Australia, New Zealand & the South Pacific - SYD Airport Hotel Recommendations

I love visiting Sydney, and always stay at the Hilton when I do (great lounge breakfast; helpful staff; swimmable pool although often crowded; nice rooms even though tiny).

I have a couple of overnights coming up in January. For one of them, before an afternoon flight, I booked the Hilton as usual. However, for the second, the flight is early (for me) and I'd like some lounge time to enjoy the QF international F experience, so I'm looking for something very close to the airport.

This old thread (http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/australia-new-zealand-south-pacific/365716-hotel-syd-airport.html) recommended the Mercure, but a lot can change in six years.

(This (http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/australia-new-zealand-south-pacific/981907-hotel-syd-easy-airport-access-not-airport.html) thread concurs with the Hilton, but that was specifically looking for something in town.)

I'd still take the CBD over the airport, if you're heading out early then the trip out is relatively fast c.15-20 mins door to door. The airport hotels just don't offer value IMO. Otherwise if you really want to stay close to the airport try the Novotel at Brighton-Le-Sands. It's close enough to the airport but in more of a buzzy area with some restaurants etc, there's a beach too. The airport hotels are located in light industrial/office areas and dead at night.

The Novotel just south of the airport is nice but a little pricier than the places right on the hotel perimeter.

The Stamford across the street from the domestic terminal is a nice (4*) property, but in a dead area. Noplace to walk to, surrounded by big wide arterial streets.

The Mercure about a half-mile from the international terminal is a slightly less nice property (3*), a little aged compared to the Stamford. Also no neighborhood to speak of; you're kind of marooned.

I wouldn't pay more than US$100 or so (via wotif.com, etc.) for the airport hotels. You also have to figure shuttle charges into stay costs; they're not free coming or going anymore (some used to be free airport --> hotel, but would charge you to go back).

Bear in mind that if you start from an airport hotel it will take you 5-10 minutes to get to the international terminal; if you start from the Hilton in the predawn hours it will take you 15-20. So, not much in it really.

This thread brings up something I've been trying to figure out for my upcoming trip. If you've got a hotel near one of the city circle train stations, wouldn't that be nearly as fast getting to the airport as a nearby (to the airport) hotel?

Thanks-

Yes, this is one of the good points of sydney -- lots of CBD hotels are within 20 to 30 min of the airport. There really is no point to stay at a SYD airport hotel; hence why there aren't any good ones, they simply cannot compete. The train service is pretty reliable though not cheap (shuttle bus costs the same or less).

Hilton is right across from Town Hall station - no contest, stay with your preferred CBD option - airport hotels are dumps.

I know the train from the Hilton to the airport is not bad, but you still have to walk a block and a half to get to the train station, get a ticket, wait for the train, ride to the international terminal at the airport, then walk from the train station to the check-in area. For a late-afternoon or evening flight (which is what I usually have), no question that the Hilton is the way to go. ^ But in this particular case, it's just an overnight, the flight is late morning, we want lounge time, and both of us hate getting up early :), so I'm thinking that the 20 or 30 minutes we'll save by staying at the airport could be a good bit of our lounge time :). So if there is an airport hotel that's clean, has comfortable beds, and is quick and easy to get to the international terminal, that would be appealing. From TripAdvisor, both the Mercure and Stamford Plaza have very mixed reviews so it's hard to tell.

(I know from staying at a few places at Heathrow that it can easily be quicker to stay at the Paddington Hilton rather than at the airport -- one place took an hour to get to even though it was at the end of a runway! But Sydney isn't like that, is it?)

My final word on the matter - for an early morning flight, the travel time difference to the airport between the CBD and "Airport" hotels will be a matter of minutes - you would also do well to remember that airport hotels in SYD are dumps.

For an early morning flight, the travel time difference to the airport between the CBD and "Airport" hotels will be a matter of minutesThanks -- if I wanted to be at the international terminal around 9 AM, how long would it take from the Hilton? Would a taxi be faster at that hour then the train, including getting to and from the stations?

Which day of the week? If it's during the week, I'd go with the train.

I don't know which station you go to, but the closest station to the Hilton is only half a block away at most. (Town Hall).

There is a Mercure at Central railway station (connected by underground tunnel) but I suppose it is a block walk inside the station to get to the airport train platform :)
Sheraton on the Park is 1/2 block from St. James station. So are a dozen other hotels (that are nicer than the Hilton in my experience -- am not that impressed with the Sydney Hilton, they really screwed up the renovations).

The SYD airport hotels are crap, to put it simply, and mostly used by people with cars buying a parking package with a free room night thrown in. Anyone who has a choice will stay somewhere better. It can actually take longer to get to the airport by shuttle from the "airport" hotels than by train from the CBD -- yes, traffic can be that bad at times. So you may be saving zero time by staying there, and as Shillard mentioned it is probably minutes (under 15). Sad but true (and of course it is a vicious spiral, so these hotels will forever be unsuccessful and useless).

From TripAdvisor, both the Mercure and Stamford Plaza have very mixed reviews so it's hard to tell.

...airport hotels in SYD are dumps.

The SYD airport hotels are crap, to put it simply... Awww... that's a bit harsh, don't you think? People are going to visualize filthy, shabby motels. I think "unremarkable" might be a fairer term.

I've stayed at both the Mercure and the Stamford Plaza. For an American, I'd compare the Mercure to a 3* Holiday Inn in slight need of renovation. It is a little thin on luxury amenities, the restaurant is a ripoff, and there's nowhere to go out the front door as you're planted in some sort of swampland within view of the international terminal, but it's not overtly offensive. It's a layover dormitory with a bar downstairs; if you're only there a few hours and don't want the $30 breakfast, it's fine.

The airport Stamford I would compare to a competent midrange Hilton in the States. It's a newer property than the Mercure (or perhaps just more recently renovated), it's comfortable and there's a passable buffet restaurant. It's in a pretty desolate area, but I hardly think you're going to suffer through a night in either the Mercure or the Stamford gritting your teeth and praying for morning.

Let me clarify that you would be insane to pay the rack rate at either place, but the discount websites routinely price them around USD$100.

Getting from either property to the terminals can be costly and time-consuming. The Stamford is a six-minute walk from the domestic terminal but a long (taxi or shuttle) ride from the international; the Mercure is closer to the international building. In both cases, though, the shuttles charge a fair amount per head and meander around the airport perimeter for what seems like forever. I would agree that for an early morning flight it'd be almost as fast to take a taxi from the CBD, but the train would still take longer.

Finally, it does not follow that a CBD hotel is automatically nicer than one of the airport places. My son and I stayed at the Menzies across the road from Wynyard rail station... oh, boy. We decamped to the Stamford on our last night in town not only because we had an early-AM departure, but to indulge his planespotting itch from a high-floor window, and it was, um, nicer than the Menzies.

So, you know, these things aren't all cut and dried.

I would stay in the CBD near one of the train stations. Last time i stayed at the Travel Lodge (Philips street) much nicer than anything at the airport. Its right near ST James Station which is about a 12minute ride to the airport.

I've stayed at both the Mercure and the Stamford Plaza. For an American, I'd compare the Mercure to a 3* Holiday Inn in slight need of renovation. It is a little thin on luxury amenities, the restaurant is a ripoff, and there's nowhere to go out the front door as you're planted in some sort of swampland within view of the international terminal, but it's not overtly offensive. It's a layover dormitory with a bar downstairs; if you're only there a few hours and don't want the $30 breakfast, it's fine.

The airport Stamford I would compare to a competent midrange Hilton in the States. It's a newer property than the Mercure (or perhaps just more recently renovated), it's comfortable and there's a passable buffet restaurant. It's in a pretty desolate area, but I hardly think you're going to suffer through a night in either the Mercure or the Stamford gritting your teeth and praying for morning.Thanks very much for the comparison to U.S. hotels.

Let me clarify that you would be insane to pay the rack rate at either place, but the discount websites routinely price them around USD$100. I haven't been able to find any prices lower than around AUD150-210 depending on room type and if breakfast and/or Internet is included. Still a lot lower than, say, the Hilton, but we'd likely get room on points there, although we may try a "Raffles Suite" at the Stamford Plaza in lieu of the second room.

Getting from either property to the terminals can be costly and time-consuming. The Stamford is a six-minute walk from the domestic terminal but a long (taxi or shuttle) ride from the international; the Mercure is closer to the international building. In both cases, though, the shuttles charge a fair amount per head and meander around the airport perimeter for what seems like forever. I would agree that for an early morning flight it'd be almost as fast to take a taxi from the CBD, but the train would still take longer. I'd like to be at the International terminal by 9:00-9:30, so not quite early morning. It sounds like the Mercure might be the shortest travel time, the Stamford plaza would be a few minutes longer but nicer, and the Hilton more enjoyable (plus we could get one room on points) but it can be a hassle to take the train when rushed and with luggage.

Finally, it does not follow that a CBD hotel is automatically nicer than one of the airport places. My son and I stayed at the Menzies across the road from Wynyard rail station... oh, boy. We decamped to the Stamford on our last night in town not only because we had an early-AM departure, but to indulge his planespotting itch from a high-floor window, and it was, um, nicer than the Menzies. Well, we wouldn't be staying at that place anyway.

Nice to hear your son likes planespotting :)

I'd like to be at the International terminal by 9:00-9:30, so not quite early morning. It sounds like the Mercure might be the shortest travel time, the Stamford plaza would be a few minutes longer but nicer, and the Hilton more enjoyable (plus we could get one room on points) but it can be a hassle to take the train when rushed and with luggage. That's about right, yes. I would add that the train fare for two from Town Hall to the international terminal will be about AUD$30 or so, and a taxi from the Hilton would be about AUD$40, so for the extra few dollars I'd get into a cab from the Hilton at 830a and forget this whole thing.

Skip the Mercure Central Station. It is dismal at best. I wouldn't give it but maybe 2*. It is really crowded, dirty and need of some major renovation. The entire hotel looks like it's molded out of plastic and has a fast food chain feel about it. My room had a HORRIBLE sewer smell and I left after one night for the Hilton. I think the rooms at the Hilton are a litte lacking too but far, far superior to the Mercure and certainly worth a little extra money and time.