

Although I did all those things on my first trip and was totally smitten.

Have fun!

Stay in Paris. Eight days is not enought time to experience all of its charms. And as several have suggested, you can always take a couple of day trips (Versailles, Giverny, Chartres).

Agree with mamcalice. Our 8 day trip to Paris in 2009 wasn't enough time to take advantage of all this wonderful city has to offer. We spent 4 days in Rome 5 years ago, and wished we had a couple more.

You can easily take Ryanair to Rome or Vueling airline the flight last wo hours.
To give you an example..

Going Out From Paris Beauvais - Rome (Ciampino)
« Previous Week Next Week »
Tue, 22 Mar 11
from
26.99 EUR Wed, 23 Mar 11
from
36.99 EUR Thu, 24 Mar 11
from
36.99 EUR Fri, 25 Mar 11
from
26.99 EUR Sat, 26 Mar 11
from
26.99 EUR Sun, 27 Mar 11
from
26.99 EUR Mon, 28 Mar 11
from
36.99 EUR
Select A Flight

Going Out

Regular Fare

Depart:
Paris Beauvais 09:30

Arrive:
Rome (Ciampino) 11:30

2 x Adult 53.98 EUR


Fare: 53.98 EUR
Online Check-In: 12.00 EUR
Taxes / Fees: 49.76 EUR
» Taxes and Fees 36.78 EUR
» Aviation Insurance/PRM Levy 12.98 EUR

Total Price: 115.74 EUR
Regular Fare

Wow, your heads must be spinning.

I also am with the group that says "go for it". Yes, I've been to both and it only took us two hours to fly from Paris to Rome. And it is MUCH cheaper than taking a night train, not to mention you will be more comfortable sleeping in a Rome hotel that night instead of on a train. No overnight train, is my suggestion.

And I disagree with the poster who said you could not fall in love with Rome so quickly. I got off the train from Florence and walked out the door in Rome. My chin hit the ground and I could not speak for 15 minutes. I LOVE Rome, and have from the minute I met her.

I hope you pack light, though. You can do it. Many posters here can tell you that you both can get away with just one carry-on and a backpack.

Congratulations and have a wonderful trip!

PS Forgot to add that this is a good way to get a feel for each, and it will help you plan your next trip to Europe. You'll know which you'd like to explore first, or go back to first. :)

Rome wins over Paris for me, also, and it took only minutes for me to make this determination. However, Paris is extremely popular for a reason, and in some ways, it is an "easier" city than Rome.

The original post mentioned a strong budget concern. That being the case, figure out where you can get the best hotel deals that you are happy with, and let that influence your decision. If you don't switch cities, you'll definitely save money by not having those transport expenses.

And even if Paris is not my favorite city, I'd totally love 8 days there even so.

Even though you're young, you'll experience some jet lag the first day or two in Paris. I think you should stay put, since you're going for only a week. You're young, you can look forward to many trips in the future - go to just Paris, then next time, just Rome etc. This way to get to relax and really enjoy each city, instead of just remembering a hectic, tiring blur!
Bon Voyage!

Since budget is an issue, you may want to look at renting an apartment in Paris. This would allow you to save on some meals and might be less than an equivalent quality hotel.

Stay in Paris and have the most romantic relaxing memory of a wonderful honeymoon. 8 days (not sure of "real" arrival and departures) is not long enough to even really "enjoy" Paris on its most comforting level. I am not a fan of Rome--fast, busy, spread out, and people who walk right through you. BUT that is me. It is also a LONG way, and while an overnight train may sound romantic, it is just a hard way to spend a night.
You can take day trips from Paris if you really want to do something else--even going to Lyon for a special dinner, if that was to be a splurge.
"Maximizing" your trip could be with experiences rather than places--a special dinner in Paris, the opera, etc.

I'm with the "go for it" crowd. Rome and Paris are my two favorite cities and I think it would be special for you to see both on your first European trip. You say you have a "somewhat limited budget", so see if it works out for you to take the extra trip. I don't agree that you'll waste the whole day travelling. It's an easy two hour flight (agree it would be best to schedule in the evening or early morning), or, as other posters suggest, take the night train, which saves you a night of paying for a hotel. You seem to be young and sleeping on a train is quite comfortable (I've never NOT fallen asleep on a night train). You arrive in the morning refreshed and ready to go. Definitely don't agree you can't fall I love with Rome at once. It took me all of ten minutes on my first visit to Rome. I've been living here in Rome for over a decade and I'm still in awe as I walk around my adopted city.

of the 3 days in Rome 2 will be spent travelling to/from

missing time to experience both places only 1 full day

to see all of magical Roma WAY too little time.

destination "cramming" #1 mistake euroewbies make

Pare back have fun in Paris and sourrounds Chartes awesome

www.eurocheapo.com Paris city guides www.parisvoice.com

For current activities just stay in Paris...

Happy Journey,

If you elect to do this fly www.skyscanner.net sleepers are expensive and have MANY drawbacks including missing all the neat scenery and noise snoring coughing crowds avoid couchettes like the plague if you want to sleep. Passes such as Eurail and BritRail do not entitle you to free accommodations.Thieves sometimes prey on overnight travelers, especially those who are trying to sleep "for free." If this is your plan, find a way to secure your baggage -- tie it to your ankle if you must! Be certain to keep your passport and money very close to you.You must weigh the scenic appeal of a particular route with your need to save time and money.

Far better to fly stay in a cheap nice Rome hotel

for 2 nights...recently on Hotwire picked up Sheraton Roma

for $69/nt a great 4 star with shuttle from airport

www.betterbidding.com

Best way to do it if you elect to do a driveby of Roma

but better to make a whole nother week if you can.

Congrats!

If you are looking for inexpensive lodging in Rome, do consider staying at a convent or monastery. Note that some have "curfews" because a nun or monk has to lock the door behind you. :)

http://www.santasusanna.org/comingToRome/convents.html

I agree with the majority that the better plan would be to stay in Paris, with side trips to Versailles and some other towns outside the city center. The first day may be lost to jet lag and Paris has so many things to see, and that would be a wonderful honeymoon.

Otoh, I don't think you'd regret your choice if you did 5 days in Paris, and 3 in Rome. I would not split 4 and 4 because with jet lag, that is shortchanging Paris imho (and I prefer it to Rome). That way you get to enjoy Paris and see a taste of Rome and both cities are pretty wonderful. So there is no "wrong" answer here imho, just know that you will only get the highlights if you split the trip in two.

I would pick a city, but still try to build in some flexibility. On a trip to Paris during March/April, it was so cold and rainy in Paris that my SO and I were miserable (think freezing cold, rain, windy). So - after a couple of days, we decided to head south to Provence and were so happy that we did so. The weather was delightful and we had a perfectly wonderful time.

Rome probably would have better weather than Paris, but no guarantees.