Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'm with you.....funny, but when I grew up in NY (technically was a resident up until age 24) I never went to Philadelphia and spent 2-3 days in DC and Boston and did not feel shortchanged (though I was not an adult at the time)....when I go back now to visit it is usually for a 5 night trip to NYC (not longer, only because I lived and been there so often) and would consider a 4 day/3 night trip to Philly only because I've never been there. Yeah, I could also see NYC as the anchor with a side visit to any one or maybe 2 of the other 3 big cities in the region on the same visit.
when I visited out West prior to moving there, LA was the anchor city with a same day or overnight trip to San Diego....I imagine some might do as short as a 3-4 night trip each to SF and LA with a possible 2 night visit to Vegas or SD nowadays--though, frankly that would not be enough for each of the CA cities and would feel rushed to me--but, then again, look at how many Americans cram 3 European cities into a 10 day itinerary. Such crammed vacations can often be an exploratory trip with visitors returning to 1 of the cities and spending a full week or more there at a future date.
Outside of the US, I have spent 10 days - 2 weeks in Rio multiple times and never get bored--urban, beach and forest are all in the same area....I would like to spend a month+ in Barcelona, Madrid, or Milan when we get over this Covid thing and use it as my base for multiple day or 2 night trips within a 2-3 hour radius.
If you've never been, Milan is literally a day or night trip city. I've toured Italy a few times and flew out of Milan twice because the flight from there to NYC was the cheapest. Spent 1 night there on 3 different occasions and that was plenty. I would say Rome is the best choice for an extended anchor spot... You can head to North to Florence/Tuscany or South to Almafi.
Barcelona, you could easily enjoy a long trip there, and there are great transit options to other cities and coastal towns. I spent 5 nights in Barcelona and that was not enough, especially if you take trips to other towns. Madrid, I spent 4 nights and it was enough, but its still a wonderful city.
And to keep this on topic, I think most European cities offer more due to their increased walk-ability, history, architecture, etc. The US has that to an extent, mostly in the Northeast.
Location: Miami (prev. NY, Atlanta, SF, OC and San Diego)
7,409 posts, read 6,537,276 times
Reputation: 6671
Ive been..I actually enjoyed my stay in Milan more so than Rome—more of a European City to me (and never understood its reputation from some as an “industrial” city—I think of Detroit or Pittsburgh when I hear that) whereas Rome is an Italian City, but geographically liked its location and transportation access elsewhere in Europe and better restaurants IMO.
From my experience, foreign tourists (esp Europeans) Ive met and/or known are more likely to take longer vacations than their US counterparts and spend more time, i.e. a week, or more, each in multiple cities, including US cities, rather than a rushed 3 city, 10 day shorter trip. They do get more vacation days/year (I believe minimum 4 weeks) which makes a big difference and the most logical reason. Reason why for a week or 10 days, many Americans might be more likely to combine relatively close cities on same trip (here or abroad).
Quote:
Originally Posted by cpomp
If you've never been, Milan is literally a day or night trip city. I've toured Italy a few times and flew out of Milan twice because the flight from there to NYC was the cheapest. Spent 1 night there on 3 different occasions and that was plenty. I would say Rome is the best choice for an extended anchor spot... You can head to North to Florence/Tuscany or South to Almafi.
Barcelona, you could easily enjoy a long trip there, and there are great transit options to other cities and coastal towns. I spent 5 nights in Barcelona and that was not enough, especially if you take trips to other towns. Madrid, I spent 4 nights and it was enough, but its still a wonderful city.
And to keep this on topic, I think most European cities offer more due to their increased walk-ability, history, architecture, etc. The US has that to an extent, mostly in the Northeast.
Last edited by elchevere; 07-13-2020 at 12:33 PM..
And to keep this on topic, I think most European cities offer more due to their increased walk-ability, history, architecture, etc. The US has that to an extent, mostly in the Northeast.
Europe definitely offers more becauae, atleast for me, every street has to be explored and seen for me to feel accomplished. I've spent a cumulative of 25 days in Paris... And I don't think I've grazed the surface. It's all dependent on what you like and/or are interested in.
Similar to America, but the day trips from Major US Cities definitely proppel it further. Like for NYC, Fire Island, Montauk, Asbury Park, Long Beach Island, Seaside Heights and the Delaware Water Gap are all a day alone. add in Catskills Sleepy Hollow and the multiple scattered towns throughout Hudson Valley and you have another 3 days of activities. You really cannot get bored In a good amount of US Cities. I could spend weeks exploring each metro and their quaint towns and cities and geographic oddities that surround them. It's all dependent on what you like. So that's where the 28 day tally came from. But again, you may not be interested in exploring ins and out of each metro. However a lot of people love it!
This is going to be challenged but there is no point to spending more than about 4 days in NYC.
I tend to agree with this. I don't think there's really any city in the world worth spending an entire week in.
4 days in NYC is probably enough if you're ambitious. The way I see it...
Day 1: One whole day for Liberty/Ellis Island. You could theoretically do them in the morning and then move on to other atractions later in the day. But the work required to get there is a bit exhausting, imo, and especially so if you're going with kids or older people. You could probably spend some time in Lower Manhattan and see the Oculus and 9/11 Memorial/Museum and kill 2 birds with 1 stone.
Day 2: One whole day sight seeing in Midtown (5th Ave, Times Square, Rock Center, etc.). Maybe swing a little farther north to check out Lincoln Center.
Day 3: A museum or two for half the day. Central Park for the other half.
Day 4: One day in Tribeca, SoHo, Little Italy, the Village, walk across the Brooklyn Bridge.
I think that covers most of the big stuff. You could add in a 5th day to maybe spend more time at museums or explore some other neighborhoods. But I think 4 days is enough to adequately cover all the major tourist attractions.
Location: Miami (prev. NY, Atlanta, SF, OC and San Diego)
7,409 posts, read 6,537,276 times
Reputation: 6671
I know Europe offers more which is why I’m perplexed some/many Americans find it necessary to do 3 cities (let alone in different countries) in 10 days when they go over there (London, Paris, Amsterdam). Some foreign visitors, especially Europeans, are able to get deeper into our cities and travel within them “further” (some combine trips to further away states, not just neighboring cities and states) because they get many more vacation days than us. Also why I see a US tourist more likely to include a Boston or Philly or DC with NY in a 7-10 day trip or SF and LA, maybe SD on that same trip rather than one city at a time for a greater length of time. Several cities in Europe can be worthy of at least a 7 day visit vs maybe 2 here, 3 tops. Their high speed rail v lack of ours also helps.
I know Europe offers more which is why I’m perplexed some/many Americans find it necessary to do 3 cities (let alone in different countries) in 10 days when they go over there (London, Paris, Amsterdam). Some foreign visitors, especially Europeans, are able to get deeper into our cities and travel within them “further” (some combine trips to further away states, not just neighboring cities and states) because they get many more vacation days than us. Also why I see a US tourist more likely to include a Boston or Philly or DC with NY in a 7-10 day trip or SF and LA on that same trip rather than one city at a time for a greater length of time. Several cities in Europe can be worthy of at least a 7 day visit vs maybe 2 here, 3 tops.
Money is an issue too, if you can only afford to go to Europe twice (say 24 total days) you’re not going to waste your time in some pub on Croydon. You’re gonna got the highlights and move on. Obviously you don’t want to hit 9 cities in 12 days or something because then you end up seeing nothing not everything
St. Louis: Gateway Arch tram and Museum of Westward Expansion, St. Louis Zoo, Missouri Botanical Garden, Cathedral Basilica of St. Louis, City Museum, St. Louis Art Museum, Jewel Box, Magic House, St. Louis Science Center, City Garden, National Museum of Transportation, Missouri History Museum, Old Courthouse, Fabulous Fox Theatre, Anheuser Busch Brewery tour, Laumeier Sculpture Park, Historic Soulard and the farmers market, Tower Grove Park, McDonnell Planetarium, The Loop and St. Louis Walk of Fame, Old Cathedral, Soldiers Memorial Military Museum, St. Louis Union Station and St. Louis Aquarium, Wax Museum, The St. Louis Wheel, Confluence Park, Lumiere Casino, Casino Queen, and Cahokia Mounds historic site.
All of them are very much worth seeing.
No way it could be done in 3 days. Not even half of them.
St. Louis is not even in the same universe as Asheville. Laughable.
Here’s the big secret: St. Louis has as many great attractions as cities several times as large. Anyone who has been here knows. I’m correcting it to a 5-day visit. Or longer. Here’s an open invitation to come see all of what St. Louis has to offer!
It should be added that about half of the attractions above in St. Louis are FREE to enter, including a free zoo, a free art museum, a free history museum. The city also has some on the most amazing architecture in dozens of distinct neighborhoods, which can be enjoyed on tours. The variety of great dining options in the city and nearby suburbs, including a huge ethnic representation, is a must for any tourist. All of this and more is why St. Louis is one of the most underrated and under appreciated cities by those who haven’t visited. St. Louis can and will surprise you.
I'd say most of these are "unless my employer sends me there one day, I can die in peace without having seen them". There's really only a few 'must see' cities in the U.S.
Philadelphia is a very large unique city anchored by a very large unique metro area. A destination like Longwood Gardens in suburban Philadelphia is an example of that.
Longwood Gardens is beautiful and absolutely worth a visit. But it's also 30 miles from central Philadelphia and thus well outside the OP's range.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
