Please sign in to post.

First time to London - is 4 full days enough to tour?

I wanted to get an idea if 4 full days in London is enough to tour the main sights (no museums) and the city in general? What if I want to throw in one day to Windsor Castle/Stonehenge/Bath? I am stuck between a 4 and 5 day trip and moneywise I may only be able to do 4. Thanks!

Posted by
45 posts

Tracey, That's a tough question to really answer. London is packed with so many things to see. In 4 days you won't cover them all but you can prioritize and definitely get in a lot of sights. If you have 5 days then a one day excursion out of the city won't really whittle into the time you have to spend in the city. But if you do only have 4 days I'd be tempted to spend it all in London. You don't really list tho what you consider to be the main sights. Obviously some things can be seen more quickly than others. Every time I've been it's been part of another trip so just a few days here and there. I still haven't seen everything I want to but each time I cross more things off my list. You will love it!

Posted by
11507 posts

Gosh,, without seeing any museums,( really, are you sure, they have some amazing ones,, really, amazing) yes, I personally could do it in four days. I think London could easily fill 7, but I would put the British Museum, the Victoria and Albert Museum, and the Tower of London on my list.
I have done Bath on my own as a daytrip and enjoyed if very much, I also did a bus tour to Bath, Stonehenge and Salisbury as a one day , I found it fine,but we did not get enough time in Bath so would recommend you do Bath seperately, unless you just want a taste of a bunch of places. Even if you don't want to visit any Museums, I hope you will see the Tower of London at least, the Beefeaters included tour is very interesting ( and humorously done)

Posted by
2768 posts

Well, there's never enough time to see everything, but I think you can get a great feel for the city and see the highlights in 4 days. I can't imagine not going to the British Museum, it's my #1 London sight, but if museums aren't your thing then you have more time for the non-museum sights. My first trip there was 3 days - including the day I arrived at 8AM at Gatwick - and I felt I got a decent, if very abridged view of the city. What I did on that trip was day 1: Westminster Walk, saw Big Ben, Parliament, and the outside of Buckingham Palace. Trafalger Square walkthrough. Also Westminster Abbey in the afternoon. Day 2: Tower of London, St. Paul's, City area walk, and a very, very quick stop at the Tate Modern for an exhibit I was very interested it. Day 3: British Museum, Covent Garden, Thames Boat, London Eye. Day 4 was an early train, so I stopped at the British Library then headed onto Paris. I was young and highly energetic, and I missed a lot. I didn't go in Buckingham Palace, for starters. Missed some museums that are great (War Rooms, National Gallery), didn't get to the markets, etc. But you can do a lot a get a good overview even in 3 days. I would advise not being like me and counting on the day you arrive as a big touring day. Delayed planes, jet lag, etc can really derail that kind of schedule. I was lucky. Also, on a short visit, confirming what days things are open and when they close is extra important - good planning is essential.

Posted by
2829 posts

London is city were you could easily stay 2 weeks and still not having explored the "main sites". If you are pressed for budget, it doesn't make any sense to introduce a costly day-trip in your plans. Stay in London 4 or 5 full days, as you can, and enjoy the city. The same reasoning goes, in my opinion, to Paris and Berlin.

Posted by
7209 posts

and not to mention that the British Sterling Pound will eat through your dollars like wildfire.

Posted by
35 posts

Like Andre mentioned... you could spend weeks. You'll see a lot in 4 days' and more in 5! On the practical side...if jet lag affects you, it may crimp your energy level at certain times of day. So, that may be a reason for 5 days'. Not sure if art galleries get lumped in with museums for you...but the Tate Modern has a restaurant and bar on the 6th floor with wonderful views of the city and St Paul's across the river, great for a coffee, wine or lunch..all 3! Entrance is free. The gallery building is a converted power plant. If you visit St Paul's cathedral, a short walk across the Millennium Bridge will lead to the Tate. Otherwise, the Southwark Tube station and the "orange painted lampposts" will lead to the gallery.

Posted by
1167 posts

I honestly that it is impossible for total strangers to answer that question for you since they have no real idea what your interests are. You need to do some research and decide what things in London YOU want to do/see and then decide how much time it will take. For example, some people love to shop and could spent 1/2 a day or more at Herods while others might prefer to go to Greenwich and see the Observatory, etc.

Posted by
35 posts

Windsor is only a 25 minute train ride, and I paid 8 quid for round trip (Paddington to Slough, change trains at Slough)but you will probably end up spending at least a whole day/afternoon there. It is a fun place to visit. Go to Eton Central station in Windsor, not Eton Riverside.

Posted by
32873 posts

No museums at all? You do know that almost all of the absolutely world beating top flight ones are free, right? The HoHo bus will wizz you by many of the outsides of many famous places in London, and you could have it done in half a day if you don't want to go in anywhere. There may be a reason for shunning all museums but that's actually what many people go to London for. Its not called a museum but even the Tower of London is pretty museum-like. So is the British Library, and so is Madame Tussauds. oh well

Posted by
2030 posts

Well if you don't care about going to museums, I suggest taking the Hop on Hop off bus on a nice day. You will see a lot of the city and all the major sights and you can stop at any one of them that interests you, then return to the bus tour. I think Westminster Abbey, Tower of London, (perhaps- if you like heights) the London Eye, and the changing of the Guards, Trafalgar Square and Covent Garden (pubs and shopping!) are great non-museum things to do. The London Walks pub walk is fun and the parks are beautiful for strolling. I have not taken the trip out to Windsor Castle, but have friends who just did it and raved how impressive it was. Since it's pretty close, perhaps this is a good one to do. I have done Stonehenge and Bath trips, but they are longer, take a full day. But like others have said, just staying in the city is great too.

Posted by
6545 posts

Not to beat this to death, but I agree with most of the others, you can get a good introduction to London in four days if you don't want to spend time in museums. Places like Westminster Abbey, St. Paul's, and the Tower have museum-like qualities but I wouldn't define them that way, but rather as historic and beautiful buildings with many interesting things to see. The Beefeater tour of the Tower leaves out the White Tower exhibits and the Crown Jewels, allowing you to see the site without violating your (questionable to me) "no museum" principle. The audioguide to Westminster Abbey is excellent. Group your major sites by area, use the Oyster card or HOHO bus depending on budget, stay somewhere close enough in that you can retreat for an afternoon break without having to end your day. I'd skip the day trip out of town because London offers so much and you have so little time, but if you want to get away consider Windsor, Hampton Court, or Greenwich which you can reach, see, and return from in less than a full day. And keep in mind the RS mantra, "assume you will return" (perhaps with more interest in some of the world-class museums).

Posted by
433 posts

I agree with Charlottebea. We did London in 4 days, and were looking at stuff to do on the fourth. Saw the British Museum, British Library, Tate Modern, Westminster Abbey, rode the tube, Big Ben, Tower of London (cool place), Buckingham palace and the changing of the guards (what a waste), visited Piccadelly Circus, the museum at Trafalgar square (can't remember the name), attended a premier party for Toy Story 3 (they had something happening when we were at Picadelly), and took a day tour to Bath, Windsor and my favourite spot, Stonehenge. We also visited a few pubs and had time to cruise up the Thames from Tower of London, and of course walk the Tower bridge.

Posted by
12 posts

Oh sure, been there twice for just a couple of days each time. While I would LOVE to go to London for a LONG time, any time, and would probably never see everything, I believe you can see any city in just a few days if you really prioritize what you want to see and spend time before you go to make sure you know where each attraction is and how to get there. Wasting time on figuring out trains and so forth is something I try to avoid because they are time killers while you are there and its enough to have to figure out money and so forth. Plan ahead...that's all you have to do. Every time I post a question like yours on a travel site, people bark at me and tell me I could never fit in all I need to, as if I have the option of taking more time. Nonsense. The truth is not everyone has the time or money to take long, comprehensive trips and to see the things you are most interested in, you will do fine. Museums are fabulous but they are never our priority either. Time permitting, we will choose a few but only if we've seen everything else we want to. On our last trip, we managed to fit in London, Edinborough, Normandy and a half day in Paris...in 7 days. Did we see everything? No. Did we see enough? For now, sure! I also want to say we LOVED the Tower of London so if you like history, that is a must see and you can do it pretty quickly if you need to. Windsor Castle is a quick and WONDERFUL day trip but you can do it in a half day if you push. The town is wonderful too. Have fun!

Posted by
14565 posts

Hi, Going to London for 5 days without intending to see any of the museums, sort of defeats the purpose. But if you plan saving that for the next trip, then get an overview of the sights, as suggested above, by taking a tour, such as HoHo, and be prepared to do a lot of walking, great city for walking, and tracking the sights yourself. Get an Oyster card, invaluable and convenient. Unless Bath, Windsor, etc are absolutely top priority, I would stay in London, no day trips this time.

Posted by
8709 posts

In answer to the question, yes. You can visit and pass by the touristy sights in 4 days. Will it be a great way to truly experience London? No, but that's not what you asked. Your money spend it how you wish.