California trip
 

Hi,

My husband and I are thinking of taking a trip to California this september. Since this will be our first time, we're not sure of how to plan our itinerary. We will be renting a car and want to drive to the following places: 4-5 days in San Franciso, 2 days in L.A., 2-3 in Nappa and if the time permits it, 2-3 days in Phoenix. We'll be flying out of Montreal
thanks

Napa can be a day's outing from SF. I would suggest Sonoma because it has more to see in terms of historical sights (the main square in Sonoma itself, General Vallejo's home, Jack London State Historical Park) along with the wineries that can be visited.

It'll be over 100 degrees in Phoenix in September. And it's hundreds of miles out of your way. I would drop that part of your trip and add it somewhere to your California travels.

Long way from the Bay Area or LA to Phoenix. If you want heat and the desert go to Death Valley or Jousha Tree NP. Still a long drive but much closer than Phoenix.
If you do a day trip to Napa, skip the city and just spend time in Napa Valley...a route a little less traveled is the Silvarado Trail on the east side of the Valley.
But, like Michael, prefer Sonoma and environs. If you want a little further north since you have a car, look at the Healdsburg area, Russian River Valley and more up there. IMO, better wineries.

So, after a few days in SF and a few days in Napa, head down Highway 1 destination LA, but take your time. A very beautiful and rugged coastline. Stop 1 night Monterrey (Aquarium, 17 mile drive), down 1 to Cambria and Moonstone Beach area. Then Santa Barbara. Finish off with a couple days in LA and whoosh, back to Montreal. You could make a good two weeks out of that.

Agree with the above: Cut out Phoenix part of your trip and end in LA

BillJ has the right solution!

"Few" days in SF?? How many days is few??

I would spend at least 5 nights in San Francisco, followed by 2 nights in Healdsburg/wine country, 2-3 nights in Carmel/Pacific Grove/Pt Lobos, 1-2 nights in Big Sur, & 1 night in San Simeon to visit Hearst Castle. After that - you may not want to spend a whole lotta time in LA & all the freeways/traffic/concrete there.

Here are my ideas for the SF Bay Area.
http://www.fodors.com/community/unit...mendations.cfm

Stu Dudley

Oh StuDudley - I love all your San Francisco advice but don't knock LA too hard. With good planning it can be a great place to visit with ocean beaches, foothill hiking, world class museums and gardens, architecture (50's, arts and crafts, old theaters), terrific restaurants and classic tourist spots.

I agree about LA. It has many pockets of greatness amidst the craziness. You just have to know where to go and when to go there. Don't diss L.A.

>>You just have to know where to go and when to go there.<<

Is a first-timer going to know that??? When I lived there for 28 years (San Gabriel for 23 & Laguna Beach for 5), I had a difficult time avoiding the freeways - which I didn't like. I can remember many times sitting on a freeway for hours, but only driving 60 miles - and this was not during "core" commute hours. After we moved to San Francisco 36 years ago, we could see more interesting stuff in a day than we could in about a month in the LA basin.

Most visitors to San Francisco don't use cars to visit all the sites. They walk or take public transportation.

Stu Dudley

I think the goal of Fodors Forums is to help travelers find the "pockets of greatness." I used to feel the same way as Stu about LA until our daughter moved there. She transferred her joy of discovery in the LA area to fabulous itineraries for us when we visited. We absolutely loved our visits in LA! That said, Phoenix does seem a bit out of the way, unless the OP has special reasons for going there.

Star48, if your time schedule feels tight, consider just a day trip to Napa from SF, or just spending one night with 2 very full days there. To justify the long drive to LA, I think I would spend more than 2 days.

I'm afraid StuDudley's view of LA is pretty outdated, if it ever really was accurate (after all, he lived in San Gabriel!)

I think yk has some of the most useful trip reports on Fodors, so just for reference here is one she did with some ideas: (and it includes a link to a second one).
http://www.fodors.com/community/unit...os-angeles.cfm

I wasn't knocking LA. There's plenty interesting things to see there. But the op apparently has only a couple of weeks.

Every trip is a compromise of what doesn't get seen.

<<<consider just a day trip to Napa from SF, or just spending one night with 2 very full days there>>>

As beautiful as the wine country is, unless you're going to spend days wine tasting, you can drive through and see the beauty (and even get out of your car once in awhile :-) ) in one day.

>>>>>I'm afraid StuDudley's view of LA is pretty outdated<<

Do you mean that there are no freeways there anymore, and the cars have disappeared?? If so, I'll have to return for a visit !!!

My point is that the OP will probably spend more time getting from site to site (on a freeway, most likely) in the LA area, than they will in San Francisco (walking, most likely). I was watching a John Denver video last night "livin' on an LA freeway, ain't my kind of having fun"

What's wrong with San Gabriel???

Stu Dudley

When in L.A., do not miss the Museum of Jurassic Technology, making sure that you see every room.

If you read Yks report, you can see that not only did she WALK between sights, she actually found lots to do..in 40 hours. And I'm not sure that she needed to take a single freeway.

Nothing is wrong with San Gabriel, I just wouldn't judge the ease of seeing LA tourist things from a suburban home vs staying downtown or in (heaven forbid) Hollywood. And a lot has changed since you left...I won't ask how many years ago.

>>You just have to know where to go and when to go there.<<

"Is a first-timer going to know that???"

Well, that's what this forum does best! First-timers to any city can find out "where to go and when to go there".

I lived in SoCal, years ago, and it is certainly different than when we lived there. Yes, the freeways are not for the timid, but at least the drivers seem to know what they are doing in L.A. (Ever driven in Baltimore?) And the air is so clean now, compared to when we lived there. I love the canyons and the ocean and the mountains close by.

I also have relatives in the Bay Area, and I will say that when we drive places through SF, their city traffic is every bit as bad as L.A. And SF has the weirdest, and dangerous, intersections. But no self-respecting SF-er will ever admit that, for sure. My sisters certainly do not.

There is a traditional anti-L.A. feeling in San Francisco. Always has been. Always will be. They think L.A. is a cultureless wasteland, and S.F. is mecca. Sorry, but I like both cities. Two completely different places, obviously, both with strengths and weaknesses.

Am heading to L.A. Marina del Rey area in a couple of weeks. I enjoy it there.

<<<There is a traditional anti-L.A. feeling in San Francisco.>>>

Blame it on the Dodgers. LA is okay, there's certainly plenty to occupy tourists, the weather is usually great. Really, the only problem with visiting LA is that everything is so spread out and traffic is awful (the difference between traffic in San Francisco and traffic in LA is that the former is bad during commute hours and the latter is bad all the time --- like 2:10 to drive on a late Saturday afternoon from Torrance to Hollywood, for no apparent reason other than lots of cars)

I'm guessing here - but I'll bet that 80-90% of first-time tourists don't even rent a car while visiting San Francisco on a 4 day (or less) visit. They walk or take public transportation - so street traffic is not an issue for them. I can drive from the northern edge of SF (GG Bridge) to the southern edge of SF in 15-20 mins - and never get on a freeway. Same thing for driving east to west on Geary. When I worked in downtown San Francisco, I had several co-workers who lived in the City & didn't even own a car. There is even a "car-share" program in SF (don't know much about it) which might be a good idea for these non-car owners to use for trips outside the City. There are lots of people who bike to work from areas withing SF that are considered "far away" (Inner Sunset to downtown, for example - more than half-way across SF). San Francisco is only 49 Square miles - 7X7.

Can't say most of these things about LA - which is why we moved up here.

Stu Dudley

<<<I can drive from the northern edge of SF (GG Bridge) to the southern edge of SF in 15-20 mins - and never get on a freeway. >>>

Well, to be honest, you'd be hard pressed to do that ON a freeway :-)

No sense bashing one location or another. Travel is about discovery anyway. Fodorites are here to help! I could post some relatively easy and fun things to do in LA area, but I'll wait for star48 to post some questions first.

Star48, when you are ready to ask about LA, there are a number of us on Fodors who will help you figure out how to maximize and enjoy your time there!

>>you'd be hard pressed to do that ON a freeway <<

East on Lombard to Gough. North on Gough to Fell, right on Fell, left on Octavia to the Central freeway, & then 101.

The only thing I might be "bashing" is all the time spent driving on freeways from site to site in LA.

Stu Dudley

I know - my point was you can't get from the Golden Gate Bridge across town to 101 south on a freeway.

>>you can't get from the Golden Gate Bridge across town to 101 south on a freeway.<<

Back about 40+ years ago, a freeway linking 101 to the GG Bridge was planned. They were going to knock down many Victorians in the Alamo Square area (including the famous 'Postcard Row") to make the connection. Thank goodness - it never happened.

As you know, there are fewer miles of freeway in the City today, than there was in '88 (before quake). There is the beautiful Embarcadero today, where an ugly & view obscuring freeway once stood. I was opposed to removing both the Embarcadero & Central freeways in the 70s & 80s when those ideas were first considered. The '89 quake resolved the conflict. I will admit that I was wrong - big time - in my support for the freeways.

Stu Dudley

Thanks for all your suggestions. As for Phoenix, we really want to go. Can anyone tell me how long the drive is from LA to Phoenix...we don't mind long drives. We've driven from Montreal to Miami several times.

LA to Phoenix, about 6 hrs actual driving time.