Oceania (Australia, New Zealand & the South Pacific) - Hotel in Auckland: Hilton or Langham?

Due to the sudden closure of the Westin, I find myself needing to decide between a Deluxe Harbor View room at the Hilton or a Park Suite at the Langham for a 5-night stay next week. We're traveling with my 2-year-old son, so I'd typically take a suite in an instant, but I'm under the impression the Hilton has a much better location for tourists.

Thoughts?

The Hilton is by the harbour and apart from the Viaduct, hasn't got much near it. The Langham is at the other end of the CBD, up a slope. The Hilton is probably slightly better with a small kid especially if you don't want to walk up a hill.

The Langham is a good hotel but some walk up the hill from the CBD.
The Hilton is right at the beginning of the CBD with views of the harbour.
Location of the Hilton is better, and hotel should be of a quality that pleases.
Know the Westin had issues with the owners of the rooms, but didn't know it had actually closed.

The Langham is actually in a great location, at the edge of the CBD (so avoids traffic with easy access to the motorway and airport). Also on a somewhat edgy road, wavering between seedy and trendy (a bit like Times Square, if you can imagine Auckland having that). Tons better than the Hilton, which is like a cruise ship (and often has a cruise ship docked, looking into your room -- a rather disconcerting experience!). Really no contest, the Langham is far better as a hotel, and for me has a better location. The "climb" up a hill is just 1 block, nothing compared to Nob Hill in SF, and more fun than an obstacle.

It was a few years ago we stayed at the Langham. Nice room and each floor had access to a couple of computers by the elevator. There is a Club floor upstairs but we were not signed up. there was a free shuttle to take one down the hill to the waterfront; it stopped by the Duty Free store.

I thought the area reminded me of Berkeley. An eclectic mix of stores: Korean, Chinese, coffee houses, small eateries around the area. Close-by to a University. I think there was an old cemetary in the area, too. Enjoyed exploring the area and visit to Auckland.

The Langham is my usual hotel in AKL (when I'm not staying with family). The AKL CBD isn't big enough that distance from anything should be an issue and there are pretty frequent buses down Symonds St, with a stop right outside the Langham.

I like the hotel and have always had a good stay there, with a lot of excellent memories.

The Langham is definitely the better of the two hotels although the area is a little seedy (as mentioned in a previous post). Business and First class passengers are usually put up in the Langham during cancellations.

Anyone stayed in Sky City? How does it compare to the Langham and the Hilton? Also there's the Heritage Hotel.

The Langham is definitely the better of the two hotels although the area is a little seedy (as mentioned in a previous post). Business and First class passengers are usually put up in the Langham during cancellations.
Not sure I'd agree with it being seedy around the Langham. Maybe further down K'Rd, yes (and even then by international standards, hardly seedy).

You have a number of pretty big office buildings, student accommodation, Auckland Hospital, Auckland University, restaurants and bars, and a couple of other hotels within quick walking distance of the Langham - long before you get to any seedy areas.

Sky City is a bit of a dump (although I think they'd a slight refresh recently), it's often full of tour groups. With the casino as part of the hotel, I'd avoid unless you're into that.

However, the Sky City Grand is much better and reflected in the price.

The Heritage is average (still better than Sky City), and is an apartment/hotel.

Sky City is a bit of a dump (although I think they'd a slight refresh recently), it's often full of tour groups. With the casino as part of the hotel, I'd avoid unless you're into that.

However, the Sky City Grand is much better and reflected in the price.

The Heritage is average (still better than Sky City), and is an apartment/hotel.
Agree with Leumas. I stayed in Sky City regularly in 2005 and it's a lousy hotel. I've never stayed in Sky City Grand but have heard good things about it, but never a good thing about Sky City.

While I obviously have not (yet) had the chance to stay at the Hilton, I just wanted to report that we are very happy with the Langham. ^

We actually quite like the area immediately surrounding the hotel; it has a nice variety of shops and cafes, and Myers park with its playground was a delightful find for our son. The shuttle to the water is quick and reliable (with a very friendly driver), but we've taken to walking or the city bus (a great many of which stop right in front of the hotel) the past few days as the weather has been wonderful and the distance indeed short---although the hill does give one a workout, especially with a child on your back!

Thanks for all the input. The Hilton does cut an imposing line in the harbor, but the difference in location certainly shouldn't seem to weigh much into one's decision about which property to select.

Langham as a chain is very high quality and often the best choice in whatever city. Glad it worked out for you; the Hilton in AKL gets a lot better press, despite being a worse hotel. The Hilton location is really not that great, once the novelty wears off; the area around the Langham has gotten steadily better over the years, a decade ago there was a bit of a drug use problem there.