jellabee14

In June we're having a extended family holiday to Italy, we're staying in Lucca, in a villa for a week.

After this week me and my boyfriend have planned to stay on abit longer, 5 more nights, possibly could extend this if necessary (budget considered)

I was thinking: stay in Florence for 3 nights then get the train up to Venice for 2 nights (because of a late flight home, would be 2 whole days to explore)

My question is: Should I stay 1 night in Pisa (afternoon & evening to explore, sleep and leave in the morning) and make Florence 2 nights?

Or any other suggestions?

Planning to do Rome on a seperate occassion, and friends have suggested Venice doesn't take long to see..

I am trying to keep cost relativley low (as much a possible) Planning to fly into Pisa and out from Venice!

Thank you in advanced!

Bella

suze

<friends have suggested Venice doesn't take long to see>


That is often said, and I have never understood that thinking. You could easily spend a week in Venice and barely scratch the surface. That said, Venice is not cheap so may not fit your budget.

sandralist

Many people have very happy short visits to Venice, so it is perfectly understandable to most people why someone would say that. You should look at a guidebook for both Venice and Florence and figure out which has more of the things that interest you.

There are inexpensive ways to see and enjoy Venice without sleeping in a hovel or eating yogurt 3 meals a day. If you decide you want to spend more time in Venice but worry about your budget, put up another post asking about a budget trip to Venice. Lots of people can help you, and just ignore the rest that can't understand your travel ideas.

Jean

You have two threads going for the same trip.

http://www.fodors.com/community/euro...lease-help.cfm

To find your threads, click on your name.

TassieTreck

I'd spend all 3 nights in Florence, since you can easily visit Pisa from your family villa in Lucca. These 2 towns are only half an hour apart. Lucca is much more interesting town than Pisa, which doesn't have a lot to offer besides the famous leaning tower.

Florence is by now a city of 1 million people, plus the waves of tourist that crowd the city center. However, most visitors are there for only day-trips, and if you are actually staying in a city center hotel, you would have the peaceful mornings and evenings to share with Florence natives.

bilboburgler

I'd not want to spend more time in Pisa.

Florence is certainly a place where you can spend more time as is Venice. For me I get a bit "blown" by Florence and need to get out away from the churches etc after a few days, while in Venice there i always something new to see (and a bunch more other tourists).

I'd add the time to Venice but make a day trip to say Padova

bvlenci

I agree that Pisa is a very easy day trip from Lucca, either by bus or train. We took the train there when we were staying in Lucca.

Saying that Pisa doesn't offer anything other than the "Tower", though, usually indicates that someone went to Pisa just to see the tower and didn't bother to find out if the city offered anything else. At the very least, it has a number of beautiful Romanesque and Gothic churches.

sandralist

People have various reactions to Italian destinations. I find all of Pisa much more interesting than all of Lucca. I never tire of visiting the many art sites and churches of Florence. Lots of people think Padova is a miss while still others think Venice is the only place in Italy worth lingering ....

Would be fun to go to an Italian airport sometime and ask departing tourists what is the most enjoyable place to go in Italy and which is the least interesting. Fair bet you would get a different answer from everybody in line. Internet answers are the same.

If you consider yourself a "typical tourist", most mass market guidebooks aim to satisfy that, and Rick Steves seems to be very popular among people who consider themselves "typical North America tourists" in Italy. For a lower priced trip, aimed at a younger set, consider Rough Guides or Lonely Planet guidebooks.

ashwinb

I would do Pisa in a half day quick trip, and I would rather go to Siena than Pisa, that's just me.

Whathello

Not just you ashwinb, I'd do the same.
For me Pisa is not much more than the tower. Yet I've been there about a dozen times, so yes it is a fun place to be, like a lot of other cities less well known because they haven't got a tower.

sundriedtopepo

Hi Bella, you are not planning on doing any day trips from your villa in Lucca?

tuscanlifeedit

sundried's question is a good one. If you're in Lucca for a week, why not an easy day trip to Pisa? It's pleasant and simple, by train, bus or car.

sandralist

Siena is a very long day trip from Lucca unless one has a car -- and even then most people would consider it too far for a comfortable day trip (not to mention some people prefer Pisa to Siena, etc)

annhig

I agree that you could do Pisa as a half day trip from Lucca except that I would do it in the evening when all of the tourists and associated hawkers have gone home; try to time it so that you can go inside the Basilica and the baptistry, and book tickets to climb the tower:

www.opapisa.it

Then decide which you think you would prefer, i.e. spending 3 nights in Florence and 2 in Venice, or vice versa. 3 nights in Florence would give you the possibility of a day trip to Siena; 3 in Venice a boat trip to the islands of the lagoon - I suggest Burano and Torcello. Whichever you choose the most difficult thing will be deciding what to leave out - you could easily spend the whole 5 nights in Florence or Venice and not run out of things to do.