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.
In your opinion, that are the European countries that can be effectively fully covered in a week's worth of vacation time? Or IOW, more than a week, and it becomes a case of diminishing returns?
I have exactly 7 nights to spend in July, and I want to choose a place that fits this bill. Some options that I can think of are Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Albania, Moldova, Macedonia, Kosovo etc. (Let's forget the flight prices to some of these for the moment). I'd like to hear some personal experiences.
In some cases though, just looking at the land area alone can be deceptive. For example, Denmark is smaller than Estonia, but there is so much more to see and do in Copenhagen than in Tallinn, with the effect that Denmark needs more days.
Of course, interests also play a part here, so I like museums, art, architecture, nature etc. So an ideal trip would be a city break or two coupled with few days in the countryside. That's why a bigger country would be impossible as I'd like to cover the whole country or at least a good chunk of it.
Traveling with the wife. Another criteria is that it shouldn't be anywhere super-hot (so automatically eliminating Cyprus, Greece etc.).
Thanks in advance.
Belgium. The Netherlands. Perhaps, Austria. Perhaps, Ireland. None of those seem to be on your list though.
I really spend just a week, anywhere. However, I was in Tallinn for about that amount of time over Christmas and I recently visited my son in the Bay Area for 5 days.
Try Slovenia for your 5-day trip, but it's worth a lot more!
A 5-day trip in Moldova is over-kill. I wanted out after 2 days. Macedonia, on the other hand, is worth more than 5 days.
A 5-day trip in Moldova is over-kill. I wanted out after 2 days.
Hah you've got to be about the 10th person I've heard say similar.
Moldova seems to be the most common European "let's see something off the tourist radar!" destination where folks quickly decide off the radar because it's a dump that doesn't belong on the radar and change their plans.
Re:Bosnia. Yes, I’ve been there. Sarajevo is a small, manageable city. Mostar is more like a big town, but fascinating to see. We rented a car and drove around the countryside, which was beautiful-old castles, rolling hills, waterfalls. Obviously, reading up on recent history of that country is highly recommended. I think you could see a lot in a week (we went as part of a longer trip that included Croatia and Montenegro too).
I’d still argue that you haven’t done a “deep dive†in France or Italy since the regions are so different, including food and architecture/landscape, but I know travel styles vary wildly!
True story While we were in line to get our passports stamped at a souvenir shop for 2.00 (beautiful passport stamp) the King strolled by. He roams the countryside
Prince.
Lichtenstein is a Principality and the monarch's title is Prince
Czech Republic: Prague and countryside castles, Hungary- Budapest and their large lake in the country,
Slovenia!! Enough said!
Netherlands could be done- going to Delft or/and Hague after Amsterdam? Or their seaside?
Belgium!
Monaco!
Lithuania:Vilnius, Klaipeda and their seaside- you see enough of the countryside
About 20 years ago, I would have recommended England for a week or so. But with the incredible population growth in London alone, and the time it takes to get to each place, a week is really needed to see the city. So, I will recommend Scotland. You can visit the Scottish Highlands, Edinburgh, and Glasgow in a week or so. It is also much more affordable than visiting London
In your opinion, that are the European countries that can be effectively fully covered in a week's worth of vacation time? Or IOW, more than a week, and it becomes a case of diminishing returns?
I have exactly 7 nights to spend in July, and I want to choose a place that fits this bill. Some options that I can think of are Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Albania, Moldova, Macedonia, Kosovo etc. (Let's forget the flight prices to some of these for the moment). I'd like to hear some personal experiences.
In some cases though, just looking at the land area alone can be deceptive. For example, Denmark is smaller than Estonia, but there is so much more to see and do in Copenhagen than in Tallinn, with the effect that Denmark needs more days.
Of course, interests also play a part here, so I like museums, art, architecture, nature etc. So an ideal trip would be a city break or two coupled with few days in the countryside. That's why a bigger country would be impossible as I'd like to cover the whole country or at least a good chunk of it.
Traveling with the wife. Another criteria is that it shouldn't be anywhere super-hot (so automatically eliminating Cyprus, Greece etc.).
Thanks in advance.
Some people try to cover all of Europe, 5 or 6 countries, in a week so you are ahead of the game of most US travelers I think. I try to work in 10 days to 2 weeks, and limit to one country. A bigger country could work in a pinch, or you can take a distinct region of the country - i.e. Germany: Bavaria only. Italy: Rome-Florence-Tuscany. Great Britian: Scottish Highlands.
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.
Scotland
