How Long is Too Long?

I've done a month, which was awesome. You are actually ready to get back to regular life. But, I can't do a month any more, so the next best thing is two weeks, but all three weekends. That means flying out on Thursday night or Friday, day, and returning home on Monday. : ) Pam

I like to go for at least 3 weeks. The most time we can take is 4 weeks, and that was great. I could have stayed longer. I figure that for the time it takes to get there and the cost of the airline ticket, I want to stay as long as I can.

Since I have been retired for the past 12 years, time off is no longer a problem for me. I could spend whatever time in Europe I wanted until I got board and wanted to come back to Hawaii. However, my wife is still working so her vacation time dictates how much time we spend in Europe every summer. For the last 10 or so years, we have been spending between 3 and 4 weeks there. I am sure we will be spending more time there once she retires - money allowing.

I've done longer trips and shorter ones. Especially when travelling with kids it's good to give yourself some extra time as you will travel at a much slower pace. So with them in tow I travelled for 4-5 weeks. That did include lots of family visits (which are tiring as well!). 3-4 weeks would be ideal, giving me enough time to see things at a decent pace without getting sensation overload. And then I do start to miss my own bed ;-)

We mostly go for three weeks at a time but once we were gone a month. Never once have I been ready to go home and resume normal life.

Good to hear how others manage their time. To Elle's point, I think that the constant go go starts to get to me by about day 15. I probably need to plan some down time to beat the fatigue. Our last four days in Rome were so crowded with fellow tourists, I found myself looking for quieter options!

Our trips have been anywhere from 4 wks to 10 wks. I wouldn't go to Europe for less than 4 wks, even that is way too short for us. We never get tired. We love every minute and never want to come home. Edit: The only reason I said I wouldn't go to Europe for less than 4 wks is because of the airfare cost to get there for two of us. There is nothing wrong with going for less time and I did not mean to imply there was :) I'd happily go for even a week if it didn't cost so darn much.

Our normal pattern is 4 to 6 six weeks. The longer periods generally will have a cruise stuck in the middle. On most of those trips the fourth or fifth day is completely blank - use it to catch up and sleep. Critical for us. Leave tomorrow for ten days in Tuscany. First experience with a total package deal but price was too good to pass up. This fall have scheduled the last of Sep through all of October. However, we travel very slow.

Though the thought of spending a month or two in Europe sounds wonderful, most of my trips to Europe are two to three weeks even though with summers off I could take longer ones. I have found also, that at three weeks I am starting to feel ready to be home. On the other hand, I have taken, what might others think are too short of trips - 5 to 7 days - and enjoyed them also. I think that if someone told me I could only go for a day, I would still do it.

I go every summer until the Schengen Rule kicks in. Before there was s Schengen rule, even longer but not every year. I avoid one-night stays and try to work in a week or more in one place a few times each trip. I turn money into time, so I have a modest (but not bare-bones) budget with only a few splurge days.

Nancy, I find that two months is about my limit. By that point, I'm feeling some degree of "travel fatigue" and just can't tolerate another Museum, Church or whatever. When I start to get thoughts of "it's time to go home", then I know I've reached the limit. Now that I'm retired, it's not likely I'll be able to afford two month trips any more, so it will likely be one month trips from now on. Cheers!

Hi Ken, If I may ask, how were you able to take two month trips before you retired? My work was alwyas so limiting, I never had more than a week or 10 days in a stretch. Now we have our own business and have much more flexibility.We could be gone longer...I think I just need to plan to slow the pace down a little bit.
Thanks for sharing!

Easy, two choices: 1. Work in education which has bigger blocks of time off but low salaries but invest wisely. 2. Retire wealthy or at least retire. My social security is deposited directly in our travel account. Part of it is payment for the intern program the government provide me in V Nam in 68.

I really enjoyed reading this thread. There was so much passion and caring about travelling. Gave me goose bumps :-) We generally go for one month (not by choice), but hubby has a new job, and can only take 3 weeks in one stretch. I adore Europe and could seriously stay there. I've never felt like I was bored and wanted to be home. Have started looking for a slower day every 4 days or so on our trips. And as someone mentioned, when it rains, we take it easy. May go out, but we do less. I think it's crazy to be on the go every day, for a month!! The shortest trip we made was one week in London (business).

Nancy I think that the travel fatique you have experienced can only be remendied by staying LONGER,lol ,, two weeks can be tiring since many people try to see too much and cram it into a shorter period then they should. My most tiring visit was only 9 days long, in Paris whole time, but I had taken a friend who had never been and I was determined ( as was she) to hit all the highlights.. made for busy days. My usual trip length is closer to four weeks,, last summer we went for 26 days and I found it tiring because once again my boyfriend was new to Europe and we wanted to see quite a lot. We are planning our next trip for again at least three weeks but will only do two , maybe three destinations . I have a hard time understanding how people can fly to Europe from NA and stay only one week, and then some of them list 2 or 3 countries /cities they want to see in that time length! I would save vacation time and not even go for a week .. the 9 day trip was a mistake! My longest trip was 3 months.. and it was great..

Nancy, "If I may ask, how were you able to take two month trips before you retired?" I worked in a Union job (large U.S. Union based in Washington D.C.) and with my length of service (about 42 years at the time I retired), I had six weeks paid vacation every year (some of which could be "banked"). With some "creative" shift scheduling and co-operation from my colleagues, it wasn't too hard to arrange two month holidays. My last two month trip was in 2010, which was the year I retired so time away from work was no longer a concern.

I was once in Europe for 8 weeks; it was wonderful and I had all of Italy to explore in that time. My shortest trip was during a money-crunch in 2009; I stayed only two weeks and focused on London and Bath with a day-trip to Paris. I kept betterorganized than usual and had a satisfying stay. Now I usually start feeling tired of being away from home after about 3 weeks. Money, time available, and what I want to see are deciding factors.

We've had 3 trips overseas anywhere from 19-23 days. I do find about by week 2 I am starting to miss my doggie (not my work tho). We always pack way to much in, and am hoping to get my husband to try and slow down a little (this year, our trip to California will be about 18 days...I'm still trying to get one more day out of him so we can spend an extra day in LA). For us, a big part of course is airfare...it's that same whether it's 1 week or 3. So it feels better to spread that cost out over more days (tho I realize we are incurring more hotel/transport costs, etc). I think by day 13, I kinda feel like...is this still happening?!, but when we hit the few days before we are to go home, I don't want it to be over...

Hi Nancy, I have done no less than 4 weeks, and the max I have done was 91 (yes, 91!) days. Our first trip to Italy was the most exhausting becauae we were there for a month and traveled from Milan to Salerno and back up, hitting every major place on the way. Lots of trains, hotels, dragging luggage, etc... But nowadays, whenever we are there, we stay in one location for at least a month, with maybe a few days somewhere either during the trip or at the end. The 91-day trip, I was in Florence for 2 months (with a weekend in Milan) and Lisbon for 1, with a few days in Madrid at the end. Since we stay so long, we live like locals - a flat, a bus pass, shopping in grocery stores, and the like. I find that I get used to all the walking, we can space out our visits to museums or day trips to local places, and it doesn't take a toll on the body like shorter stays do. Obviously not everyone can do it (I am referring more to time off work than finances, because I am as broke as they come but I scrimp and save and really search for budget options), but if possible, living as a temporary local is the best way to go.
I think as you plan it, it "sounds" like a long time, and if you haven't been away that long before, it sounds extra long. But once you get there and get into your adventures and touring and food and all that, the times goes by really quick and you are home before you know it, planning your next trip.

The shortest, 7 days....The Longest, 17 days.
I wished I could take months to go on a trip, but I have to work so I can pay for my trips. I envy anyone that has a trip longer than my usual.

I should not have read this thread. I have 1 week vacations. I don't mean 10 or 11 days with weekends and a holiday thrown in. I mean 7 days. But things are looking up. My husband and I have flown rather than driven to the last two vacations together. That means he's stuck and can't decide to drive home a few days early. And we're squeezing in a few more short vacations. They just won't be long.

I hope no one misunderstood that 91-day comment. It wasn't bragging by any means - just a shot at the 90-day rule because I stayed 91 days. But don't tell Uncle Sam or Mr. Schengen... I don't think anyone should envy anyone. If you can go anywhere and stay any length of time, that's great in and of itself. Yes, staying months at a time is awesome, but it does have its challenges. I work also (very hard, and in a hospital which never closes), but fortunately it has worked out that I can bust my behind for 10-11 months and then use the money I saved (by not getting my nails done, or not going to the movies, or eating our very rarely, etc...) to have an extended trip. Some people can have their cake and eat it too, but me - I make a lot of sacrifices on a daily basis to do what I do. It's worth it and I am not complaining!!!! - but it's a sacrifice all the same. So don't be quick to envy because there is a backstory to everything. I am sure many people on this site who are on a budget can testify to the same thing.

Nancy, thank you for posting this and to everyone for sharing their experiences. My longest trip to Europe to date has been 3 weeks. However, I am starting to plan my retirement celebration trip. I'd like to stay up to 3 months between Europe and UK and have wondered if I would get homesick or travel fatigued. From reading everyone's thoughts I will add the regular days of rest or as the Italians say the sweetness of doing nothing 'dolce far niente.' I never took that backpack through Europe trip during the college years, so this is my take the rolling bag through Europe trip. I plan on staying at least a week, preferably longer, in any one place and making day trips to outlying areas. I am also looking at alternate accommodations like staying in convents and getting an apartment for a longer stay or using airbnb to stay in someone's home.

I generally plan three weeks because that's about as long as I can get away with. The longest I've done is six weeks, which wasn't too long - I still felt like I wanted more time. Normally, no matter how long I go, I wish I had twice the time.

I totally forgot my longest trip! Daughter and I spent 8 weeks in 2011, and did 7 countries. The shortest was a 1 day trip just so she could say she saw a small bit of Switzerland. Maybe I'm still tired from that trip, lol

Longest trip was about 16 days. I can only take two weeks off work at one time. Hoping to take longer trips when I retire in a few years.

Thank you so much for all of your responses! it has been very enlightening to read all of the posts. I can tell that all of you who have been traveling to Europe for many years have a much more relaxed approach to your trips. This year was only my second trip to Europe and I am still in that "can't wait to see EVERYTHING!!" mode. Going forward, I will try and incorporate some of your ideas and philosophies in slowing down a little bit. I discovered the website Classictics.com last year and we have enjoyed concerts in Paris, Venice, Rome and Barcelona on our trips. These are always among the highlights of our trips. I love the beautiful venues and it seems to be mostly locals attending. I alwyas make time to photograph the beautiful architecture and gardens..these serve as my souveniers. I agree that it is a privelege to travel and I am thrilled to be able to do so. Thanks again!

For me the threshold is 5 weeks. Usually I'd stick with one month maximum. 6 weeks would start getting too long of a vacation. The most I took were 7 weeks. However, I consider it critical to balance the pace of travelling on vacations longer than 10-15 days. I'm already not attracted to "whirlwind"-style travel, rushing to tick off places out of a check-list. On longer trips, that is even more important. I try then to avoid more than one major site with lines and/or long guided tours per day, and try to stay at least 3 nights on each stop. I find itineraries like RS "Best of Europe" in 21 days to be very taxing and rushed, though I understand their market logic for people who don't have the luxury of longer vacations.

Part of the answer probably depends on the stage of your life. Back in my Lonely Planet/Let's Go days, when I had more time than money, travel started to merge from pleasure to chore between 5-6 weeks. There's only so much some people can take of living out of bag, not preparing your own food, seeing yet another museum/church/castle etc. If I lived in a some fantasy land where money magically appeared on trees, 5-6 weeks would still probably be my limit... but because I'm a working age adult with real-world responsibilities, 2 weeks is about my max. My wife and I could easily afford longer trips, and we could probably even negotiate for more extended periods away from work. But realistically, that work isn't doing itself while we're gone. It only accumulates, happily waiting to welcome us back when we return. The longer you're gone, the bigger the welcome. So, in my profession, I've found that anything longer than 2 weeks just causes too much work to build up, and can almost negate a fair amount of the pleasurable memory of the trip. Even Rick Steves has to return to the office sometimes.

We have taken five European trips as a family with children and the lengths, in order, were; 21 days, 21 days, 30 days, 35 days, 35 days. We also took a trip to Australia/New Zealand for 42 days. Each trip has felt like a good amount of time - neither too long nor too short. Over time our travel style and expectations have evolved. When the trips were three weeks, every day that we didn't accomplish several things - either due to weather or fatigue - felt like a failure. Now we don't sweat each day so much. We tend to stay in week-long rentals when possible and that lends itself to a more relaxed "I'm pretending I live here" sort of approach. What a non-rental traveler packs into 3-4 days of sights, hotels and restaurants, we spread over 7 days in a rental cooking most of our meals. It feels better, creates longer-lasting memories, and (here's the real kicker) costs exactly the same. The only catch is that you have to be able to get away from home for a longer period of time. Many people can't. No one can keep up a frantic pace of sight-seeing indefinitely. But when the pace is adjusted, longer trips rarely ever feel too long.

It's time to come home when: * The money runs out. * Your boss asks, "What ever happened to whats-'is-name? * Your third bust for sleeping under a bridge in Paris. * You are so broke, the pickpockets put money IN your pocket. * The local government declares your house "abandoned" and prepares to tear it down. * Your picture starts appearing on milk cartons.
:)

Our trips used to be around 10 days to 2.5 weeks, with occasional aberrations like a long weekend in Paris many years ago, and a 4-week trip. Now, we prefer not to even consider anything less than 3 weeks, and this Spring we spent 5 1/2 weeks in France. Part of the reason is higher airfares, partly age, and part is the general hassle of getting there and back. No more showing up at the airport shortly before the flight and zipping through security. But I hate staying in hotels for more than a night or 2, and hate moving around too frequently. So most of our trips involve stays of a week at a time in houses, with an occasional hotel stay at the beginning and/or end.

Andre has a good point. I could probably go nonstop for two weeks, including mostly one-night stops. Longer than two weeks, however, I have to seriously think about my pace - either cut way back on one-night stops or plan a few days with nothing but rest on the agenda. Generally, I don't test my limits; I avoid long travel legs and one-night stops even for shorter trips.

My wife and I have only been to Europe twice, once for 15 days and once for 12. I had wanted to travel to Europe since high school and when I actually find myself in Europe, I don't think about things I need to see or need to do. I think about having the experience. Do I visit the Louvre or take a gondola ride? Yes, but if I don't go to the top of the Eiffel Tower or walk through Trastevere, I don't feel like I missed something. It's sort of like the folks who you see in the Louvre or, more recently, the Uffizzi who are in such a hurry to take a picture of a painting or sculpture so that they can say they saw it that they don't actually have the experience of seeing the work of art. They're in such a hurry to snap a picture that they in effect, are trying to capture a moment they never really had.

LOL @ Roy! I think the 4th one has happened to me once or twice...

Longest trip? 4 months in 1977-78. I was 31. How did I do it? I quit my job and sold just about everything I owned to be able to afford it. For those of you who remember, way back then there was no Schengen and no means of "keeping up" with home except sending postcards and making transatlantic phone calls in special booths usually in post offices. I wasn't ready to come home but ran out of money. Next longest trip? 2 months in 2009. It was my husband's first time and he wanted to see everything we could in fear we would never get back. We were both retired by then. I wasn't ready to come home but we needed to get back to our house and our dog (especially). Now we do a month a year. It's not enough, but we have set that limit for ourselves. Why a month? We hate to leave our dog in the "pet resort" for longer than that. We have left him with friends a couple of times, but the pet resort is the best option for him, and for our friends. Also, we have no one to get our mail for us, and a month is the longest the USPS will hold the mail without special forwarding arrangements like we did on the 2-month trip. A month is okay but I would definitely stay longer if we didn't have a pet. We could arrange and pay for the mail forwarding. All our household bills are automatically paid. The only problem might be if we got some oddball bill in the mail and were gone, let's say 3 months. That could happen even with the best of preparation and planning. We'd just have to cope with the consequences of not paying it on time when we returned.

Okay, while I appreciate that longer is better, the thinking that it's the, "It is not worth doing at all unless you can go for a month," mentality that stopped me from traveling to Europe for 17 years! Count them! My first trip to Europe was as a student and I was there for six months. My second trip was four years later and we went to the UK for a month. Two years after than I did Greece for a month. Then I got a job that didn't let me take longer than two weeks at time. I thought at the time and for the next 17 years, that it just wasn't worth it. You wouldn't have time to really do anything. Well thank goodness I kept the passport current and when my company said that they would send me to the UK for a week I grabbed it. And I learned that you could have a lot of fun in a week! And so I've been going ever since, albeit for two weeks, except last summer which was a week. Just because you're only going for two weeks doesn't mean that it has to be a whirlwind. I usually plan on staying put for a week of the trip and then wrap some short trips around either end. It's really good. Pam

My longest trip to Europe was for 10 weeks (when I was 20). More recent trips have been 10-12 days - the most we can manage while I am still working.

I did spend a year living overseas and working for a European company, so I stayed confined to pretty much one country since I had a job. But the longest I was on the road traveling and moving around was for one year. But I had to actually quit my job, give up my apartment and move all of my stuff into storage to do that. At no point during the year did I ever feel like I had been gone "too long". With all the technology available to keep in touch with those back home, handle your finances online, etc. the only thing that really changes is the scenery and the accents around you. But working for an American company now...forget it! Even though I have 5 weeks of vacation time this year, it was akin to asking for a kidney when I put in a request for 2 weeks off to go overseas. I leave next week and just yesterday my boss looked across the conference room at me and said "I can't believe you will be gone for 2 whole weeks. I must have been in a really good mood that day to agree to it because my schedule is going to be horrible. I'll pay you back in August when I take my 2 weeks and you cover my job and yours!" In other words, he's giving me my 80 hours of time off now, but I'll be putting in 12-14 hour days and working on the weekends, too, when he goes away.

My longest trip of any kind to date was 13 days. I'd love to be in a situation where I could travel for longer, but that's never been my reality. It's not a time vs. money thing, it's a time AND money thing. The vast majority of my travel is 2 nights - 4 nights, with hopes for one "big trip" (i.e. longer than a week) once a year. That's only becoming a reality now, with my husband's previous job and mine, we were able to get 10 days once in 2007 and that was a freaking miracle. I wouldn't let the "If you can't come for a month, don't come!" mindset stop anyone. 7-14 days is plenty of time to have a great trip to Europe, just don't try to do too much. My SIL came for exactly 7 days (including travel days) and she had the time of her life, my brother for 10, and we went all over France and Germany, my inlaws for 20, my family has come for a month and another time for 13 days. I don't think any of them would have said they felt shortchanged for having less than a month, they were all exhausted and ready to return home after we wore them out (in a good way).

I have gone for several 3 week trips, I always feel that I am just "getting good" at the whole travel thing when it's time to go home. you do have to take some down days, read a book, or go to a movie.
I did go to Bath England once for 5 days over Thanksgiving (really cheap airfare). I saw Stonehenge, Cotswold, and ate a lot of fish and chips. It was a great little adventure, but longer stays allow you to get into more of a rhythm. I will start to miss friends and pets, but I can go sit in a park and get a quick fix, pet a couple of dogs and wave to some kids.

You asked how long is too long and you have had a lot of replies. I try to make my trips 3-4 weeks long, but that doesn't mean that someone shouldn't consider shorter trips. My shortest European trip was a week. I found a great airfare deal to Ireland that was too good to pass up. We had just returned from a 2 week trip to Europe (our next shortest) and one week was all my husband could take off. Do I regret going for only one week? Absolutely not! We had a great time. So we didn't get to see everything. So what? We can always go back.

Hi, My minimum stay is 21 days when I am going to more than one country. But three full weeks is still too hectic; it's fine if you plan on staying in one country. The two longest trips have been 9 weeks and 12 weeks. If I am going to do the trip justice by visiting 3-4 countries, I need at least 6-7 weeks budgeting accordingly, going by train day or night, no flying, and setting a few days for rest. My "self imposed max" for a future trip is one hundred days, ie., Schengen zone and England. Something like that would require planning and good timing.

I have to amend my post :) I said I wouldn't go for less than 4 wks... that's only because of how expensive airfare is for the two of us. I don't think there's anything wrong with going for even a week, I would happily go even for a few days if it didn't cost so much. I paid $3800 (long story) last time and that was painful.

When much, much younger, I went for three weeks and could have stayed three months. 36 years later and with much different responsibilities, the maximum we could possibly stay would be 18 days encompassing three weekend (which we did in 2009). We are hoping to take a July 2014 cruise, and though I would love to make the trip 17 days, we are probably looking at 14 days. It is what it is, and two weeks away is a long time away for us. We can pull off two week vacations--scheduling a year in advance--every so often, but certainly not every year.

I'm lucky to be so close to Europe, so flights are shorter and much less expensive. I have never gone for less than 12 days and I have a self-imposed rule now of no more than 3 weeks, but it often ends up being 3-1/2. A couple of times I've joined a group of friends for 12-14 day cruises, so those were 4-5 week trips. But if my trip involves long-haul flights, then it's at least 4 weeks but no more than 6. I hate the long-hauls and the jetlag, so I pack in as much as I can. I don't like being away for much over 5 weeks. The only times I've stayed in one place for more than 5-6 days were London (up to 10) and Paris (14-15). Never tire of them and still haven't checked everything off my list for either one. Occasionally in the middle of a trip, I'll wish I were on my way home, but the feeling passes quickly - it usually means I need to slow down for a day. I start to think about being home 2 or 3 days before the end of the trip, and it doesn't matter where I am or how long I've been away.

We have done everything from 1 week, too short, up to 8+ weeks which was a little too long. Our best time away seems to be about 3-4 weeks. We have ample time to decompress from stressful
jobs, but at the same time don't have "travel fatigue".

Personally, I don't cross the Atlantic Ocean unless I can "be there" for at least 2 full weeks, and that's really an absolute minimum - I think a 3 week trip is a more reasonable minimum. Crossing the Pacific, my minimums are a bit longer (it takes significantly longer to get there, and to recover from the transition, both physically and culturally). After 3 weeks, I start to miss things at home (more choices for clothes than I'm carrying, my bed or bathroom at home, food options from home, an "American breakfast" - even though I rarely east one). I always notice when I cross this point - I view it as an indication of a successful travel experience. OTOH, I find that if I'm away for less than 3 weeks, it feels like a hurried trip. For me, 4-6 weeks is an ideal length for most trips. I've done longer trips, but it's difficult for me to get away for that long and still have a job, a home, and a life to return to.