What are the advantages of traveling as part of a tour group? Is it usually less expensive? Are there tours with a lot of free time for exploring on your own?

Do a search on these boards, this topic has been discussed many times. But, in short:<BR><BR>Pros (tour): someone else does all the planning, they arrange for transportation, transfer of your luggage, hotels, some meals, entrance to tourist sites etc. I did it once to Italy, and although it was not my preference, it was nice not having to worry about planning anything.<BR><BR>Cons: You have to go where they tell you too, you travel by bus (usually) with a group of others - which can be annoying if you have obnoxious people on the bus with you (and trust me - it only takes one couple to make you dread a 5-hour bus ride)! Free time varies - we had a bunch, but some don't. <BR><BR>As far as price goes, it depends on which tour you would take, and how much research you would do on your own to find reasonable places to stay, eat, etc. <BR><BR>The choice really depends on what you like. I did the tour because I went with my aunt and she wanted to do it, but I like to explore and play things by ear, so I generally take the independent route.

My family of four travels independently for most of the year. In the summers, however, we tend to take "active" European vacations, trips that involve hiking/biking. I have learned it is easier just to go on a group tour for this type of trek.<BR><BR>I am a control freak and certainly love planning, but handing over control to a tour leader for a week means I don't have to make these decisions: where to stay at which point in the trip, when/where to eat, how to get our luggage to point A, B and C while enjoying a hike/bike, which route/path to take in which/what direction using which form of transportation, how to find equipment, and how to maintain emergency road service. <BR><BR>I also don't have to be the family dictator. I don't have to prod my family to get moving in the morning. If they don't get out of bed on time, they'll be left behind! And I don't have to consult the family about all of the decisions--they're done. End of argument!<BR><BR>There certainly are non-active vacation tours that do provide you with a lot of non-structured time. You just have to query each company about the intinerary, and I would suggest you pay particular attention to that detail. On our biking vacations, the nice part is that we always have our own "wheels," and if we choose to stop somewhere along the way and pick flowers, or have a drink, or see a cute little museum, it's our choice. However, one trip's scheduling didn't allow much free time to do those things. Everyone in the group was exhausted--the trip felt like an endurance match, not a vacation.<BR><BR>Similarly, the location of your accomodations is essential to using your free time widely. It's no use having the afternoon to explore Rome, as trip literature might state, if you're staying one hour outside the city.<BR><BR>As to expenses... On one of the group tours we did, I did the math and figured out I could have not done the same trip with our family for the amount we paid. On our other trips,it's been about even, and on others, we have paid a pretty penny for the experience. <BR><BR>Of course, the group of people you travel with can be an upside, a downside, or a neutral, depending on the people in the group and how the tour leader interacts with them. There's no predicting how it will pan out. My family, for example, still misses the people we biked with this past summer. It was an eclectic group in every aspect whose diurnal patterns differed markedly from ours and each other, but the group really functioned well. Ditto for another group we biked with about three years ago. Three groups I would consider "neutral"; one trip was almost ruined by two destructive little boys and the parents who spoiled them. You take your chances.

ZooZoo9&gt;...<BR>I have done both, 2 times on tours and the rest on my own, and on my own I have enjoyed it the most, no question about it, and the previous poster has said it all, I do not like tours they suck and they are much more expensive, and lets not talk about the people sometimes you would rather be in another place!

ZooZoo, avoid tours with a bunch of 1 night stops. You'll have very little free time on those. One annoying person or couple can't ruin your tour. There's always lots of other nice and interesting people to talk to. I honestly think that tours are attracting a different type of tourist than they used to. More young and middle age, more educated and prepared. Just my recent observations. <BR>I like travelling on my own too, but if I have limited time and lots to see, tours can be efficient.

ZooZoo: Julie's point about the one-night stays cannot be emphasized enough (great point, Julie!). I always look for tours with two-night minimum stays because it just makes the flow of the trip less frantic. <BR><BR>What's even more important is that it's easier on the group leaders, too--gives them time to take care of small details that impact upon the trip and the touring group. <BR><BR>In my posting above, I mentioned one tour that ended up being more work than vacation. Unknown to us was the inherent burden of a ferry schedule that made dinner timing, etc. very problematic for the company. The guides were so busy with physical work--constant loading and unloading of bikes and luggage--that they had no opportunity to assess how the scheduling was completely off kilter for the clients. <BR><BR>It could have been even worse--three weeks before the trip they divided the last two-night stay into two one-nights. Very concerned, I called right away to get out of the trip, and apparantly others did also--the company went back to their original plan. That trip was so exhausting that I can't even imagine what one more move would have done to us. <BR><BR>So that's why I think two-night or more stays on a tour is so important--not only do you get more free time out of it, but your tour leader is given a better opportunity to solve any problems that arise.<BR>

You could actually do both...take a short tour and combine it with time on your own. Tours are easy and you do see alot...but they are also tiring. You are usually getting up early in the morning.

if you are traveling solo, keep in mind that most tours have "single supplements" because their regular rates are based on two people in a room.

Thank you everyone, for the responses.

I have taken two different European tours, about 15 years ago, and enjoyed both of them. Both were with Maupintour, which is on the upper-end side, and uses 4-star hotels, and with very nice fellow travelers. Since then, I have been back to Europe 6 times on my own, (staying in smaller, less expensive hotels) and enjoyed it more, as I stayed in one place only, and had more time to get to know that particular city, taking day trips sometimes on the train. To me, it's less hectic and more enjoyable.. However, I'm sure that someday I'll go back to the tours when I'm no longer able to lug suitcase around, take the metro,etc. But for now, I prefer to "travel alone" - and I'm in my late 60's.!

ZooZoo,<BR><BR>I, also, have taken tours and traveling alone. Many of the tour companies are offerint "leisure" tours which stay in a city for 3 nights, which is great. You have more time to explore independently and also to find those fabulous little restaurants where a tour wouldn't take you. I have also made friendships with people from all over the he country and still keep in touch with them. I do have a piece of advice - check out the hotels on the internet to see what they look like and where they are located. <BR><BR>However, this year I am planning a solo trip to the Greek Islands because there are not too many tour companies that offer this type of trip with the quality of hotels that I want. <BR><BR>It all depends what you are looking for.<BR>Good luck<BR>

I just returned from giving my first tour in Europe, and I think I have some perspective on this question. I myself never, ever would take a tour in any country where I thought I could navigate without major hassles. In fact, I've never taken a guided tour of any kind, except for on-the-spot short tours of places not far from some big city that was a base of operations from me. I enjoyed most of those tours immensely.<BR><BR>What I learned from being a tour guide on my recent trip to France was that there are people - very interesting, bright, fun-loving people - who just don't want to, or feel that they can't, arrange a trip by themselves. They are intimidated by the language and the customs and the driving and the shopping - everything is a bit overwhelming for them. They want to be coddled and have everything taken care of for them so that they can enjoy the sights. They don't want to have to go buy camera batteries or film on their own, they don't want to have to navigate a French menu, they want to be able to buy new table settings and have them shipped home without speaking directly to the shop owner. They want someone to recommend what to choose from a menu, what to buy at a brocante, what to take home for souvenirs. If that sort of thing is what you're looking for, an intimate, probably fairly expensive, tour is a benefit. If you can handle all that on your own, then you don't need a tour.<BR><BR>On our tour, we left plenty of time for free wandering, though in reality the tour participants seemed to prefer to hang out with us than go off on their own - that was an interesting fact that we have to figure into future tour plans. As tour operators, we actually wanted some time alone, but our trip participants wanted to hang out with us - so we could translate menus, etc.<BR><BR>As for expenses, I think one can always plan a trip independently that costs less than a tour. The more intimate the tour, the greater the expense. But as someone has already noted, no one wants to go on a tour that stops for one night in a number of places - the whirlwind tour may be cheap, but there's a reason for that.<BR><BR>To answer your original question, it depends on what you describe as a *tour group.* If you're talking about a huge bus full of people, it's one thing. If you're talking about one of the intimate, small tour group types, it's totally different. If having lots of free time on your own is important to you, I would do some research into the smaller tour groups that let you build your own schedule. It's still not like traveling Europe completely on your own, but it's better than being on the "If it's Tuesday this must be Belgium" deal.<BR><BR> <BR><BR>