emma69

I've been to both and prefer Vancouver - San Francisco has several interesting things to do, but after a couple of days, having done the things on my list, I was ready to move on. Vancouver on the other hand, I found I wanted more time than I had given myself. In April I would also head up to Whistler for a couple of days of skiing, the drive is quite pretty and I like the resort at Whistler.

kyden

Go to San Francisco. If you go to Vancouver in April, you will likely be rained on for most of your visit. Vancouver has good weather in Jul/Aug.

If you like scenery like mountains, Vancouver is the better option. Like someone else said, SFO has more in the city, and YVR has more around it.

El Cochinito

Note that many schools have spring vacation around early April; for example our schools here in Sacramento are off on break the week of 30-March-2015.

You may want to purchase advance tickets for certain popular sightseeing places such as the Alcatraz prison tour especially if your trip coincides with spring vacation.

Lost

I think both are wonderful cities, but considering the time of year I would also lean towards SF. Better chance of good weather. Unless you're a skier, Vancouver is best in the mid-late summer.

mvtm

Is it recommended i reach Vancouver by car from San Francisco? How many days would i take?

I am thinking of visiting some places in California by car. Which ones? Have always heard this San Francisco and up route has very beautiful scenery. What about the Yosemite or Yellowstone park? I have 10 days.

Never been to SFO but also considering visiting other beautiful places in the west coast by car. It would be in April.

pinniped

Both Yellowstone and Vancouver are about 1,000 miles away from San Francisco.

Probably too short of a trip to do either one of those long roadies unless you want to change the trip to being purely *about* the roadtrip itself. (e.g., Dropping the rental car off at the other end and flying home from there.) It's a great idea...a great trip in and of itself...if that's what you want to do.

If the intent is still an SF-based city trip, I'd probably focus on a few days in SF proper, 2 days up in the north (Napa, Sonoma, Russian River Valley, etc.), 2 days in Carmel/Big Sur.

JumboJet

As much as I love Vancouver I would go to SF if I were you. There is a lot more to do and see in San Francisco for 8 days. Vancouver would require a bit of travel to see a lot of the stuff.

mvtm

Thanks. My intent is to focus on a SF-based city trip primarily but i also wanted to add as an extra bonus a visit to some beautiful worthwhile locations near to SF if possible as it not usual i visit the west coast. We all love roadies in the family but you are right and 10 days would be a bit tight for one of these. Our main intend for this trip is visit and get to know SF, but i also was curious if i could get creative and visit other beautiful places near!

Napa and Carmel sound as great plan. I'm not familiar with the west coast hence i asked which towns/cities we could go. Upon checking google both Yellowstone and Vancouver seem too ambitious/far by car. Yosemite park is closest and i have been told so much wonderful things about Carmel and other (?) little towns close to San Francisco.

Any ideas are welcomed

gglave

It's about sixteen hours of driving between the two.

Straight-through you'd take I-80 to I-505 to I-5 straight north to Canada.

When I do it I usually overnight around Eugene, Oregon.

A much more scenic route is to take highway 101 north along the coast up into Washington state, but this will stretch the route out to 24 hours or so of driving, plus stops. It's really quite something, though:

Gardyloo

Much as I love the Pacific NW, I'd have to say San Francisco given your timing. April in Washington or BC is likely to be rainy and colder than you'd like, and since so many things that appeal about our region are outdoors, you'd be at a disadvantage. In April while you aren't guaranteed good weather in the SF Bay Area, the odds are better.

Both cities are very beautiful and in beautiful natural settings. While Vancouver offers access to mountains and marvelous scenery, SF is no slouch in the outdoor-nearby attractions contest either - redwoods in Marin County, the Napa/Sonoma vineyard areas, the north coast (Sonoma/Mendocino counties) etc.

Eight full days in either city might be pushing it - they're not that big, after all, so I'd plan to spend at least a couple of your days touring some nearby areas - maybe Monterey or the Gold Rush country (along the Sierra foothills a couple of hours east of SF - marvelous in the spring.) If you headed south for a couple of hours, you could visit both the Monterey Peninsula and Big Sur, where the scenery is quite spectacular, e.g.



Edited to add - sorry, just noticed the date on the OP. Oh well, still the same answer.

mvtm

I already chose SF a couple of months ago^

Now i am trying to figure out what to do in SF in 8 days. I was considering stretching it to Vancouver but i think i will have to dismiss that plan as much as the roads and the scenery looks tempting. I agree, and after researching and reading other posts, getting to Canada might be pushing it a bit too much.

So i plan to focus this trip SF city and do little excursions nearby,. ie.. the beautiful scenery and beautiful little towns not too far from SF that i could visit.

I still haven't flown! I'm planning my trip.

Went with the SF choice, but i am not sure if can edit thread titles. I know it may be misleading as i have already selected SF between both.

onthego15

Of all the places I've ever visited in Northern California, Big Sur was my favorite. Loyalty Traveler blog has lots of articles on Monterey (Including one yesterday) as he lives there.
http://loyaltytraveler.boardingarea.com/

Lost

I would consider two or three days up in Lake Tahoe. Absolutely beautiful and about a three hour drive from SF. Mount Shasta and the Mendocino coastline are also beautiful places to spend a couple days within a few hours of SF.

I'll send a note to a mod to move this to the SF fourm and to amend the title.

pinniped

The good news is that you can get all of that coastal beauty in the 2-3 hours up/down the coast from SF.

Big Sur is spectacular. One of my favorite trips out there was in April for the Big Sur International Marathon - a race entirely on the coastal highway from Big Sur to Carmel with tons of amazing scenery for almost the entire distance. Hilly, windy beast of a course...nobody runs a great time there...but one of the most loved destinations in the world if you're a runner. Only marathon I've ever run where I felt compelled to stop in multiple places to take photographs.

(Obviously, if you *aren't* a runner, try to go to Big Sur on a different day when traffic is moving normally... )

Ocn Vw 1K

mvtm, per your post 26, I was pleased to edit the thread title and move this to the San Francisco forum for more discussion. May I suggest that you edit your opening post in the thread to reflect your later choice of San Francisco? The thread will flow much better that way. Thanks, Ocn Vw 1K, Moderator, TravelBuzz.