Changing travel style in England

I don't think there is a one-size-fits-all solution. I use whatever makes the most sense for me given the location, what's available, how it fits into the rest of the trip and my preferences.

In many places (rural England probably qualifies, as you have discovered), you just can not beat having your own car - unless you have plenty of time. In other places, having a car is just a big headache. I mix and match. In my experience, the commodity that is most constrained for most of us is time (if you're retired or a backpacking vagabond, maybe you have more time than money). If time is short (or you're trying to maximize your trip) then often a car is best.

One thing to be aware of if trying Uber and similar services overseas: just having wifi connectivity will not work for their apps. I was recently in Mexico City, where Uber is considered a good, reliable, safe, cheap option. Because we did not had a Mexican SIM in any of our devices, we were unable to use the Uber app, and ended up having to rely on taxis. We had solid connectivity via hotel wifi, and we even had a pocket wifi device (which, ironically, works off the local cell network) but because we did not have a local (Mexican) phone number, the Uber app failed for us.

What you could do, decide where and what you want to see, take the train there,mthen have a car for just a day or so. Let’s say, you want to see the Yorkshire Dales, take the train to York, then rent a car for just a few days to see the Dales, turn it in, then take the train to your next location. As you know, there are areas that you really cat see much without having a car. Last year, my friend and I took the train to Canterbury East, picked up a car which was a two minute walk from the station. We drove to B&B (3minute drive), we walked to a pub for dinner. Then the next three days we took day trips to areas in Kent, turned in car at 6pm on third day and walked back to B&B, spent the next two day seeing Canterbury, then took train into London.

Your new-normal is my always-normal, so it has been easier for me, not knowing what I'm missing.

Now that I'm retired and can take really long trips, I spend a lot of time in smaller cities, taking day-trips by rail or bus. Most of the time I have only one target for the day, which makes dealing with public-transportation schedules a lot easier. For example, this is what I did in Great Britain last year:

St. Helier, Jersey (5 nights; around the island)
Poole (2 nights; garden on the outskirts)
Weymouth (3 nights; Bournemouth, Portland Island, Abbotsbury Garden)
Exeter (1 night, forced because coastal lodging was not available)
Mevagissey (3 nights; two major gardens)
Truro (1 night, again forced due to lack of lodging on the coast)
Carbis Bay, outside St. Ives (4 nights; museums and galleries in St. Ives)
Bristol (5 nights; Cardiff, Wells, Bath; Cotswolds tour didn't happen because I was ill)
Ludlow (1 night)
Chester (4 nights; two days into North Wales)
Coventry (2 nights; Bletchley Park)
Oxford (3 nights; Cotswolds van tour from Moreton-in-Marsh)
Norwich (3 nights; Bury St. Edmunds)
Brighton (5 nights; Lewes, Arundel)
London (10 nights; all local)

I usually have fewer 3-night stops and more 4-nighters, but I knew I'd need a lot of time in London. I planned the trip as I went, because this followed a lot of time in France. With better planning, things could have been somewhat more efficient, but the ticket sellers at the train stations were very helpful in avoiding the worst effects of buying rail tickets at the last minute.

I took no taxis, but depending on public transportation did leave me a few long walks to gardens. In some cases I could have gotten closer by waiting for a later bus. I don't mind walking a lot as long as the weather's not bad and there's something interesting to see.

I am by nature a frugal traveler, but I am trying to unbend enough to take the occasional one-day tour (as I did in the Cotswolds and in Normandy last year). I think it's worth the cost if a tour gets you to 3 or more small places in a day, as long as they are places where you will be satisfied with just 1 or 2 hours of sightseeing time.

Unless basing in a big city, I always drive (so far) as I prefer villages and small towns, some hard to get to by public transport. If it comes to the point of not wanting to drive anymore, I will a) use public transport to a village or small town for a week or two, include plenty of walking on trails and to the pubs or b) stay in London for 2 or 3 weeks and day trip from there every third day or so.

Some cities, like London (as you know), have a ton of places to visit easily by train close by. Munich is another, Vienna somewhat, Rome not so much. This might be my eventual way of travelling if I no longer want to drive around, as long as my two legs are in good shape (and the wife's). I'll miss some of the little spots but you cannot have it all. I do not like changing accommodations frequently, always stay in apartments.

Thanks for all your comments! Really helpful.

The more experienced I get as a traveler, the more I look for ways to avoid renting a car. For me driving overseas is stressful, and the worst part is entering a new town and trying to figure out how to get to your hotel/B&B. The rental car drop off always seems to be a challenge too. I am not the coolest under pressure when driving overseas. I don't mind driving in the country at all, and my my wife has gotten better at helping with navigation. All of this said, some places a car is really necessary. In England we would never have gotten to Dartmoor, and the Cotswolds would have been quite a challenge without a car on our 2013 trip. On our 2000 trip we used the car to get to Castle Howard from York, also visited Rye. It did enable more a blitz style of travel, but sometimes that does not make for a more satisfying trip. Sometimes the places you want to go have a great attraction but you don't necessarily want to spend a couple of nights there. Dover Castle for example was great but we only visited on a day trip. So yes, we have changed our travel style somewhat and lean toward no car or minimizing time with the car. We have never tried Uber in Europe, but it's worth researching. We have branched out to buses too, as much as the train is more comfortable. My "get a car for when it's really needed, but minimize time with it" seems to be a good way to strike a balance.

The only problem with using only buses (especially buses) and trains is that you miss some of the most beautiful villages, you zip through them on a bus.

Looking at all your comments again. Very helpful. I think mixing and matching will work for us now. I can no longer be in a car for long periods of time - just can't do it. My husband still wants to drive but I'm not comfortable with that any longer. But, I can see us taking the train to a location and then renting a car for around a small area. Also, the suggestion of taking a taxi from a large town to a smaller one and spending time there sounds like a good one to me. We very much missed being in small villages last year. Thanks again.

In Europe there's often bus service to the picturesque little villages; it just may not be very frequent. The key is careful selection of your lodging base. Although I haven't done it so far (too stingy), I have often looked at a bus schedule and considered taking a bus to the little town and getting a taxi back. All such decisions are a bit more painful when you're a solo traveler and paying 100% of the cost for just one person.

A large part of what you have to do, as you say, is adjust.

If you're not renting a car, that makes some places easier and some places harder. If you really want to see small villages and are used to having a car to see them, you will definitely have some "hardship" without a car. If you can accept "only" seeing places like London, York, and Liverpool, and not seeing smaller villages (or seeing them with the limitations acraven talks about - limited bus service, need to take some taxis which may be expensive), then you'll do fine. And if you plan a trip around large cities with easy daytrips by public transportation, you're set.

But yes, if you're taking taxis, you have to wait for them. If you're taking buses, you have to accept their schedule. As you say, this is definitely an adjustment if you aren't used to it.

You should investigate Switzerland. I know you asked about England, but in Switzerland some of the best small towns are car-free, so you take the lifts and cogwheel trains with everyone else. You won't miss a car in a place like Mürren or Wengen, because no one else will have one either! And transit is very frequent in Switzerland, and almost no transit requires reservations, so you can be spontaneous (particularly with a pass).