Adding Colmar and Bruges in between Paris and London

Realize your dreams of a lifetime by doing whatever you want with your time and money.
Do you have the plane ticket already?
If not, realistically you could fly into London then take the train from London to Bruges, you would book that with
https://www.eurostar.com/us-en/

and then Bruges to Paris with this :

https://www.belgiantrain.be/en

and then Paris to Colmar using:
https://en.oui.sncf/en/

So you don't do too much back tracking you should fly back from either Paris or Strasbourg.

One nighters are tough, especially for inexperienced travelers. But if you have two full weeks you could take one night from each London and Paris and add them to Colmar and Brugge. Or - maybe skip Colmar as it is logistically more difficult. But Paris - Brugge - London works well and if you gave 3 nights to Brugge that would be plenty.

Jazz above has suggested an itinerary. Paris to Colmar would be around 4 hours by train door to door each way, but Colmar to Bruges would be a 8+ hour trip via Paris door to door, so best see Bruges between London and Paris. They are both out of the way for only one night.

Just to add a comment - when you are planning, realize that 2 nights in one location gives you 1 full day for sightseeing. If you have one night then you might have 2 partial days.

Your train travel from Bruges to London will take half a day at least. You'll go to Brussels and then get the Eurostar to London but you'll need to be in Brussels an hour ahead of your Eurostar boarding as you go thru security, European exit immigration and UK Immigration before you get on the train.

I like Jazz's itinerary. If there is any way to squeeze out 2 more days for your once in a lifetime trip, my suggestion would be to stay two nights in Bruges and Colmar. Colmar is very nice tho I like the little wine villages of the Alsace more. Perhpas there is a tour that would take you into some of the villages for a day.

Would you visit Cleveland for one night, between Chicago and Ann Arbor? That's what you're proposing. Think about the time "overhead", train changes, and money! Don't risk spoiling a once in a lifetime trip with only a glance at a worthwhile destination!

Your idea is not horrible, but it's too complex for a first trip to Europe. And the short time in those two places isn't rewarding. BTW, seeing Bruges makes it unnecessary for you to see Colmar on the same trip. OPINION.

Thanks for the replies. So, if I pick either Bruges or Colmar for a two night stay - what are the recommendations. I know they are similar, but I love them both, and Brugges was recommended. I found Colmar by reading Rick's book.

What do you mean "what are the recommendations?" and Bruges and Colmar are not similar

Jazz - I believe by your itinerary suggestion, you suggest London to Bruges to Paris? I thought someone had said that Bruges and Colmar were similar in looks and sights?

They are nothing alike except for attracting lots of tourism; and I suggested a realistic way for you to get where you want to go that is all.

I haven't been to Bruges, so I comment here with some trepidation, but both towns have "water features", though I think that's a more prominent part of Bruges's layout. And they've both been on the tourist circuit for a long time, so they are well and truly "discovered".

My reason for choosing one would simply be that I think a really nice visit to one small town is a great deal more enjoyable than very rushed visits to two of them with a lot of extra time on a train.

Europe is full of charming towns. Rick mentions some in his books, but there are many, many more. Even with a lifetime of travel it would be difficult to get to all of them. You have to draw the line somewhere, and I draw it at the point where I'm going to be seriously sacrificing sightseeing time by trying to cover way too many miles. I'm 68 and haven't managed to get to Belgium yet; instead, I've been to lots of other cute small towns that were more convenient than Bruges.

If you are trying to decide between Bruges and Colmar, as previously discussed Bruges logistically and timewise makes much more sense. You can easily train from Paris to Colmar to London. I would plan on at least 2 nights in Bruges to give you at least one full day there.

Also, just to make sure that it is clear that the train from London requires a transfer in Brussels. You would buy the type of ticket that will allow you to take a train from Brussels to Bruge within 24 hours of your arrival in Brussels. As to the original question, it's the trip of a lifetime and you should do what you want so in that sense, your plan is not too much and the first response gives you a great itinerary for this trip if you keep both Colmar and Bruges. I think you will be rushed but once in a lifetime trip and all that. If it were my trip, I'd skip Colmar but you may have a compelling reason to go there (reading about it in Rick's book would not be that for me but it is your trip).
Edit: +1 for this: "Europe is full of charming towns. Rick mentions some in his books, but there are many, many more. Even with a lifetime of travel it would be difficult to get to all of them. You have to draw the line somewhere, and I draw it at the point where I'm going to be seriously sacrificing sightseeing time by trying to cover way too many miles. "

So much of Colmar's attraction is the string of very small, very beautiful villages of the wine route right nearby. It is a long way to go to just wander in the old centre of Colmar and not get out into the countryside to those small villages. Not easy without a car or a lot of time.

Bruges, on the other hand, is self contained. If you weren't held up by the horse carriages and crowds you could walk all the way from 't-Zand to the windmills in 20 minutes. Or from the station to the end of the boat ride in about the same time or maybe 10 minutes longer.

That's the east-west and north-south dimensions. And of course you wouldn't just walk quickly in a straight line.

You'd dawdle and go in things, and Bruges is up to the eyeballs in things to see and go into - but it is contained. And doable entirely on foot.

Your once in a lifetime trip to do with as you want. I've been to both and want you to do what feels best to you, with the knowledge you need.

So much of Colmar's attraction is the string of very small, very
beautiful villages of the wine route right nearby. It is a long way to
go to just wander in the old centre of Colmar and not get out into the
countryside to those small villages. Not easy without a car or a lot
of time.

What Nigel said. I, too have been to both. Colmar was nice, but the wine route and local hikes, castle, vineyards, etc. were the real attractions. On the other hand, I went to Bruges as a day trip from Brussels, and it didn't disappoint.

I stand by my previous statement, which did not say Bruges and Colmar are identical. In fact, they do have many overlaps, including unique artwork that never travels. They also both have canals and medieval stonework.

I've been to Bruges on two separate days from Antwerp, and spent a full day in Colmar by car during a driving vacation, Strasbourg to Avignon. It would make sense to fly to Paris from London, and take the train to Belgium for the last stop, probably with Thalys service. The OP could, instead, buy a London, ABS Eurostar ticket with a change in Brussels to Bruges, and go to Paris from either Brussels or Antwerp. This means returning to Brussels, if they can't fly home from Paris instead of BRU.

The OP stated she will be arriving in Paris and departing from London, unless I misunderstood. That's why I suggested Paris - Bruges - London.

Haven't purchased any airfare yet. I will do a week in Paris and 5-7 days in London for sure. Just trying to pin down my itinerary. I appreciate all your suggestions.

If you haven't bought your airfare yet I suggest you start in London and end in Paris. Assuming you've not been to Europe before, London will be an easier transition since they speak English. Additionally, your airfare may be less expensive. Taxes seem high flying out of London. You could do London - Bruges - Paris.

We were just in Brugges in September and spent 2 nights. We wish we’d have had 3 or 4 nights. Brugges was an absolute blast! There are so many cool things to see. Lots of great museums, restaurants, and bars. Make sure you see Market in market day.

Ghent was also amazing!!!

Our trip was:
London 1 night to acclimate from jet lag
Brussels for lunch
Ghent for 2 nights
Brugges for 2 nights
London for 2 nights

The Eurostar was easy from London to Brussels (3 hours including time change) and then take a local thru Ghent (30 min) and then Brugges (30 min). Same in reverse. Keep that in mind since that’s a lot of time for a single night.

It would make sense to fly to Paris from London,

This doesn’t make sense at all to me.

The much more agreeable way to get from London to Paris is to take the Eurostar. Purchase tickets as far in advance as possible once you know your schedule for the best prices at the Eurostar website.

You should be at St Pancras about an hour before your scheduled departure. You do emigration from the UK and immigration to France both right there at St Pancras, so when you arrive in Paris, you just walk away from the train (since the border formalities were done in London. The same principle applies if you take the train to Brussels instead for Bruges).

The trip from London to Paris by train takes 2 hours and 20 minutes.

If this is a once of a lifetime trip you don’t want to go home and regret your decision. I think you can include anyway as already said an overnight stay in Bruges. Living within an hour driving of Bruges maybe I’am biased but Colmar is lesser attractive to my idea too, it didn’t met expectations a few years back and indeed the real attraction are those lovely small places nearby. If nevertheless Colmar remains a must you can stay for instance in lovely Turckheim, just 10 minutes with the train from Colmar.