I am going to LV in May with my husband and the rate at the Hilton is ony $45 a night, but is it convenient, clean and worth staying at? I have not booked it yet. I am from Canada and want value for my money with the exchange rate being so high.

Hi, Tara,
If you are referring to the LV Hilton and NOT the Flamingo Hilton, that's a good rate; in our experience the LVH tries to whack you with the rack rate whenever possible.

The LVH is off the strip by quite a distance, making a car a necessity to go anywhere. It's certainly clean enough but enormous and rather dull by LV standards, without many redeeming virtues IMO. I don't think you'll find many bargains in the restaurants or shops at the hotel, either.

The Flamingo Hilton is another story, right in the middle of things on the strip, a much nicer facility.

Good luck.

The above poster is right. The Flamingo Hilton is great with one of the nicest pools. The other Hilton is too far away. You will not need to rent a car in Vegas if you stay on the strip. Go to the site lvol.com for the most concise reviews and lots of information.

Really the only reason to stay at the LV Hilton is if you are going to a convention at the convention center. It might be worth it for $ 45 a night but it's not within walking distance of the strip. Try the Imperial Palace, near the Flamingo and close to the center of the strip.

While I fully agree with the other posters that staying on the Strip is a far better idea than staying at the Las Vegas Hilton, I think it is a major exaggeration to stay that the Hilton is beyond walking distance from the Strip. I was in Las Vegas last week at the CES 2000 and I had no trouble walking from the Frontier (on the Strip) to the Hilton/Convention Center in under 20 minutes.

I checked a couple LV hotel consolidators and you won't find a better deal right now.
As for the hotel itself, it's been left behind by the new trendy Strip hotels, and having stayed in both regular rooms and suites, they're nothing special. They're clean, functional and passable. The key is, are they worth it? For what you're planning to pay? You bet. For $100 a night, no way.
The walk to the strip is 12 minutes or so, but it's not the "happening" part of the strip. You'll have to use some type of transportation to get to the places you'll really want to visit.
Book the LVH, then keep checking around for better rates elsewhere, maybe one of the Hampton Inns, etc will prove a better option later.

Your're right, it is within walking distance of the strip assuming you're in pretty good shape and it's not in July. It can be a rough jaunt when it's 110 degrees. Cab would only be a few bucks though.

The Las Vegas Hilton is a pretty decent hotel and you probably will not find a better deal than $45.00 /nt considering the class of accomodations.

However, I do NOT recommend it, especially for your first visit to Las Vegas. The reason is location. I personally would stay at the Flamingo Hilton, the Paris, or Ballys ( also Hilton properties ). These 3 are similar in quality to the Las Vegas Hilton with the Paris being the newest and probably a little more expensive. These 3 are virtually next to each other at the mid strip. This is the best location for walking to other attractions especially the Bellagio ( must see ). There are other properties in this area that would be fine but probably more expensive ( i.e. Mirage, Bellagio, Caesar's Palace ). I definitely do NOT recommend the Imperial Palace nor Harrahs ( same location as others ).

One thing that you must realize is that the distance between the properties is very deceiving. If you were to look at a map of the strip. everthing appears MUCH closer than it really is. The Las Vegas Hilton is definitely NOT within reasonable walking distance of the other attractions.

Mr. LVLarry:
The Flamingo, Paris and Ballys are all better choices than the LVH, certainly for location, and at least moderately better hotels. But....the rates at these properties range from a low of $149 up to $189 for early May weekends. For someone who wants to carefully control spending, paying more than 3 times as much for a hotel may not be reasonable. Depends on Tara's budget, of course. But that's a sizable difference, which could total a few hundred dollars over 3-4 nights.

As a resident of Las Vegas and travel agent, I can tell you that you have landed a fantastic room rate and I would jump at it. The Hilton is nice and you will find the rooms and service typical of all Hiltons. Yes, a cab ride to the strip will cost you about $5 with tip, but there are also free shuttles available that run regularly. Yes, it's true that the Hilton is not in the middle of everything, but the rate you are getting is well worth the bother of hopping on a shuttle or grabbing a taxi to see the sights.

I stayed in the Hilton for a convention a couple of years ago. It was the only time I have been in Vegas. I did get out and do a lot of sightseeing too. If you are doing it to save money, then I think it is more than worth the $45 a night. There are some good restaurants at the Hilton, and of course Star Trek- The Experience is there. It is fairly dull for Vegas, I would think, and the location is way off the main part of the strip. It doesn't take very long though to walk to the Stratosphere tower and the casinos in that area. You can always use the bus or take a cab to get to the other areas (I think cabs were between $5 and $10 to get from there to the Luxor). The hotel is definitely very clean, and the rooms are pretty decent. Dennis Rodman seems to like the place. We saw him there, and he apparently goes there often to gamble. Oh, I guess you won't stay there now...

Baron:

Room rates in Las Vegas are extremely volatile. I never checked the rates for those periods so you very well may be right. However these same rates could just as easily be $39.00 - $59.00 /nt. The Flamingo Hilton ran a special a few months back for $39.00 /nt so you can never generalize about the rates. It all depends on who has what conventions, etc.