pijeta

My husband and I are traveling to NYC for our first time in April. Although we know they'll be lots to do there, we are considering a day trip via Amtrak to Philadelphia. Should we make the trip or just stay put and enjoy the Big Apple? Thanks in advance for any advice!

abram

There's so much to do in NYC that I wouldn't take a day away.

nytraveler

Make a list of your must dos in NYC. Then see about how long they'll take. Then think about waht you can see in Philly in one day.

I would tend to stay in NYC - since it would be along day in Philly - and Amtrak ins;t cheap - to see a limited amount.

But it really all depends on your interests.

GoTravel

No, stay in NYC. You'll find seven days isn't long enough for NYC.

bugswife1

Do you really have a FULL 7 days, or are one or two partially eaten up by travel/check-in, etc.
IF you have a full 7 days, then I say go for it. I know, there is a ton of stuff to do in NYC. I have lived here my whole life and still haven't seen it all. You can't possibly see it all in a week.
That said, go ahead and check out Philly for the day. Because honestly, once you have been to NY it is inevitable that you will HAVE to come back--it IS that great! And, that day in Philly may just whet your appetite enough to come back and do a philly/DC trip too.

mclaurie

This is one of the questions that's impossible to answer. We don't know your travel "style." I know some people who couldn't stand to be in the same place for 7 days on vacation no matter how much there is to see and do. They just have to be on the move. If you're one of those-go, do. If you think you won't be back to this area soon (or ever)-go.

rhrd

Depends on a few things. How far away are you? Do you like historical stuff? As others mentioned, do you "really" have 7 days, or is it really 5?

If you doubt you'll be back in the area again, you can do a day trip to Philly, see the Liberty Bell, Independence Hall, eat a cheesesteak, and be back to NYC. There is enough to do in NYC, but if you won't be doing that area of the East coast again any time soon, I'd go for it.

You can easily spend 7 days in Philly as well and not have covered everything.

diann

I am from the PHL suburbs. Quite honestly if it were me I would stay in NYC. As said difficult to say without knowing your styles, interest, is it a full 7 days or not. Traveling to PHL will take time and back Factoring in the time element, not that much time in PHL to see that much. Trust me I doubt you will be bored in NYC.

bugswife1

Sorry, I have to disagree with those who say not to go.

I remember going to London for a week and deciding on a whim to take the Channel tunnel train to Paris for a day. I left Waterloo at 8 AM, arrived in Paris at noon. I saw a wing of the Louvre (crown jewels, mona lisa, winged victory, I.M.Pei pyramids, etc.). Then took the double decker bus and rode to the top of the Eiffel Tower, got a beautiful overview of the Opera house, Notre Dame, and the Arc de Triomphe. Strolled the beautiful streets and had a wonderful lunch in an outdoor cafe, rode the subway back to the train, and was returned to London at 11 pm, just in time to hit a pub.
I still saw much of London and got a taste of Paris as well.

Philly is only 2 hours from NYC. You could see the bulk of the historic district, enjoy a marvelous lunch, and greatly add to your trip. While NY is absolutely amazing, I think that the historical value of Philadelphia is equally enjoyable. The contrast of the 2 east coast cities, only 2 hours apart is very interesting.

Gekko

No.

First, 7 days in NYC is not enough.

Second, there's too much to see in Philly for a day trip.

Finally, it would be a nightmare day with two train rides etc.

BTilke

I hardly see it as a nightmare. Many Philly residents commute to work in NYC on Amtrak 5 days a week. My husband did it for two years and didn't find it that arduous.

If you want to see Philly, then you could have a lovely day trip. See the historic center, check out the Reading Terminal Market, relax with a coffee on one of the benches at Rittenhouse Square.

It's not that different from people spending a week in London and doing a day trip to Paris--something plenty of tourists do every year.

If you don't really want to see Philly, then it's not worth doing. But it makes a nice contrast to NYC. You're not going to see everything in NYC anyway even if you do spend all seven days there.

bardo1

I strongly agree with Gekko's first two points:

<<First, 7 days in NYC is not enough.

Second, there's too much to see in Philly for a day trip.>>

And I love Philadelphia.

bugswife1

So, let me understand. The argument here is that you shouldn't go someplace if you can't see everything, or at least as much as you can cram into the days you have?
So say they have 14 things to do in NY over 7 days and they see 12 instead of 14, but see 2 things in Phila, does that make it a bad trip? A waste of time? Sometimes a diversion in the middle of a trip is not a bad thing. I know plenty of people who come to NYC for a week and want to take a day trip to the Hamptons. It can be equally rewarding to see the surrounding area as the area itself.

Gekko

It's a bad idea for visitors, plain & simple -- hence the majority opinion to stay in New York.

Christina

I think the OP should do it just based on how much interest they really have in Philadelphia. That's all it depends on. If it's a place you really want to do, of course do it. It's an easy trip on a train -- I spend that much time communting one way to work sometimes (unfortunately, due to traffic). The idea that you should go because there is too much to see in the entire city in one day makes no sense. That doesn't mean you can't see some of the main things you want to. I personally wouldn't have any desire to spend 7 days in NYC. I don't like it that much, I don't care how much people say there is to do. I enjoyed visiting Philadelphia and I've been there a couple times only for a day or so.

The point of visiting NYC (since that is the alternative, you must stay there) is not to see every single thing, or to do every single thing there is to do in New York, either. Lots of people do things I have zero interest in, and I like seeing a variety of places and cities.

The only reason I wouldn't is the cost, perhaps, as Amtrak is expensive. There's no reason in the world why this is a "bad idea".

Andrew

I agree that if pijeta has an interest in Philadelphia then go - its only just over an hour each way on Amtrak, a very easy trip. Philadelphia has history of national significance that you can't get in NYC (and vice versa of course), but some people do like to see stuff like Independence Hall and the Liberty Bell if they've never seen it before. The Constitution Center is nice, too.

In my experience, adding a city and a day trip often adds a dimension to a trip, something more to talk about and remember. When you you look back on your trip in five years, if you stay in NYC you'll just remember the best of NYC, whether you spend 6 or 7 days there. If you go to Philadelphia for a day you'll remember the best of NYC *and* your day trip to Philly.

thit_cho

To me, and I live in Manhattan, its an excellent idea. Six days in NY is plenty -- you don't need to leave having seen everything. I find train rides pleasant, the trip to Philadelphia is not that long, and its a much different city from NY. I don't understand those who expect you to see all of NY -- do they expect you to write your own guidebook after the trip? I consider Philadelphia a daytrip from NY, in the same spirit as visiting Giverny from Paris, the Great Wall from Beijing, etc.

In my opinion, if you want to visit Philadelphia, you'd be silly not too -- its just so close. I have gone just to see the Mets play and have been back in NY that night.

marginal_margiela

I live in Philly. I don't think you should visit for just one day, as there is just too much to see and do. You need at least three days to appreciate the City of Brotherly Love. Stay in NYC.

Thin

BarryK

I live in the Philly burbs and frequently make day trips to NYC.

I think a day trip to Philly is a good idea and a nice way to take a break from the frenetic pace of NYC.

I agree with the posters who say it's ridiculous not to go somewhere just because you can't see everything the city has to offer. You'll get a taste of Philly and come back for more when you have more time.

pijeta

Thanks for all the excellent replies! Every opinion really gives us something to think about and I value each viewpoint.

To answer a few questions:
- We will be in NYC for 7 full days.
- We tend to get antsy when in one location for a long time, especially w/o a car that would give us more freedom/flexibility.
- We live a good distance from most of our relatives (we are used to making a 10-hour round-trip drive in a weekend to visit them), so really the 1.5-hour one-way ride doesn't sound that unappealing. And my husband has never ridden the train, so I think that would add some excitement in and of itself.
- We are from the Midwest and although we hope to go back to that area again, we don't know when. Plus, Philedelphia's history does interest us and maybe a "sneak peak" will make us plan a second trip much sooner.

I think we'll make a list of the "Must Do's" in both cities, compare, and add up the value of doing it. And, like mentioned, the price will be a big consideration.

Thanks again for the help!