sdsearch

I don't understand. Despite what it says in post 1, Cuzco is not that close to MP. It's just the closest major city.

Staying in Cuzco for a week because you're going to Machu Picho, that's like staying in Phoenix (instead of at least Flagstaff) for a week because you're going to the Grand Canyon, or staying in San Francisco (instead of Oakhurst or at least Fresnco) for a week because you're going to do Yosemite, or staying in Portland, Maine for a week because you're going to Acadia National Park, or staying in Washington DC for a week (instead of at towns along the route) because you're going to Skyline Drive and Blue Rdige Parkway.

In other words, if you are going to day trip to Machu Pichu from Cuzco, you'll only see Machu Pichu for a few hours, yet spend all day traveling, and you'll be done in a day. If you want to spend more time in Machu Pichu, Cuzco is entirely the wrong place to stay (except before you leave for Machu Pichu and/or after you return from it). It makes no sense to me to pick a far-off city, just because it has a Marriott hotel, for a whole week because it's the nearest city from which to do a one-day day trip.

And if (per a pervious post) Lima doesn't need a whole week, even more so it seems to me Cuzco would not a whole week, unless you've figured out tons of other day trips besides Machu Pichu.

I'm not deciding whether you should spend more than one mid-day in Machu Pichu or not, I'm saying that if you want to spend more time in Machu Pichu you need to stay much closer to it, in the Machu Pichu town itself probably, and if you don't need more than one mid-day, then I don't understand why a whole week in Curzo.