rcross23

Hi all,

I have just recently become comfortable enough financially to start traveling outside of the United States. Last year my wife and I went to Japan for 17 days, and are trying to plan a trip to Europe sometime over the next 8 months or so.

As I have never been to Europe, I have no idea how to start planning a trip of this magnitude, so the approach I took was to make a list of the top cities/countries that I would like to visit and then narrow them down to the ones I MOST want to visit. However, due to my time frame of 2 weeks, and the distance between several of the cities, I am fairly confident that trying to squeeze them all in will leave us feeling rushed and with not enough time to enjoy each city.

I have listed the top 6 cities below. I was hoping to get some advice on whether this truly would be too many destinations to squeeze into a 2 week trip, and if so, some advice on which cities I should prioritize and then the minimum amount of time I should allot to each city.

Barcelona, Spain
Paris, France
Amsterdam, Netherlands
Prague, Czech Republic
Rome, Italy
Venice, Italy

Thank you so much in advance! If there are any cities that I should definitely add to the list, those suggestions are also welcome.

The_Bouncer

Visiting all six of these cities would be an extremely rushed itinerary for two weeks, and I would advise against attempting it, unless you would be content with literally a day or two in each place.

Personally I would limit a two week trip to a maximum of three cities, giving you four days in each, with two travel days in between.

Which ones you should visit depends entirely on your interests.

What do you particularly want to see/experience?

What do you enjoy doing on vacation?

Non-NonRev

So much you need to tell us, in addition to the excellent queries posed by The_Bouncer:

When? What time of year.

Where are you departing from?

Are you buying tickets or trying to use miles/points?

Travel within Europe - trains? Low cost airlines? Rental car? Combination of these?

rickg523

Pick two, buy an open-jaw ticket - I'd suggest Paris and Rome - and stay for a week in each. You'll feel like you're living there not visiting. I'll guess that after a week, you'll regret leaving and will start thinking about a return trip.
Investigate a vacation rental (HomeAway, Flipkey, AirBnB) instead of a hotel - seven days is too long in a hotel. And hotels are way more expensive than rentals (they'll clean up for you, though). But...if you haven't used vacation rentals before, find a friend who has, or proceed carefully with lots of communication with the renter, insist on a flexible cancellation policy, and if it feels at all squishy, just bail. There are phenomenal rentals available in both cities. No need to settle for a scam. (This applies everywhere, not just Europe).

SanDiego1K

Know that there will always be another trip. Pick a country and travel within it. In Italy, you can easily organize two weeks just in northern Italy. It's extremely easy to organize a trip to Rome/Florence/Milan/Venice by train. Even more satisfying is driving a car and heading to many of the charming smaller towns. Our first trip to Europe was to the UK. We rented a car and had a wonderful time traveling thru Wales, England and Scotland. Believe me, we hadn't even scratched the surface at 2 weeks. If you really want to focus on major cities, pick two cities and see each of them well. Our only two cities trip in Europe was to London and Paris. We spent a week in each of them.

It's easy to get inspiration from itineraries organized by some of the large tour companies. Look up brochures from Trafalgar or Globus. See the itineraries in Italy, in France, in the UK. Print them out. Do they appeal to you? There's a reason these companies choose the routes that they do. They take their customers the places that most want to go.

The_Bouncer

Superb piece of advice.

Too many people make the mistake of thinking they have to tick every box on one trip. They try to make sure they "see everything". The result is of course, they end up seeing virtually nothing but airports, train stations and highways, whilst racing from one place to the next.

I very nearly made this mistake with my upcoming trip to the western USA and ending up trimming off more than half my original itinerary.

JBord

Good advice by everyone above, but I'm going to take a little different angle.

On my first trip to Europe many years ago, I decided that I wanted to get a little taste of a lot of different places. Find out what you like and don't like about Europe then plan future trips. It wasn't a little taste of EVERYTHING, just enough to get a feel for things.

If you like this type of idea and trip, I'd suggest 4 main cities in a two week trip, and plan them close enough to take a quick train ride in between each. Plan them more or less in a line...for example, Paris/Bruges/Antwerp/The Hague/Amsterdam. Given your list of cities, something like this would fit well. Staying in the west also allows you to knock out some of those bucket list items like the Louvre and Eiffel Tower.

What I've found over the years is while I think cities like Paris are wonderful, I find myself wanting to go back to cities like Amsterdam, Vienna, and Budapest.

Also, as others have said, don't try to see every sight in the guide books. Allow yourself to enjoy each city leisurely, with only a couple of big sights each day. Spend time roaming and exploring, sitting at sidewalk cafes, shopping in the little shops, and eating at restaurants outside the tourist areas.

Or, as others have said, tell us what you like to do on vacation, and we can recommend some countries or cities that you may enjoy more than the ones on your list (which is a pretty good list!).

As far as how to get started, try to narrow your list down to 4 cities or less, that are grouped nearby one another...yours are quite spread out. Then look at open-jaw flights. Next, decide how long you want to spend in each city and then check train schedules between the cities. Hotels can be the last thing you plan. There are plenty of hotels at all levels...although cities like Paris and Venice will be much more expensive than cities like Prague and Barcelona.

Non-NonRev

Thinking through a little more, I could see a lot of credibility in:

Paris - 5 days

High speed train Paris to Amsterdam

Amsterdam -4 days, emphasis on day trips

Flight to Rome

Rome - 5 days

Return home

I frankly think Barcelona and (especially) Prague are second tier cities that can be visited in the future. Venice can be #1 on your list for your second trip.

Dieuwer

WHEN does the OP want to go? Some cities are better in summer than in Fall or Winter.

rcross23

Wow thank you all for the advice and help so far.

To answer a few of the questions:
In terms of timing, I was planning to first decide on specifically where to go and then decide on the time of year that would be best. Off the top of my head, I think I would like to go around September but our jobs are pretty flexible so we can go pretty much anytime.

I have a ton of points from traveling for work so I would like to leverage those as much as possible (Marriotts) but am not opposed to paying cash for better experiences (I.e. We paid to stay in a Buddhist temple in Japan).

As far as what we enjoy to do, we are not picky. We enjoy museums, but have never been to an art museum. We also enjoy seeing old architecture and historical sites but are not history buffs per se. More than anything, we just enjoy experiencing other cultures and seeing life in a way that is different than what we experience on a day to day basis. We also LOVE to eat, but get as much enjoyment from eating at a road side stand as eating from a Michelin restaurant.

Like I said, we definitely don't want to feel too rushed on our trip and know we will have to make it back to Europe another time as well, so I will take all of the advice into consideration.

Thanks again, and any other info is much appreciated!

The_Bouncer

If you don't want to feel too rushed, then you should probably pick two cities, or a maximum of three.

For old architecture and historical sites Athens is hard to beat, but Rome would also be a good choice.

Paris and Amsterdam are good choices for museums and such like.

I would pick a couple of places from the list and book an open-jaw flight. If your chosen cities are not all that far from each other, transfer between them by train and see if you can stop off somewhere interesting or different on the way.

Sample itinerary 1:

Open-jaw flight into Paris and out of Rome.

Days 1-5: Paris

Day 6: Train to Geneva.

Day 7: Lake Geneva.

Day 8: Train to Rome.

Days 9-14: Rome.

In this case I chose Geneva as an example because it's on the way from Paris to Rome and much less frenetic than either of those two cities. Maybe a nice calming break. Alternatives would be Lyon, Lucerne or Turin.

Sample itinerary 2:

Open-jaw flight, into Paris and out of Athens.

Days 1-4: Paris

Day 5: Train to Amsterdam.

Days 6-8: Amsterdam.

Day 9: Fly to Athens.

Days 10-14: Athens.

bibbju

I'm glad you're not doing what so many people do (often Americans!) which is to squeeze far too many places into one trip. I guess for some people it is a box ticking exercise i.e. they just want to say that they've been somewhere and are less interested in really experiencing the places they are visiting.

Is it just cities you want to see or are you interested in smaller places? A lot of the charm in Europe is outside the cities. Maybe something to think about once you decide on an actual destination.

I agree with others on this thread who have suggested you pick max. 2-3 cities and focus on them. Which cities really depends on where your preferences lie. I would tend to suggest either doing Paris and Amsterdam as a combination, or focusing on Italy and visiting Rome, Florence and Venice. Sept is a good time to visit either of these combinations (school holidays have just finished, it's the shoulder season so prices are slightly lower).

Have a look at hotel availability (if you want to use points) as that may influence your decision. Good hotels can get booked up quickly. A good hotel in a good location can make all the difference. Especially when this trip is clearly a big deal for you. I disagree strongly with the previous advice that you should leave hotel booking until last.There is nothing worse than staying in a crummy hotel in a poor location or paying far too much money just because you left booking late. This is especially significant in Paris where hotel prices can double or triple (or worse!) depending on when you book and how busy the city is on those dates.

I am horribly biased here but no London??? If you want history, architecture, great museums (which are free!) and good food, it's the place to visit. Maybe because it's English speaking it seems too "similar" for you?? (trust me, it's not!) If this is an option, I'd suggest flying in to Paris, then Eurostar to London, then cheap flight to Amsterdam then Thalys (fast train) back to Paris to fly home (note: open jaw flights are often more expensive hence the return to Paris but all depends on flight prices etc).

Finally, Europe isn't going anywhere. You don't have to do everything in one trip. You can come back. ;-)

Non-NonRev

OK, still don't know where you are from, (helps in making comparisons,and in suggesting the order of travel), but let me lay out some details.

As JBord said in post 7, a pace of about 4-5 nights in each city allows you to hit the must see icons while leaving sufficient time to assimilate a bit and live like locals, at least for a while. So:

Arrive in Amsterdam.

This starts you with a lower key city to allow a bit of adjustment to jet lag. Also, in the Netherlands, English is almost universally spoken, so you can easily adjust. Amstream musts includemail either or both the Rijksmuseum (Rembrandts) and the Van Gogh, plus the Anne Frank house.

Other than that, your time offers the first chance to join local life. By its compact nature, the area near Amsterdam is great for half-day side trips to interesting historical towns.

Next, take the Thalys high-speed train from Amsterdam to Paris.

Your musts are indeed the Louvre (Mona Lisa, Venus de Milo, etc) and the Eifel Tower. One other museum maybe the D'Orsay (Impressionists) or maybe a military museum for variety. You might do a half-day at Versailles, but don'the overload on the old stuff.

Spend more of the open time walking or on the metro exploring the different districts of the city. Adjust your meals to local custom, like, if you have hot breakfast every day at home, switch for a while. Enjoy the freshness of the baked goods, etc.

English is spoken, but learn a few phrases to ask, in French, if they will speak English. It is a small gesture, but it is polite, and that goes a long way.

In both Paris and Amsterdam, try to have at least one day where you don't overload the daytime, to give yourselves a night at a musical event alongside the locals. Music quality is very high and ticket prices very affordable.

Fly Paris to Rome.

Rome will be a bit different in that the history is all around you. Musts would include the Vatican/Sistene Chapel, ruins at the Forum and the Coliseum, and the Pantheon. Again, the open time is for exploring and for trying to get into local rhythms. English is less universally spoken, but you will get by.

Fly home from Rome.

Good Marriott point redemption options in both Amsterdam and Paris, a few in Rome.

JBord

Ok, given the additional information, I'd suggest something like this, either in this order or the reverse:

Amsterdam - 4 days
Bruges/Ghent/Brussels area - 3 days
Paris - 5 days

I'm assuming you have a day of travel on each end of your trip. If not, fit in another city like Rotterdam or Antwerp, or extend your time in Paris and Amsterdam and take some side trips outside the cities. Take trains between all of these.

Leave Rome for another trip, and combine it with Venice or another part of Italy.

Non-NonRev has provided good suggestions on things to see in Amsterdam, probably my top 3 sights.

Bruges is an old medieval town, and touristy, but it's worth seeing. You'll get good food and beer in Belgium. By the way, I love the comment about a road side stand or a Michelin restaurant -- there is excellent food to be found everywhere! Bruges and Ghent are more worth your time than Brussels in my opinion, but you can decide as you research more.

Two hotels in Amsterdam, a Marriott and Renaissance. Both good hotels, good location. I always stay at the Renaissance, it's near the Jordaan area, which I enjoy, and a 5 minute walk to train station.

Paris has a number of Marriotts, you can't go wrong as long as you stay in the main part of the city. For something different, try the Renaissance Le Parc Trocadero. It really felt like a boutique hotel, and a little outside the heavy tourist areas. As I recall, it's about half way between the Eiffel Tower and the Arc de Triomphe. Quieter at night, in more of a neighborhood setting.

You won't find a Marriott in Bruges, I think Ghent has one, and Ghent is probably a good home base for the area if you spend a few nights there. Or book an old historic boutique hotel in Bruges, hopefully along a canal.

If you don't like the idea of Belgium, I'd suggest replacing it with Cologne, Germany and the surrounding area for a few days. It's a little longer train ride between (maybe 5 hours from Paris?), but certainly reasonable.

Dianne47

September is an excellent time to visit Europe, the summer crowds will be somewhat - repeat somewhat - thinned out. I agree with the Amsterdam, Paris, Rome suggestions made by Non-NonRev. Those cities and the modes of transportation recommended would be good choices.

For Paris, definitely learn a few words of French. Especially "Good morning sir/madame," "Good afternoon sir/madame," "Do you speak English," and "I'm sorry, I don't speak French."

Do visit the museums as suggested, you will be staggered at the beautiful art and sculpture everywhere.