Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Not everyone travel to "relax" at a 70 year old's pace, and I am usually exhausted at the end of every day and I am happy about it.
While I'm not exhausted, I don't do "relax" trips, either. But I do actually SEE the places that I visit. I would rather spend a week in one general area -- hub and spoke traveling, than constantly have to pack and unpack, lug bags to airports and train stations and deal with the endless hassle of transfers and making connections.
I could spend days just in the Louvre or the forum in Rome. I'm not content to just "scratch the surface" of a place.
And that's why I would rather have a root canal than deal with trying to cram all of Italy in 10 days. I couldn't see Sicily in 10 days. And why fly into Paris for an Italy trip in the first place? That doesn't make any sense to me at all. That's like flying into Las Vegas to see San Francisco.
I don't think anyone has suggested a week to 10 days in one city. What I see is people recommending more time seeing things instead of spent travelling between destinations. For a first trip to Europe, people are just trying to help them not regret doing so much that they don't even enjoy themselves.
I agree with that. Most people provided constructive suggestions in helping the OP to see more places more realistically without spending most of the time driving.
However, the post I was responding to was suggesting the OP's plan is less enjoyable than a root canal, and definitely inferior to his plan of spending 10 days in nothing but suburban Paris.
We should provide recommendations based on the inquirer's interest and preference, and OP apparently wanted to see more European cities on his trip, and what we should do is to help improve his plan, not mocking it just because it is not the way we usually travel.
While I'm not exhausted, I don't do "relax" trips, either. But I do actually SEE the places that I visit. I would rather spend a week in one general area -- hub and spoke traveling, than constantly have to pack and unpack, lug bags to airports and train stations and deal with the endless hassle of transfers and making connections.
I could spend days just in the Louvre or the forum in Rome. I'm not content to just "scratch the surface" of a place.
And that's why I would rather have a root canal than deal with trying to cram all of Italy in 10 days. I couldn't see Sicily in 10 days. And why fly into Paris for an Italy trip in the first place? That doesn't make any sense to me at all. That's like flying into Las Vegas to see San Francisco.
then what's the point of your response to the OP's post? You provided nothing constructive just because you think your way of travel is somehow superior. You are essentially saying "hey, it is a stupid way to travel, you should travel like me: spending 10 days in one city!"
You could spend days just in Louvre. Fine, you like the Louvre, but that doesn't make your plan any better or your taste higher. But the OP is not you and doesn't share your taste. He wants to see more places, maybe just see the highlight, take a few photos and leave (many travelers are like that), and we should help him to achieve that without spending too much time on the road.
Your post is essentially like when someone asks how to cook a chicken, you responded by saying " why the hell do you eat chicken? it is horrible. It is wrong. I only eat beef as it is so much better, and I'd rather eat dirt than chicken".
And why fly into Paris for an Italy trip in the first place? That doesn't make any sense to me at all. That's like flying into Las Vegas to see San Francisco.
I think it was Italy to Paris, and that was because there was a sale for $400 per person tickets from the USA to Milan. Even with adding on a LCC into Paris, you should come out way ahead from a $$ standpoint instead of going directly to CDG.
then what's the point of your response to the OP's post? You provided nothing constructive just because you think your way of travel is somehow superior. You are essentially saying "hey, it is a stupid way to travel, you should travel like me: spending 10 days in one city!"
You could spend days just in Louvre. Fine, you like the Louvre, but that doesn't make your plan any better or your taste higher. But the OP is not you and doesn't share your taste. He wants to see more places, maybe just see the highlight, take a few photos and leave (many travelers are like that), and we should help him to achieve that without spending too much time on the road.
Your post is essentially like when someone asks how to cook a chicken, you responded by saying " why the hell do you eat chicken? it is horrible. It is wrong. I only eat beef as it is so much better, and I'd rather eat dirt than chicken".
You couldn't be more wrong.
Travel is something that can absolutely be done incorrectly. How? Try to cram too much into too little time. Whenever I hear people complaining about rude locals, snooty waiters, bad infrastructure, missed connections, lost bags and all the rest of the vacation nightmares, there is only one reason for it -- that person is in a rush, pressed for time, and feeling stressed.
I never have a bad time on vacation. Why? I'm never in a rush. I don't HAVE to be anywhere in particular and if I feel like modifying my trip because I like an area, I do.
One thing I see every time I vacation is Japanese tourists, zooming around the world at breakneck speeds, taking pictures of A-list attractions. But they don't actually experience the places that they travel. They didn't really see Paris -- they just have a picture of themselves standing in front of the Eiffel Tower. They are a case study in how NOT to travel. They log a lot of miles, but never really see anything.
The only way that travel itinerary could get any worse is if OP said that it's important to pack 10 pairs of shoes and 50 outfits. That would complete the trifecta of a bad trip -- too much stuff, too many places and not enough time.
I haven't read all the previous responses so maybe someone covered this. The hotels aren't like your used to in the states. They will potentially be very frustrating for you. Alot of the times they don't have anyone who knows about your registration. Make sure you bring a printed copy, in both English and Italian if you can. If you arrive too early they will not check you in. If you arrive during mid afternoon they may not be at the desk. If you arrive too late there may not be anyone around. Europeans shut down alot in the afternoon for siesta. Dinner is very late. You may have trouble adjusting to eat so late. The streets are set up for horses and chariots. You cannot always just drive up to someplace like a hotel or a famous site. Public transport and having a walkable roller bag is often easier to get to your hotel. From there public transport or tours to the sites. There is often not parking anywhere near where you want to be seeing the sites.
Consider finding American run bed and breakfasts to stay in. Sad to say but Americans are easy targets for Italians who scam. An American run place will steer you to restaurants, tour companies etc that will treat you fair and honest. We enjoyed this one: http://nicolasinn.com/
I would trust Melissa to recommend your tour companies, restaurants, times to go to things etc. What we booked on our own was often a disappointment. What she recommended for us was stellar.
Having been to all the cities on your list, some several times I would do Naples/Amalfi coast (don't forget Pompeii), Rome and Venice for a first trip. Of all the cities the one I truly love is Rome. I could spend the whole time there. After that Venice would be my second choice.
Also hop on hop off buses are a great way to get to the highlights
I agree - they are also great in Florence as well as Rome. If you have a couple days to get the rhythm of a place and enjoy it, do a hop-on-hop-off the first opportunity and then go back on a 2nd day to a place you might like to explore in more detail.
We always stayed in smallish Italian hotels and had good experiences. It was good advice to find a wine you like before you go. Also...learn some basic Italian. A ''buongiorno'' and ''grazie'' are nice and sometimes a welcome surprise to Italians. But don't be surprised or offended if they correct your Italian because they are well intentioned and happy that you are making the effort.
Or just go ahead and stay in part of the Accor chain. The Mercure and Ibis option typically comes with a 24 hour front desk with someone who can muddle through the necessities in English, good water pressure, acceptable to excellent levels of cleanliness, modern CH&A, and free to affordable wifi. (Just note that the Ibis Budget and Formulae 1 brands can be very basic, and the remaining F1s Accor hasn't sold off were often built with the bathroom down the hall rather than en suite.)
They're also more likely to be overrun by French families and German businessmen than other Americans who have never heard of the brand other than the odd US Sofitel, so call them 21st century authentic Europe, such that it is.
I have taken the transit time into consideration. We will already be at the airport for the flight to Paris which will be about 3 hours after we land and only a 90 minute flight, I wasn't really planning on doing anything on our arrival day so it doesn't seem like we are losing anything. In terms of getting to Rome, the flight will be around 8:30 in the evening. That should give me nearly a full day in Paris and even with the transit time to a hotel and checking in, I will be able to get enough rest to get a fair start the next day. Travel to the subsequent cities would be by train and from I have gathered they run frequently enough that I can be flexible about departing and transit time time in between isn't very long so unless there is a strike I think we'll be ok if we book accommodations near train stations.
Quote:
Originally Posted by shellymdnv
Right now we're thinking of flying to Paris, then a flight to Rome and finally a train to Florence and possibly Venice. Right now I'm inclined to just leave out Venice but I may have to talk my sister into that. I'm thinking 3 full days each in Paris and Rome and splitting the remaining time in Florence and Milan
This makes an awful lot more sense. With your trip length, I would leave out Venice, and leaving in the other four is still more than I would want. You really have 9 days at your disposal. With your Paris & Rome, you have 3 left, but you've got a long train from Florence to Milan, a short train from Rome to Florence, and a flight from Paris to Rome in there. Without even worrying about jet lag, that three looks more like 1.75 for Florence and Milan.
If Paris is a must, I would go Paris, flight to Rome, train to Florence, return to Milan strictly for your return flight. Paris being maybe my favorite city in Europe I would go 4 days in Paris, 3 in Rome, 2 in Florence.
If it's not, I would probably spend two full days in Bologna, two full days in Florence, four in Rome, and fly back to Milan to depart.
Some city tips: Paris -Use the side entrance for the Louvre, the Porte des Lions. You can go any time of day and there will be little wait, if any. It is near the southwestern corner of the building under an arch. You can actually save yourself an hour plus by using this door, all the while laughing to yourself about the people waiting to enter the pyramid. You'll also be sure to see the Moai statue that many visitors miss.
-Paris' subway is fast and efficient. Use it when you need to cover ground.
-Stay in the center, but don't worry too much about specific locations. All of the arrondisements are central enough for a visitor. Using the subway, it will be easy to get to any sights you want to see, and staying away from the most popular attractions can help you get a feel for the city itself--in addition to gaining access to better food.
Rome -I agree on skipping the Vatican. The lines are so time consuming, and the museum is so crowded. Take a Colisseum/Forum tour to skip lines and get interesting information from guides. They will be near the entrances, usually wearing a company's t-shirt.
Florence -Buy tickets to museums in advance to use the shorter lines. Your hotel operator can tell you where to get tickets.
-For an excellent but under-visited museum, go to the Bargello.
Quote:
Originally Posted by shellymdnv
I would love to but my sister and I have never developed a taste for wine. I blame it on my first taste being communion wine. I would love to develop an appreciation for wine but I'm not sure if it's just too late or if not, how to go about gaining it.
It is never too late to develop a taste for wine. If you live near a real wine shop, go there and ask for recommendations. Explain that you don't know anything about wine, but want to learn. If your options are limited in terms of wine shops, order from K&L Wines (if your state allows it). They stock a variety of quality wines from around the world at all price points. Their website has a lot of information about the wines on offer. You could also read some online information about wine, but you've got to supplement it by drinking in order to learn. I like this:
This makes an awful lot more sense. With your trip length, I would leave out Venice, and leaving in the other four is still more than I would want. You really have 9 days at your disposal. With your Paris & Rome, you have 3 left, but you've got a long train from Florence to Milan, a short train from Rome to Florence, and a flight from Paris to Rome in there. Without even worrying about jet lag, that three looks more like 1.75 for Florence and Milan.
If Paris is a must, I would go Paris, flight to Rome, train to Florence, return to Milan strictly for your return flight. Paris being maybe my favorite city in Europe I would go 4 days in Paris, 3 in Rome, 2 in Florence.
If it's not, I would probably spend two full days in Bologna, two full days in Florence, four in Rome, and fly back to Milan to depart.
Some city tips: Paris -Use the side entrance for the Louvre, the Porte des Lions. You can go any time of day and there will be little wait, if any. It is near the southwestern corner of the building under an arch. You can actually save yourself an hour plus by using this door, all the while laughing to yourself about the people waiting to enter the pyramid. You'll also be sure to see the Moai statue that many visitors miss.
-Paris' subway is fast and efficient. Use it when you need to cover ground.
-Stay in the center, but don't worry too much about specific locations. All of the arrondisements are central enough for a visitor. Using the subway, it will be easy to get to any sights you want to see, and staying away from the most popular attractions can help you get a feel for the city itself--in addition to gaining access to better food.
Rome -I agree on skipping the Vatican. The lines are so time consuming, and the museum is so crowded. Take a Colisseum/Forum tour to skip lines and get interesting information from guides. They will be near the entrances, usually wearing a company's t-shirt.
Florence -Buy tickets to museums in advance to use the shorter lines. Your hotel operator can tell you where to get tickets.
-For an excellent but under-visited museum, go to the Bargello.
It is never too late to develop a taste for wine. If you live near a real wine shop, go there and ask for recommendations. Explain that you don't know anything about wine, but want to learn. If your options are limited in terms of wine shops, order from K&L Wines (if your state allows it). They stock a variety of quality wines from around the world at all price points. Their website has a lot of information about the wines on offer. You could also read some online information about wine, but you've got to supplement it by drinking in order to learn. I like this:
Some good suggestions, except I disagree with staying away from the most popular attractions. Seeing those famous sights are what people want to see for themselves, crowded or not. It's bad enough the OP might be only spending a day in some spectacular cities, but that's a long way to go to avoid what makes those cities great.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
