Which World Cruise do you recommend?

[Mich3554]

On 2/1/2024 at 8:45 AM, Heidi13 said:

 

Viking has 4 options for their World Cruise, with the L/A to London being the shortest at 121 days. With the port/sea day ratio and the number of overnights and double overnights in port, you can't sail around the entire World in 4-months.

 

For those wanting a true circumnavigation of the globe, the 180-day option is from Florida to New York.

We did this last year, got on in FL and off in NYC.  However, for us the London to NYC legs were marketed as 3 separate legs for an additional 6 weeks.  Originally, we were going to get off in Reykjavik, but added Reykjavik to NYC while on the cruise.  There were about 12 of us that got off in NYC from the world cruise.

We are considering the 25-26 cruise.  If we can work things out, get on in Barcelona before the WC and get off in London.
 

[Guinness1000]

I noticed HAL is doing their 2026 WC on the Volendam. Does anyone have any thoughts on that? We've been waiting to see what the itinerary would be, but I'm not sure my hubby would like 130 days on that ship. Zuiderdam too big to fill? 

[Cruise Junky]

3 hours ago, Guinness1000 said:

I noticed HAL is doing their 2026 WC on the Volendam. Does anyone have any thoughts on that? We've been waiting to see what the itinerary would be, but I'm not sure my hubby would like 130 days on that ship. Zuiderdam too big to fill? 

Ugh. We wouldn’t consider that ship. We’re leaning towards Oceania Vista.  

[islandwoman]

What's the problem with the Volendam?

[tigerfan75]

3 hours ago, Cruise Junky said:

Ugh. We wouldn’t consider that ship. We’re leaning towards Oceania Vista.  

Yes, the 3 ATW itineraries show online today.  IIRC, one can choose from 196, 180, or 120-day sailings on the new (2023) Vista.

[Cruise Junky]

9 hours ago, islandwoman said:

What's the problem with the Volendam?

For me she’s too old and has had a lot of issues. There are also no regular balconies, you have to book a suite to get a balcony which increases the price.  

[islandwoman]

53 minutes ago, Cruise Junky said:

For me she’s too old and has had a lot of issues. There are also no regular balconies, you have to book a suite to get a balcony which increases the price.  

I like the older ships, so that wouldn't be a problem for me.  But as for "a lot of issues", that might be.  Could you specify?

 

LOL.  I don't know why HAL calls the balcony cabins "Vista Suites" .  From the looks of them on you tube, they are not suites at all.  and as far as I can see they have no suite benefits.  IMHO, it is misleading to call them "suites".
 

[Cruise Junky]

24 minutes ago, islandwoman said:

I like the older ships, so that wouldn't be a problem for me.  But as for "a lot of issues", that might be.  Could you specify?

 

LOL.  I don't know why HAL calls the balcony cabins "Vista Suites" .  From the looks of them on you tube, they are not suites at all.  and as far as I can see they have no suite benefits.  IMHO, it is misleading to call them "suites".
 

They’re definitely not suites but there’s a very large price difference between those and an OV.  Things like plumbing and AC issues and just lack of space would annoy me.  As much as I’m not a fan of Zuiderdam, I would have preferred that size.  

[Port Power]

On 2/2/2024 at 12:45 AM, Heidi13 said:

 

Viking has 4 options for their World Cruise, with the L/A to London being the shortest at 121 days. With the port/sea day ratio and the number of overnights and double overnights in port, you can't sail around the entire World in 4-months.

 

For those wanting a true circumnavigation of the globe, the 180-day option is from Florida to New York.

After reading six months’ worth of posts here, I am seriously rethinking my choices so that I can sail a world cruise every second year, if not every year for awhile.  I am cruising the WC with Regent Seven Seas next year, but have learned a lot on this thread.  Although Azamara is high on the list for me, I am going to seriously look at Costa and Viking.  I don’t mind five languages, but the announcements did hold up trivia for quite a long time! 🤣

 

As a solo cruiser, I often need to book very early for the best solo deals.  Starting in Europe rather than the USA is also attractive.  That you all for your views and experiences.

 

P.S.  And if I book a shorter cruise, I can take advantage of booking a WC using the onboard discount.

Edited March 2 by Port Power

[islandwoman]

4 hours ago, Port Power said:

Starting in Europe rather than the USA is also attractive.  That you all for your views and experiences.

Princess has a World Cruise starting in Australia.

[Port Power]

22 minutes ago, islandwoman said:

Princess has a World Cruise starting in Australia.

I definitely would not do a WC on Princess: boring and repetitive.  Nor Cunard.  I have had issues every time I have sailed with Cunard (and I’ve been on all three), for all their good entertainment and guest lecturers.  There is no need for anyone to defend either line, they are just not for me.

[Heidi13]

13 hours ago, Port Power said:

After reading six months’ worth of posts here, I am seriously rethinking my choices so that I can sail a world cruise every second year, if not every year for awhile.  I am cruising the WC with Regent Seven Seas next year, but have learned a lot on this thread.  Although Azamara is high on the list for me, I am going to seriously look at Costa and Viking.  I don’t mind five languages, but the announcements did hold up trivia for quite a long time! 🤣

 

As a solo cruiser, I often need to book very early for the best solo deals.  Starting in Europe rather than the USA is also attractive.  That you all for your views and experiences.

 

P.S.  And if I book a shorter cruise, I can take advantage of booking a WC using the onboard discount.

 

As a solo cruiser, I'll suggest that Viking might not work for you as they do not offer any discounts for solo pax. They sell every cabin for the entire WC, so have no incentive to provide discounts. This year they sold 2 full ships, sailing 3-days apart.

[Port Power]

5 hours ago, Heidi13 said:

 

As a solo cruiser, I'll suggest that Viking might not work for you as they do not offer any discounts for solo pax. They sell every cabin for the entire WC, so have no incentive to provide discounts. This year they sold 2 full ships, sailing 3-days apart.

I have priced the 2025/26 WC.  Not quite double as port fees are removed, but the 180 and/or 138 day cruise prices are comparable pro rata to what I’m paying on RSSC.  They only reduced by 12.5%, but there were early booking discounts. Price wise, unless the itinerary is just what I want, Regent provides larger cabins and more luxury for around the same price as Viking. Business class flights are included with Viking though, and that’s worth a lot.  Anyway, as I said, I have more information now and will research further.

[islandwoman]

9 hours ago, Port Power said:

I have priced the 2025/26 WC.  Not quite double as port fees are removed, but the 180 and/or 138 day cruise prices are comparable pro rata to what I’m paying on RSSC.  They only reduced by 12.5%, but there were early booking discounts. Price wise, unless the itinerary is just what I want, Regent provides larger cabins and more luxury for around the same price as Viking. Business class flights are included with Viking though, and that’s worth a lot.  Anyway, as I said, I have more information now and will research further.

I think shore excursions (one in each port) are also included on Viking.  That's worth a lot too.  Does Regent also include shore excursions?

[Port Power]

59 minutes ago, islandwoman said:

I think shore excursions (one in each port) are also included on Viking.  That's worth a lot too.  Does Regent also include shore excursions?

Viking seems to include a certain number of shore excursions, but not every port. OBC an ve used to buy more.  Regent excludes shorex in every port, and passengers can go on more than one if they wish.  Or have the stamina! 😁

[Heidi13]

44 minutes ago, Port Power said:

Viking seems to include a certain number of shore excursions, but not every port. OBC an ve used to buy more.  Regent excludes shorex in every port, and passengers can go on more than one if they wish.  Or have the stamina! 😁

 

Viking do state and in our WC experience, provided the shore infrastructure can accommodate up to 900 pax, they do guarantee every pax an included shore-ex in every port. In some ports, 2 options are available and you pick one of them.

 

On our Viking WC only 2 ports had minimal included shore-ex, due to insufficient local infrastructure. Nuku Hiva and Thursday Is were examples of where the included tour was a self-guided walk.

[Cruise Junky]

On 3/2/2024 at 6:48 AM, Port Power said:

I definitely would not do a WC on Princess: boring and repetitive.  Nor Cunard.  I have had issues every time I have sailed with Cunard (and I’ve been on all three), for all their good entertainment and guest lecturers.  There is no need for anyone to defend either line, they are just not for me.

Can you share what you didn’t like about Cunard?  I’m eyeing their WC on QA. Thanks.  

[Guinness1000]

2 hours ago, Cruise Junky said:

Can you share what you didn’t like about Cunard?  I’m eyeing their WC on QA. Thanks.  

I've never sailed with Cunard, but I have looked at their WC mostly since they seem inexpensive. They seem to have a pretty low port/sea day ratio. For us, the fewer sea days, the better.

[Port Power]

7 hours ago, Cruise Junky said:

Can you share what you didn’t like about Cunard?  I’m eyeing their WC on QA. Thanks.  

My reasons are only from the perspective of a solo cruiser.
 

Cunard has excellent entertainment, musicians and lectures, and the food is very good. I also like to dress up. Nevertheless, as a solo traveller, the ships are too big.  I meet some people and enjoy a chat, but never see them again.  Cunard does not hold any solo gatherings.  At dinner there is a share table only if you arrive quite early.  QM2 last year, booked for 9 nights just to try this iconic ship, was the final straw.  Not for me.

[Cruise Junky]

44 minutes ago, Port Power said:

My reasons are only from the perspective of a solo cruiser.
 

Cunard has excellent entertainment, musicians and lectures, and the food is very good. I also like to dress up. Nevertheless, as a solo traveller, the ships are too big.  I meet some people and enjoy a chat, but never see them again.  Cunard does not hold any solo gatherings.  At dinner there is a share table only if you arrive quite early.  QM2 last year, booked for 9 nights just to try this iconic ship, was the final straw.  Not for me.

Thank you. Appreciate the feedback.  

[Patria21]

4 hours ago, Port Power said:

My reasons are only from the perspective of a solo cruiser.
 

Cunard has excellent entertainment, musicians and lectures, and the food is very good. I also like to dress up. Nevertheless, as a solo traveller, the ships are too big.  I meet some people and enjoy a chat, but never see them again.  Cunard does not hold any solo gatherings.  At dinner there is a share table only if you arrive quite early.  QM2 last year, booked for 9 nights just to try this iconic ship, was the final straw.  Not for me.

Cunard isn't for everyone and I completely understand why someone might not enjoy the experience, but I do want to update one point. I'm currently on the QM2 World Cruise and there is a "Solo Traveller's Evening Get Together" every night, and whenever I've walked past its appear to be well-attended. The ship also has single cabins, which many ships don't. They're expensive, but they do exist. And by its very nature, a world cruise offers many more opportunities to meet other people.

[Aquadesiac]

On 3/3/2024 at 10:27 AM, Cruise Junky said:

Can you share what you didn’t like about Cunard?  I’m eyeing their WC on QA. Thanks.  

 

We had actually booked the 2025 WC on QA. We enjoy the music, entertainment, enrichment and sense of "occasion" on Cunard. But the more we thought about our incredible experience on Viking in 2022--bear in mind that this was at the height of the Omicron outbreak--and how deftly that cruise line pivoted, changing the whole first half of the itinerary, and still managed to give us a world class adventure in safety and comfort...well, we decided to jump ship and return to Viking to hopefully enjoy the itinerary we thought we were going to have in 2022. 

 

But itinerary isn't the be all end all. We've discovered that we really love smaller ships (QA 3000 pax, Viking 930). We'll still have the music we love, the entertainment, the enrichment we'd have relished on QA. But we'll enjoy them in a much more intimate setting. The only downside is that the DH doesn't have to pack his tux for Viking. (Such a shame! The man looks fabulous in his James Bond duds!)

 

It's not that we dislike Cunard. Far from it. But our previous Viking WC just kept calling to us. It was a new surprise and delight every day. 

[Janet&Carl]

I have been reading the board and still undecided on which world cruise.  I am surprised that no one mentioned which ports the cruise goes to as a priority.  I have short listed cruises and in doing so have added up how many port days to sea days.  Some of the cheaper ( Princess, Cunard)  have really bad ratios.  Next criteria is how many are new ports.  Having flown half way round the world to most cruises (which has been one of the biggest expenses of each holiday) to book a holiday that just repeats what we have already done would be crazy. 

 

So food is not that important, most lines have something I can choose to eat and I can buy specialty restaurant access on cheaper lines that dont provide a good menu.  Entertainment is ok but not the be all and end all of my considerations.  Comfort and service with a smile is important I get that on most cruises.   We prefer serene, quiet environments to loud party scenes. We are easy going and dont complain about very much at all so most lines suit us.  We have tried 7 different lines and can find good and bad in all. 

 

So given the above considerations and the fact that this may be a one of experience the more ports the better and the more new ports going to places that are still on our list to see is the primary consideration.  

[Aquadesiac]

Of course, in a perfect world, itinerary is important. However, it is not guaranteed. No cruise line can be certain they can deliver the ports they advertise because situations change on the ground. War in the middle east make it imperative that current WCs change their itinerary to avoid the Suez Canal completely. Russia has been off the radar since they invaded the Ukraine. Myanmar has been on countless cruise wish lists, but inevitably, they are skipped because of internal unrest.

 

Because of that, it's really important that the culture and experience of the line you choose fit your preferences because you'll be on the ship more than in port whichever line you choose. The serene vibe on Viking is one of the reasons we chose it for 2025. Just the sound of "The Traveler," the hauntingly beautiful orchestral piece the line commissioned is enough to lower my BP instantly. 

 

[islandwoman]

8 hours ago, Janet&Carl said:

So given the above considerations and the fact that this may be a one of experience the more ports the better and the more new ports going to places that are still on our list to see is the primary consideration.  

I agree.  The first thing DH does when I show him a new cruise is to look at the itinerary to see how many new to us ports there are. That isn't easy because  after more than 50 cruises over more than 60 years, We have visited most cruise ports. DIY land tours would offer new places, but we should have done that early and cruised later 😕 At our ages, packing, unpacking, repacking and schlepping luggage from hotel to bus to airport to train to another hotel has become a bit much!