My friends and I are planning a 17 day trip through europe during the world cup. We know we definately want to start our trip in Prague and end our trip in Munich but we're trying to decide what countries to visit in between. We'd especially like to know travel times between countries by way of rail.
Croatia and Budapest are definite stops for us.

The debate right now is whether to travel:
A) PRAGUE-BUDAPEST-CROATIA-VIENNA-MUNICH
or
B) PRAGUE-BUDAPEST-CROATIA-VENICE (by ferry) - MUNICH

Does anyone have any suggestions? Is Venice worth the extra travel time over Vienna?

For museums and other cultural venues, I would say Vienna. For the city that is beautiful in itself, Venice.

Venice is alsolutely one-of-a-kind. IMHO Vienna does not compare.

I love both of these cities, but I think that there's so much more to do and see in Vienna...although I have to say that I was astounded by how beautiful Venice is.

Dear Becky,

Ultimately, only you and your friend can answer this, because you will know better than we will what appeals to you most.

My perspective - in some ways, Prague, Budapest and Vienna are similar. All great capitals of Europe, still very vibrant, mixed architecture (historic and new), "big" city activities.

Venice is a jewel apart, like nothing else in the world. You either love it or not, but it is something to be experienced at least once. For that reason, I would vote for Venice and leave Vienna for a future trip.

If the rail distance information is needed for your decision, you could use the search function on this site to find previous posts with websites for European train schedules.

Best wishes, SusanEva

As SusanEva says, it's absolutely down to your own tastes. It seems my tastes are the opposite of Pegontheroad : I'd go back again & again to Venice, but found 2 days in Vienna too much. Perhaps it would be best to borrow a selection of guidebooks to each from the library & see which appeals to you most.

Go here to find out timings and durations:

http://reiseauskunft.bahn.de/bin/query.exe/en

This timetable will save a lot of mucking around with the Hungarian and Austrian timetables; you'll need to pick a specific location in Croatia;
personally I think your Plan B is a better choice although I am not certain what sorts of connections you can get directly from Budapest to Croatia but the timetable above will help.

Be aware that unless you get the (usually) one direct connection per day Venice-Munich you'll almost have to change in Verona. Prague-Budapest takes about 7 hours or so and there are several direct services each day.

Venice is my favorite far and away beyond Vienna, BUT--
Vienna is a world-class capital city with lots to see, give it a couple of days since you will be in the neighborhood, and save Venice for the crowning jewel in a visit to Italy.
Venice is farther away from your other destinations than you might realize, unless you intend to fly there.

Hi BP,

The train rides from Vienna to Venice and Venice to Munich take you through the mountains. Very pretty rides.

On a scale of 0-10, I would give Vienna an 8 and Venice 11.

Also see
http://plannerint.b-rail.be/bin/quer...n?L=profi&
for train schedules.

Vienna is a very nice city. I have been and have no particular desire to return. Venice is unique and a jewel and certainly one of the loveliest places I have ever been. It is worth the extra time it would take to get there. However, if you think you might be able to get to Italy any time soon, you might want to include Vienna in this trip and plan for a later trip to Italy, including Venice.

Vienna is a nice city. Venice is a unique world treasure.

On our first trip to Venice we stayed 4-1/2 days and didn't run out of things to see and do. In fact, we didn't have enough time to visit some excellent sights like the Accademia and Guggenheim museums or any of the smaller lagoon islands (e.g., San Michelle, Burano, Murano, Torcello, etc.).

Whether any additional travel time might shift the balance to Vienna depends on the traveler's interests and personality.

I can't believe there's even a debate here. Vienna is quite a nice city, as cities go, a bit on the dull side, whereas Venice is unique. Everyone should see Venice at least once in their lifetime.

I completely agree with the last statement. I just think, not necessarily on this particular trip.

as elaine above, i think venice wins as a city, but vienna is more logical for your itinerary this trip.

what time of year is the World Cup? Sorry if I missed it in the post somewhere....

I agree that if you've never been to Venice (no matter what time of year) you must go there.

Thanks to everyone for responding! Your advise and weblinks were really helpful. I think we're leaning towards going to Venice over Vienna now. Looks like we might want to fly from Budapest to Croatia to cut down on the travel time. According to my friend the world cup should be starting a few days before we leave (which is why we're ending in munich) Our trip is going to be 5/25-6/11. According to the web the world cup is 6/9-7/9. I'm getting very anxious. This is going to be my first trip to Europe.

Don't know why it has to be an "either/or" - let the geography do it for you: From Prag you're going through Vienna anyway, on the way to Budapest. So stop for a day or two and check out the few items that you agree ahead of time are of interest to all of you. You'll be glad to get off the train anyway.

Then from Budpest the most natural thing is to head west, either through Slovenia and come out on the Adriatic, or a bit further south via Zagreb (I think Slovenia is prettier), go down as far as you wish along the Croatian Coast, come up along the coast to Trieste and head the few miles over to Venice. Now look at the map: It's pretty much straight up, north, the sortest way to Munich.

No backtracking, no detours. You're covering the shortest distances between all points, and you're hitting them all. Bingo.

Enjoy

WK