Europe: By cruise or land?

[vacationsaregreat]

I'm thinking of taking a vacation to Europe next summer and had originally thought I'd fly and then drive or take trains to a few different places. Then, I recently saw an ad (can't remember who it was for) about cruising around Europe. It hadn't really occurred to me but now it's got me thinking. Can anyone shed some light on the pros and cons of cruising Europe? Thanks.:)

[JeannyCT]

Cruise: you have one day in a port, get to see the highlights of one town/small area, then you move on, hardly any contact with locals, you don't have to pack your suitcase everyday but still get to see a new town, food and entertainment on board

 

Organized bus tour: you have one day/several days in one place (according to schedule), you see places that are not close to the coast, more time to spend with people, shop/walk around, try the local cuisine

 

On your own: you get to decide where you go when you want to do it which of course also means you have to do all the planning (= more work but you also won't spend time with things you're not interested in), local food and entertainment

 

It depends on what kind of person you are: do you want to be independent on your holiday or do you prefer to have everything organized for you? You can always combine the two, do a cruise and afterwards or before a land based holiday. That's what I usually do.

[HeinBloed]

Well - the problem is: not all European places are at the coast to be reached with a cruise ship...

 

Like tours through the Swiss Alps with the Glacier-Express will not be able to do with a cruise ship.

 

Heidelberg, Neuschwanstein and Rothenburg ob der Tauber are not at the coast as well...

 

So a good compromise will be to use the trains and to book on some sections the river cruises:

 

Rhine from Amsterdam to Basel via Cologne, Loreley, Heidelberg etc...

Danube from Passau to Budapest via Linz, Melk, Vienna, Bratislava

Rhone from Lyon to Marseille via Avignon

Elbe from Magdeburg to Prague via Dresden

Seine from Le Havre to Paris

 

A compromise to have both...

 

But Europe is anyway so big that you cannot make it at once...

 

Regards,

HeinBloed

[Capsu78]

Heres my story: Traveled alot around the US on business and pleasure, so I have seen more than many, and didn't really have an urge to see Europe. 3 years ago I got invited to spend a week in a castle in Italy with some business associates. My wife and I enjoyed ourselves so much, we have been to somewhere in Europe once each year for our major vacation.

We opted for the cruise last year for all of the reasons pointed out above- ease, unpack once, transportaion handled, checked off a host of sites- I can say I've been there.

This year we are going land based to one of the areas we spent a day in last year on the cruise. We fly in through Dublin for a 2 day "port of call", go onto the south of France, and will day trip about 50-75 miles in every direction...or not, depending on our mood.

I would go back to nearly all of prior cruise "ports of call", as I now know how tho plan for them. The cruise gave me a lot of confidence and enough experience to plan for myself, so that is a good case to do a cruise "early" in your european travels, if you plan on making it a lifetime goal to see it all- by land, by sea, by rail or river barge.

I have also lucked out by traveling back through major EU cities for overnight stays, even though we use FF miles. Last year we were able to see Paris for 36 hours on the way back. It was a bonus port of call!

[vacationsaregreat]

Thanks for your thoughts. I really like the idea of a cruise being a good way to get introduced to Europe, as I haven't been there before. I get that you don't get to travel too far inland as you have to get back on the ship. That said, do you feel like you got to see what you wanted to in the cities where the ship stopped for the day? Or did you have to pick just 1 thing and that was all you could fit into the time you had? I don't mind not getting too far inland if I can feel like I saw the high-points of the cities where I visit.

[dbh62ark]

We don't approach this subject as an "either" "or" situation but usually combine the two, although we have taken trips to Europe that were entirely ground trips. We travel to Europe every year--knock wood--for a period of 19 - 34 days. We are on cruise ships for 10 - 14 days. So we have at least a week on the ground, and we use that time to see places that cannot be reached by cruise ship such as Switzerland. I think that some places are not well served by sightseeing during port stops for my husband and me because there is just too much to see in the time alloted, and we can't absorb the culture if we don't stay to interact with the locals. But the fact is that port stops are a good option for a lot of travelers, so that's great. Other small villages can be experienced in a day, and that's how many land travelers to Europe experience those places by taking the train in for the day. It's been downplayed on some other threads, but I've done the plane, train, and automobile transfer from one place to another in Europe; it takes a lot of time and effort whereas the ship will relocate you during the night after you have a meal on the ship. I think there are advantages and disadvantages to both methods and that it also depends on your travel style and the places that you want to visit, so there are many factors in determining what is best for you. If you read through threads on these boards, you will find a lot of information that will help you to make that judgement call for your situation.

 

Happy travels,

Donna

[dbh62ark]

That said, do you feel like you got to see what you wanted to in the cities where the ship stopped for the day? Or did you have to pick just 1 thing and that was all you could fit into the time you had?

It really varies from port to port within Europe. But for illustration, one port that you will see on a lot of Med itineraries is Livorno. Livorno is a gateway to Tuscany, so you’ll need to choose between a whirlwind tour of Florence, the walled villages of Lucca, a tour to Siena and San Gimignano, the Cinque Terre, etc. So as you can see, you could stay in that area for a week and not run out of spectacular places to visit in Tuscany. On the other hand, we visited the port of Oporto in Portugal last year and were able to see a lot in Oporto during our port stop (and I’m sure someone could make an argument for staying there for week too). A cruise will give you an overview of areas such as the Amalfi Coast, but you can see quite a bit in one port day using a private driver if you plan carefully and make the tough decisions as to what is most important to you. I do recommend that you stay at least a couple of nights on the ground before and after your cruise though so that you can explore independently and take your time visiting some of the sites.

 

Donna

[Capsu78]

That said, do you feel like you got to see what you wanted to in the cities where the ship stopped for the day?

 

Most of the tours and ports of call are geared toward the major sites in any port. I found we cover a lot of ground, and never felt like I hadn't seen "the best of..." anyplace. Some places just call out to you, that you know you have to come back.

 

Or did you have to pick just 1 thing and that was all you could fit into the time you had?

 

That is where this board is so helpful, in that you read nearly day by day reviews and figure out what you really want to do on any given day. I can't think of one tour where we only did "one thing". Usually a combination of events... I have mentioned before I like to start the day like Rick Steves...with a focused plan in place,(avoiding long lines at Historical sites, then about mid afternoon spend the rest of my day like Samantha Brown... shopping, eating, marveling at "fine bathrooms".

[ehogan]

I agree with Donna, we generally combine a cruise with some land time. Last cruise, we spent 7 days in Rome between cruises and this year we spent 3 days pre cruise in Rome (I don't understand why I can't live in Rome!). Cruising is a great introduction to Europe, you see many of the highlights with little effort in the transportation and planning department.

 

It also gives you an idea of places you would like to revisit - on our cruise in March, our stop in Portovenere and Lerici means we will plan a land trip to the Cinque Terre!, our stop in Istanbul means we will plan a two or three day precruise there. Our stop in Athens was a one time deal - checked the Parthenon off our list, Ephesus was amazing, but again a one time thing.

 

The only real problem you will have if you choose a cruise is becoming addicted to cruising!

[LILynn]

We did a Med cruise last year. It was fantastic. There were so many ports that we got a taste of. Would I liked to have spent more time in some of them??? Yes, of course and eventually I would love to do a land trip to Italy but for now I am going to stick to crusing. Everything in Europe is so expensive right now bacause of the euro to the dollar. The one night in Rome cost us over $300 just for the hotel, not to mention food, drivers, etc. At the end of the cruise we stayed over in Venice. Again our hotel was 330 euros (over $400) plus food and expenses. WIth a cruise you pay in American dollars - we are booked on another European cruise for this September. For both of us it averages to $285 a night. So for right now, at least until the dollar gets stronger I think a cruise is a better value for us.

 

Just my 2 cents....

 

Lynn

[Bruin Steve]

I've done several of each sort of European trip...

 

Everyone so far has posted some good points...let me just add a little from my experience.

 

First, let me agree that my favorite way to travel Europe is to do a cruise, but to add several days pre- or post-cruise--either in the region from where my cruise starts or ends...OR, in some place completely different,,,I have found that you can often get very reasonable fares within Europe...Or, if using airline frequent flyer points (at least with AA), they allow you to make an intermediate stop somewhere for the same point value as a round trip...so, for example, when we did our British Isles/Norwegian Fjords cruise a couple of summer's back, we routed our air through Madrid and spent several days there before continuing on to London to catch the ship at Dover... This allowed us to tour an inland region extensively before continuing on to a cruise...

 

One comment I often hear as an "advantage" of a "land trip" over a cruise is the ability to spend more time in a place than a cruise port stop allows...I tend to disagree with the notion there's a real advantage there...There is if what you are doing on your land trip is choose a single region or city or a limited number of regions or cities and to concentrate your time there (Say your trip is merely to Florence and Tuscany...or Paris and the Loire...or somethiong like that)...BUT, if you want to see a wide variety of places, there is simply no more efficient way of doing this than on a cruise...

 

If you plan on flying into Europe and traveling place-to place by train...or in a rental car, you will spend a good portion of most of your days waiting in train stations and sitting on trains or driving in cars...and then, checking in and out of hotels and attending to other logistic issues...

 

On a cruise, the logistics part happens while you sleep...or eat or are entertained...When you wake each morning, you are in a new port with a full day set aside for touring...

 

Let's say you are on a 13 day trip (14 night trip--travel day in and travel day out on either side)...Let's say you are on a cruise...likely, you will have about 10 or 11 port days and 2 or 3 relaxing at sea days...You will generally have between 9 to 12 hours in port in each of those 10 or 11 places...

Instead, let's say you wanted to do this as a "land trip"...First, unless you flew from city to city (and wanted to waste a whole lot of time in airport check-in and security lines and deal with delayed flights), you'd likely have to limit your scope...You simply couldn't get everywhere from Barcelona to Istanbul as you could on a Grand Mediterranean cruise...So, first, you'd be picking a particular region...then, since it would be time-consuiming and uncomfortable to move from city to city each day, you'd likely be limiting your spots to maybe half that many--say 5 stops, 2 to 3 days each...So, five of your mornings, rather than touring, you'd be packing up in Rome and moving on to Florence, locating your hotel and checking in...losing at least half the day...then, a couple of days later, packing up in Florence and moving on to Venice...then packing up in Venice and moving on to Munich, etc.

 

Just as certain places are not very accessable by ship, many are not accessable...or at least not very convenient by car or train...Doubtful you see any Greek Islands...or Malta or Mallorca or Crete ...and, unless you purposely fly into such places, you're not fitting in Istanbul or Kusadasi or even Athens...Quite simply, you are trading a lot of variety and long touring days for a shorter list of more similar places with several logistically difficult days mixed in...

 

Yes, there are certain things you miss with a cruise...Most of your "nightlife" on a cruise is the nightlife on the ship--which is actually pretty good and in some ways preferable to random local nightlife...but it's not the local cultural experience...same with food...except we try to eat our lunches (the primary meal in most European cultures anyway) in port...You also miss the adventure of getting lost, finding the "wrong" local places, etc.

 

But, of cours, by picking a location for your pre- or post-cruise stay, you can encounter some of that as well...

 

Also, pay great attention to the itinerary you choose...First, I prefer "one-ways"...cruises that start in one port and end in another...That way I can book distinct pre- and post-cruise stays...Also, look at the times you will be in port...For example, when we cruised on the Millennium a few years back, we had midnight departures from Santorini and Villefranche and an "overnight" in Barcelona...This allowed folks to have dinner and to enjoy some local nightlife in those ports...

 

My overall recommendation: Find a 12 to 14 night "one-way" itinerary...fly in a week early and fly out a couple of days AFTER your cruise ends...IOW, make it a 3 week vacation with a two week cruise...in that extra 7 to 9 nights, you can visit 2 or 3 places more in depth...and enjoy the benefits and variety of the cruise as well...Besides, if you are flying all that way, the longer overall vaction is actually more cost-effective...

 

Have fun...

[VicKen]

If it were my first trip to Europe I would opt for cruising - you get a good overview of a lot of places with the security of the ship. Travel to places where you do not know the language can be very exciting but also stressful. We normally choose land travel in Europe but did the Baltic on a cruise, a river cruise from Budapest - Nurmberg and this year are cruising from Istanbul - Athens with stops on numerous greek isles and Cairo. It would be difficult to see so much on your own in 2 weeks. I have a list of places we visited via a cruise that we will definitely go back to and some that for us were "OK - done that". I agree with other posters it really depends on what kind of traveler you are but I think an independant traveler can still have a wonderful vacation on a cruise ship.

[Capsu78]

I strongly agree with Bruins comments, particularly the cost effectiveness and time spent in logistics.

One way I have held my costs down a bit is by banking my hotel rewards for use exclusively in Europe. It is the best place to "burn some points" as the room rates are particularly bad with the dollar in the doldrums.

We burned most our Hilton points last year staying at the Rome Cavaleri pre cruise and Airport Hilton post cruise. On our first trip to Italy, we used our Marriott rewards to stay in Rome at the Grand Flora. Burned some more Hilton to stay in London for some shows on our way back from Norway. This year we had Marriott back up high enough to spend a night in Dublin at the Shelborne on the way to Nice, and our final 2 nights in Monoco. I don't travel enough, thankfully, to get all of my hotel stays free, but we have found a nice reasonable small hotel in Nice for about the same nightly price as a US hotel.

It always amazes me when people tell me they have hundreds of thousands of rewards points to burn, and it usually goes on to follow that they never have any time to use the points, and burn them in US hotels you can find for $125 per night with a bit of price shopping.

As for logistics, I agree that "traveling on your way" to travel destinations and home again, if possible, makes the long flights across the pond more bearable.

[vacationsaregreat]

After reading all these helpful postings, it sounds like most of you really like the mixed approach (cruising and a few days on land before or after) and I'm excited to see for myself why. Europe should be amazing and I really appreciate all of you sharing your experiences. Now, the fun part...deciding which cruise my family and I should take. If anyone has any suggestions there, I'd love to know about those as well. Thanks again! :)

[fmax]

I was born and raised in Scotland and unfortunately didn't take the opportunity to travel in Europe before emigrating to Canada.

 

A couple of years ago, having got hooked on cruising, I decided i wanted to see some of Europe. I get motion sick in buses so a bus tour never appealed to me, hate driving so that kind of rules out do-it-yourself, so this was best possible option. Funnily enough i don't get seasick.

 

Did a med cruise starting in Barcelona. I travel with my sister who has limited vacation time so don't always do pre-cruise stays for as long as I would like. Spent 3 days in Barcelona and loved it. What was ideal about the cruise was it gave me a taste of what I did and didn't like and where I would like to spend more time. I loved Bacelona, my sister thought it was okay. She really liked rome, but it doesn't interest me to go back. I loved Florence.

 

What I decided after this cruise is I would love to spend some time in Tuscany or Amalfi Coast and am trying to talk my friends in Scotland into renting a villa with me a few years down the line so we can explore the whole area.

 

my next cruise is greek isles. i really wanted to see Venice and it looked like my options were either some of the same ports i did last time, or greece/turkey. I wouldn't have minded going again to the ports but after much review it was probably cheaper to do two weeks back-to-back (Greek isles & Greece/Turkey) than a 10-12 day Med Cruise. This is especially true when you take into account the cost of excursions and getting to and from the main sights. I'm spending a few days in Venice precruise and actually flying back through Vienna and staying one night there.

 

A Baltic cruise is on my to-do-list as is some river cruising. again, from this I'll know if there's any of these ports/areas that i want to eventually visit for a longer period of time.

 

 

Frances

[Bruin Steve]

After reading all these helpful postings, it sounds like most of you really like the mixed approach (cruising and a few days on land before or after) and I'm excited to see for myself why. Europe should be amazing and I really appreciate all of you sharing your experiences. Now, the fun part...deciding which cruise my family and I should take. If anyone has any suggestions there, I'd love to know about those as well. Thanks again! :)

 

For a good intro (or for any other reason), I'll throw my favorite out there--the Celebrity Millennium...Well, I guess starting in 2008 they're switching it with its sister ship the Summit...

 

They do mostly 12-nighters, Venice to Barcelona or the reverse...

 

Here's a sample itinerary for next summer:

 

Thu, Jul 10 Venice, Italy

Fri, Jul 11 Venice, Italy Depart 4:00 PM

Sat, Jul 12 Dubrovnik, Croatia Arrive 9:00 AM Depart 5:00 PM

Sun, Jul 13 At Sea

Mon, Jul 14 Santorini, Greece Arrive 7:00 AM Depart 7:00 PM

Tue, Jul 15 Athens (Piraeus), Greece Arrive 7:00 AM Depart 7:00 PM

Wed, Jul 16 At Sea

Thu, Jul 17 Naples/Capri, Italy Arrive 7:00 AM Depart 7:00 PM

Fri, Jul 18 Rome (Civitavecchia), Italy Arrive 7:00 AM Depart 7:00 PM

Sat, Jul 19 Florence, Italy Arrive 7:00 AM Depart 7:00 PM

Sun, Jul 20 Nice (Villefranche), France Arrive 7:00 AM Depart 8:00 PM

Mon, Jul 21 At Sea

Tue, Jul 22 Barcelona, Spain Arrive 5:00 AM

 

You get a nice variety of ports--3 Italy, 1 France, 1 Spain, 2 Greece, 1 Croatia...You get big cities like Rome and Athens and smaller ports like Santorini and Dubrovnik...basically just a nice sampling of ports...

 

When we did it, we flew into Venice 2 days early and home from Barcelona 2 days after...But, depending on time and budget, you could stay in Barcelona a couple of nights, then head up to Madrid and vacinity for a few nights and fly home from there...Or you could start a few days earlier flying into Munich or Zurich and spending a few days touring Switzerland or Austria or Bavaria then heading through the pass to pick up the ship in Venice...

 

The Summit itself is a great ship--90,000 gross tons with only 2,000 passengers, so it is nice and roomy...and the food and service on Celebrity is among the best in the business...

 

Good luck...

[piratesmate123]

In my mind, there is absolutely no question - do the land tour. Maybe throw in a few boat day trips for fun.

On a cruise, you get a few hours in each port. If you go off ship on your own, it takes a while to figure the bus, trains, etc. out, and then you're worried about missing the ship. Or, you're afraid because you don't know the neighborhood, and just visit the nearby T-shirt shops.

Or, you get off the ship after breakfast, take an overcrowded tour with not enough time, minimal interaction with the locals (except those at the requisite gift shop), then are brought back to the ship in time to sail away. A very sterile way to travel.

Even my husband (a cruise fanatic) said that our last land vacation gave him a much better understanding of the people and country we were in.

On a land trip, you stay in an area for a few days, get to know the local bakery and great restaurant, and feel like you're part of the neighborhood. You get a much greater understanding by staying a few days.

The cruise idea of "If it's Tuesday, it must be Belgium. If it's Wednesday, it must be Turkey..." - is like flipping the channels when you watch TV. Find a station and enjoy the movie!

Don't be worried about exploring Europe (or other areas) on your own - there are so many books, websites, etc. When I was younger, I travelled around Europe for 3.5 months, mostly on my own - fabulous and easy. And that was before the Internet brought the world into your living room.

Just my 4 Euros! Linda

[dbh62ark]

Or, you get off the ship after breakfast, take an overcrowded tour with not enough time, minimal interaction with the locals (except those at the requisite gift shop), then are brought back to the ship in time to sail away. A very sterile way to travel. Linda

Linda, I think you'll find that many of the users of these boards don't use the "overcrowded" ship's tours but prefer independent sightseeing in ports.

 

Donna

[piratesmate123]

Hi Donna. I also try to avoid the overcrowded ship's tours - I have found CC to be very helpful in giving me leads on local tour guides or how to do things on my own. Still in all, a 1 day visit in a port does not give me the same understanding as spending several days in town on a land-based trip. And, I don't have to watch my husband looking at his watch for 5 hours before the ship leaves, worried that we'll miss the ship if we wander too far from the pier. Linda

[EGG]

Another question you might need to ask yourself is what city do you want to see. Our first trip to Europe was a Baltic Cruise with a pre and post stay in London. We had seen the cruise stopped at St. Petersberg and knew this was someplace we would love to see, but we would never go there on a land vacation. In addition there were all the other cities of Oslo, Stockholm, Helsinki, Copenhagen, and Tallin that we knew we would never go to on our own. After our sampling of so many cities, if I were to go back on a land trip, I've had a taste of these cities and I know which one I would love to return to.

 

So if you want to see Italy in depth, a land trip may be for you. But if you would like a glimpse of Turkey, but you know you would never stay there, then a cruise will give you that chance to spend a day with a guide and then eat and sleep on the ship while you are transported to your next port.

[dbh62ark]

Still in all, a 1 day visit in a port does not give me the same understanding as spending several days in town on a land-based trip. Linda

As noted above, I enjoy both land and cruise stays in Europe but wanted to note that some ports can be seen in a day such as Portofino. However, I do recommend a land stay for places like Rome, Florence, Tuscany, etc. Different strokes for different folks though because a lot of passengers prefer the convenience and ease of sightseeing by day and traveling by night via cruise ship and don't want to make their own arrangements. I think a lot of them understand that they are not absorbing as much of the culture, but that is a trade-off that they are willing to make.

 

Donna