Diane

My husband and I have time for one day trip from London. The only way to see Stonehenge and Bath is to take the Evan Evans bus tour (6-7 hours on the bus) with 1 hour at Stonehenge and approximately 3 hours in Bath. Would our time be better spent taking the train (1 hr 45 min) to see the castle in Warwick on our first trip to England?

Bill Irving

This would be a tuff one for me. But mainly because of only 3 hrs. in Bath. When we went to London the past June for 5 days, we had a similar problem, but it was between a day in Bath or a day in Warwick. I have been to both before & really liked both, but the kids had not seen Bath, but it was a full day in Bath & that is where we went. The kids, as well as us, really liked it there. For 3 hrs, you would probably have time to go thru the baths, but not much more. There is alot to see as far as architecture of the buildings, the Royal Cresent area, taking a boat ride on the Avon. The Salisbury/Stonhenge area could also be a daytrip on its on, which you could also do on your own. No matter what you may have read on other post, Stonhenge is worth a visit, especially if you have not been there at all. Some may also say Warick is alittle bit cheezy, but the Castle itself is enjoyable, there is much to do & walk thru - including the dungeon, & you don't even need to go into the Wax museum part of it. All 3 are worth it, but if you take the bus tour you will get to a few more areas, rather than just 1 place, & then next time you go to London, you can make choices on what you have or haven't seen.

Bridget

Hi Diane, <BR>My fiance and I went on the Evans Evans bus tour to Bath and Stonehenge on our first trip Europe, which included London, SCotland, and Paris. We really enjoyed the bus ride. The tour guides are very whitty and offer some basic British history which was very entertaining throughout the ride. They take you to Stonehenge first, for about 45 mintues, which is a fair amount of time. I must have taken 3 rolls of film, I was so impressed. Then we went to Bath. As an English major in college, I felt it was almost a must to go to Bath, to see where Jane Austen and all those literary greats wrote about. It must have been a hell of a place when it functioned, but I was pretty bored. They focused ALOT on the Roman history of the baths, and I guess I was looking at more of a literary sense of them. We were at the baths for a while, got bored with listening to the wand they give you to punch in numbers for information about tiles and Roman history. So we ventured to the Royal Cresant up the hill, went inside the Bath cathedral, and saw Sally Linn's buns and ate lunch at a pub. I thought 3 hours was just enough, if not too much, time in Bath. People say they love it and could spend days there (we had the Rick Steve's guide book for information), but when we go back, I doubt we'll make another trip to Bath, although I'd love to see Stonehenge again, and the gimpses of the English country-side were spectacular. We didn't go to Warwick, but we went to Windsor, which was really beautiful, even though we couldn't go inside St. George's chappel as an employee was getting married there that day. If you would like any more information or details on the places we visited, please feel free to write! <BR>Have a great trip! <BR>Bridget =)

Bridget

Hi Diane, <BR>My fiance and I went on the Evans Evans bus tour to Bath and Stonehenge on our first trip Europe, which included London, SCotland, and Paris. We really enjoyed the bus ride. The tour guides are very whitty and offer some basic British history which was very entertaining throughout the ride. They take you to Stonehenge first, for about 45 mintues, which is a fair amount of time. I must have taken 3 rolls of film, I was so impressed. Then we went to Bath. As an English major in college, I felt it was almost a must to go to Bath, to see where Jane Austen and all those literary greats wrote about. It must have been a hell of a place when it functioned, but I was pretty bored. They focused ALOT on the Roman history of the baths, and I guess I was looking at more of a literary sense of them. We were at the baths for a while, got bored with listening to the wand they give you to punch in numbers for information about tiles and Roman history. So we ventured to the Royal Cresant up the hill, went inside the Bath cathedral, and saw Sally Linn's buns and ate lunch at a pub. I thought 3 hours was just enough, if not too much, time in Bath. People say they love it and could spend days there (we had the Rick Steve's guide book for information), but when we go back, I doubt we'll make another trip to Bath, although I'd love to see Stonehenge again, and the gimpses of the English country-side were spectacular. We didn't go to Warwick, but we went to Windsor, which was really beautiful, even though we couldn't go inside St. George's chappel as an employee was getting married there that day. If you would like any more information or details on the places we visited, please feel free to write! <BR>Have a great trip! <BR>Bridget =)

Gwen

<BR>Hi Diane - <BR> <BR>Actually, you don't have to take a coach tour in order to see Stonehenge & Bath in the same day. I haven't done it myself, but I was there at the beginning of August and we took a day trip from London to Bath on the train (train took around 1-1/2 to 2 hrs); while on the train we met a mother & 2 daughters who were taking the train to Bath, spending a few hours in Bath, then taking the train to Salisbury to visit the Cathedral there, and finally a bus from Salisbury to Stonehenge (bus trip 20 minutes). To get back to London they took the bus back from Stonehenge to Salisbury and then took the train from Salisbury to London. It was a pretty full day but sounded like an excellent idea (we had already mapped out a full day in Bath and had bought return tickets for Bath, otherwise we would probably have done that too). I think I copied down their timetable just in case I ever wanted to try it; if you are interested in doing something like this rather than a coach tour, e-mail me at the above address and I will see if I can find the info at home.

Diane

Gwen - I was actually thinking about trying to do that very thing with the train but I didn't know if the train stopped in Salisbury and if we could get off & on again. I would really appreciate the itinerary. Thanks.

judy

I've been to all three of these sites and enjoyed them immensely. Two years later on a quick trip with others we took a day trip by bus to Warwick (this tour also went to Stratford-on-Avon which is just about 8 or 10 miles from Warwick). I think you will LOVE Warwick Castle if you've ever been interested in castles and knights, etc. As someone posted here, others may find it a bit cheesy, but it's neat with the "bottom" floor reconstructed by the same people who make the wax figures for Madame Tussaud. It shows how life was in a castle back in the Middle Ages and I found it fun...in the courtyard are strolling minstrels and a knight on horseback. If you go here, you can stop by Stratford and see Shakespeare's birthplace. I'll admit to its commercialization, but it's still Shakespeare! Gosh, I love England; wish I were going with you...have a great time. <BR>

M & J

We spent several wonderful days at Bath. Explored the town with free walking tours, enjoys a night ghost walk, a live tour of the Bath complex, the Royal Crescent and the Circle, pub sampling----go to Bath !

Bill

If I could recommend one day trip, it would be neither Warwick nor Stonehenge/Bath. Instead, it would be Canterbury. While York is probably the best medieval city, it's too far for one day. Canterbury runs it a close second, and the cathedral has such marvelous historical overtones -- Beckett, et.al. Plus, the train ride through Kent is charming.

Kimberley

Hi Diane. I did a Salisbury/Bath daytrip about 3 weeks ago when I was in London, did it myself rather than a tour, and it was easy and hassle-free. I was actually completely unprepared (it was sort of spur of the moment) and it was still very simple. Here's what you need to know: go to Waterloo station and buy tickets to Bath via Salisbury. When I was there I caught the 9:35am train, I beleive an earlier one left at about 8:30 as well. Tickets cost 21 pounds round trip and took a few minutes to buy. Train stops in Sakisbury (takes about 1 1/2 hours) and from the train station catch the Wilts & Dorset bus (4.80 pounds each way) right outside which goes straight to Stonehenge every hour. There is a wicket at the train station that sells tickets to Stonehenge, but they're not cheaper and the line is not necessarily shorter, so focus instead on when the bus leaves rather than buying tickets there (wouldn't you rather wait a few minutes longer in line at Stonehenge than miss the bus and wait a whole hour for the next one). You'll pay 4 pounds to see Stonhenge, and whenever you're done, catch the bus back to the train(it arrives at 20 past the hour, every hour right in front of the ticket booth). We had lunch in Salisbury before catching the train to Bath, then back on the train (using the same tickets from before) for another hour or so. We arrived in Bath at around 3:30, figuring we'd catch the 7:30 or 8:30 train out, but we were done about 6:00 and caught the 6:30 train. We saw the Abbey, the baths, ate some treats, and wandered around the streets, the Circus, and Royal Crescent. We found we had plenty of time and were ready to leave when we did, but were glad to have the option to stay longer if we'd liked. This whole thing cost us under 30 pounds each, was very simple, and allowed a lot of flexibility (we'd planned to stay at Stonehenge an hour and ended up enjoying the relaxing feel and stayed for two). If I can answer anything else e-mail or post! Have fun... Kimberley

Jo

Personally - I think I would choose to do Stratford upon Avon and Warwick Castle. You can easily fit both in the same day and they're quite close together. Bath is also wonderful, I just think you need more time there. I'm also not a fan of stonehenge which probably slants me a bit. Whatever you do decide, they're both great trips.

Lucas

In reply to Bill's message. <BR> <BR>Warwick is not 'cheesy'. It's an old English town. The reason it looks a bit quaint is because that's the way it is, not because it has been created that way for tourists. <BR> <BR>Beleive me, it's genuine. I live there.

Bill

Lucas, your response was not to my post. If you read it correctly, I said some people have thought of Warwick as cheesy, I did not say that I thought of it that way. If you have been participating in this forum for as many years as I have, you would have read many many Warwick cheesy posts, against which I have always disagreed, because I really like the place, just as I stated in my previous post. If you have a comment to make about a place go ahead & post it, but before you make reference to a previous post, be sure you read it thouroughly first. Again, I really like Warwick & have been there twice & want to go again, but there are some people that don't feel that way, which is fine also, different people have different tastes, likes & dislikes.

Dawn

I have not been to Bath & Stonehenge, but I have been to Warwick. It is fabulous, I know that Bath is great also, but to truly apreciate all that Bath offers, I think you need a bit more time. You can do Warwick in one day, my husband and I did and really enjoyed ourselves. We bought our tickets at the Marlyebone (sp.) Station, for both the train, and the tour of the Castle, for a combined amount and we saved at least 10 pounds than if we had purchased seperately. At the counter will be the advertisement for this combined offer. The train ride was just about 1 and 1/2 hours, once we got off the train, we walked maybe the equivilent of 8 blocks or so, and there it was. Warwick is a lovely town, I do not think cheesy at all, we had lunch and spent a most enjoyable day. Came back to London early evening and had dinner in London. My husband who is Italian and I had spent 2 weeks in Italy, before going to England, and his favorite part of the whole vacation was Warwick. We are planning on going to Bath, etc. on our next trip, I think it is better to spend a day or 2.

Diane

We were going to stay overnight in Bath and actually have a hotel reservation but then we found out that you can't buy a round trip ticket unless you return the same day and a one way ticket costs almost the same. We also werent sure that there would be something to do that night - that the nightly tours or theatre would still be open this late in the season. Actually now I want to go both places (Warwick & Stonehenge and Bath) but that would only leave us 3 days in London

Elizabeth

My husband and I wish to take a 1-day trip to Warwick and Stratford-upon-Avon, is it possible to do all in one day? Should we take a bus tour or do-it-ourselves and take a train and then bus to Stratford? Does anyone have suggestions on this itinerary? Thank you

April

Diane: <BR>I know some people think of it as "a pile or rocks" but I can't imagine going to England and missing Stonehenge. <BR>

Lori

Diane, <BR>I think you need to decide yourself which is of more interest to you - Stonehenge & Bath OR Warwick Castle. They are two different things, two different trips and two different areas. Since you can't do both which (after reading about them, seeing pictures, factoring in historical value, watching videos/whatever) appeal to you the most? Only you can decide. No one else can decide for you, everyone has their own likes & dislikes. It's your first trip to England and I understand your wanting to see the most you can, but you don't want your memories to be nothing more than a blur because you saw so much you can't place any of it later on without a photo to remind you! We've visited all three of these sights and each is equally impressive. We've done Warwick, via a daytrip by train (nice ride by the way, out of Marylebone Station) and we've done Stonehenge & Bath by car and poked around the countryside at will - both were great trips, but two different experiences. <BR> <BR>My personal thoughts on this based on knowing my likes and dislikes would be to avoid the bus tour, but again it's a personal thing and you may love bus tours. We're more the do it yourself kind of people so the train ride to Warwick was fun and the castle/town was great as we were not confined to a tour schedule, i.e. get back to the bus! Sure we had to catch a train back, but there were lots of them. Best of all is renting a car and doing your own thing, going when and where your please but with only one day I'd not consider that as an option. <BR> <BR>Another thing to consider is this going to be at the end or beginning of your trip? We always avoid scheduling anything that might be tiring for the very beginning. <BR> <BR>If in the end you decide not to take either trip there is always Hampton Court which is easily accessible from London and fantastic as well, likewise Windsor Castle. <BR> <BR>If you do follow one of the previous posters advice and to to Bath via Salisbury try and take time to visit the Cathedral there -- fantastic! <BR> <BR>Enjoy the trip,

Sue

I think anyone who does anything in 3 hours might as well stay at home! <BR>Even a day does NO justice to anything, and seems like a waste of time and money. Warwick, Stratford, and Bath and indeed - all the other heritage towns/cities of the UK deserve more than a day. It seems travellers on this forum 'do' places to say they have been there - what a waste! <BR>

Gina

Elizabeth, yes, it's possible to do both Stratford and Warwick in one day, but I'd say it would be a day with a rather early start (depending on how much of the Shakespearean sights you want to see), and a very busy one. I'm assuming this is for a day trip from London? You'd probably want to make travel arrangements that get you into Stratford by 10, allow 3-4 hours for seeing the Birthplace, the church where Shakespeare is buried, wandering around down by the locks of the Avon, and seeing Anne Hathaway's cottage. There are a couple of other places on the Shakespeare Tour too...husband your time. Perhaps have a pub lunch down at the Black Swan/"Dirty Duck," across from the Royal Shakespeare Company theater. (I'd recommend staying in Stratford and seeing an RSC performance, but if you can't you can't--I think there are *some* tour companies that do a one-day Stratford trip and bring you back late to London after theater, though.) <BR> <BR>Then you could head off to Warwick about 2:30 and get there by 3. Two hours in the castle (I believe it closes at 5?) should give you a good overview...I wish I'd had a lot more time, but I think it's so worth seeing that if you can at least squeeze that much time out of it, you should try to go. I loved Warwick Castle. <BR> <BR>Sue, while I understand your point, I think saying that 'anyone who does anything in less than three hours might as well stay home' is being rather extreme about it. Too many tourists do succumb to the desire to stuff everything they can into a seven-day itinerary, but on the other hand, there *are* some things that can legitimately be seen in a short period of time. You might get a lot *more* out of a whole day at Warwick Castle, say, but I think it can be fairly enjoyed in a couple of hours. Or, for example, Avebury: we spent about three hours there on our drive to Bath. I just loved the place, found it magical, and would have happily stayed for a couple of days poking around its environs. But was it worth the short stop we made? *Absolutely*. I wouldn't trade the magical hour wandering amid the Avebury stones in the slanting, golden September light for anything. (Speaking of Avebury, it's a great alternative to Stonehenge--the stones themselves aren't as big, but the stone *circle* is much bigger--the village of Avebury is inside it. No wire fence, much less touristed, in the same general region.) <BR> <BR>That said, I do agree that it's doing a disservice to some more "major" destinations to try to see them in a few hours. The entire town of Bath in three hours? I guess it can be done, since some people say they have, but I can't imagine touring the Baths, the Abbey, walking the Crescent, wandering Pulteney Bridge, meandering around the Georgian architecture, going down to the banks of the Avon, enjoying a bun at Sally Lunn's, and doing all of the other things that seem so quintessentially "Bath" to me in three hours. I've spent about five days in Bath over the course of two trips, and I could happily go back. <BR> <BR>Sue, I also think there's no need to be contemptuous and say that people on this forum 'do' places just to check them off and say they've been there. Maybe some people do do that, but why assume? I know for me that there are just *so* many wonderful places I want to visit--not to check them off some imaginary checklist, but to experience them. Yes, if I spend more time, I can experience them even better. But we also all have a limited amount of time we can travel--so we struggle with an infinite list of places we want to go and finite amounts of money and time. Sometimes, faced with that paradox, we overplan, not out of any "I must check Bath off my list" snottery, but because we think longingly, "Oh my gosh, how can I be so close and not get to see Bath?!"