Less is More! We have finally realized that (I think)

It's great to hear that you had a wonderful time on your holiday! That's what holidays are for.

"But next trip it will be three cities MAX and we will rent a car."

Renting a car is not necessarily a good idea in all situations. There are some potentially expensive "caveats" to be aware of in some countries. Having a car in major cities is often a huge hassle! I find that it's best to base the mode of transportation on the destinations that I'll be visiting.

I'm settling in to four night stays, too. Less is too rushed and more gets boring.

Sounds like a great trip! For our first trip to Europe, we spent two weeks in London and did six day trips. So I guess we've always tried to avoid moving around too much. The thing I have learned (slowly over time) is not too cram too much into each day. I still do it once in a while, but I'm okay with that.

Your next trip of a maximum of three locations over 23 days would be BORING for me. Each of us should develop and relish a travel style.

Will only rent a car in the smaller cities. For example, on this trip we wish we would have rented a car in Bayeux and Colmar. We did bus trips from both towns, but think we could have easily have rented a car to explore a little more. Renting a car in Amsterdam, Paris or Lyon - never!

we find it great to spend 3-4 nights in one place (with a car, where appropriate), as it allows you to live a bit like a local by exploring the local area, totally at your leisure. just trying to remember that as I plan next years trip.

Three cities in 21 days is very doable with the break down of seven nights per city incl. a day trip or two. I've spent seven nights (or more) in various cities, Paris, Arras, Berlin, Vienna, It totally depends on the cities. Spending four nights in Bayeux plus day trip(s) can be easily worked out. All I have to do is plan that way for the Czech Republic.

Vignettes not vignettes.

Wow, that does seem like a marathon! But I think the lesson you should learn is to watch out for itineraries with long travel times. Such as Amsterdam-Bayeux. Bayeux-Annecy.

I'd never tell anyone to go faster, or that there is not something to be gained by spending extra time someplace. But the times you spent at these destinations are reasonable.

I'm not sure a car would have made this any better, either, though it would have given you access to the countryside.

The more we travel -- and we have traveled for a total of 18 weeks in 2016 alone -- the slower we go. Two-night stops are anathema, and while many places do not lend themselves to more than 4 nights, most places are worth at least that as our approach is to "be" in a place, not simply "do" what is there to be done (or seen).

Several years ago we took a one month trip to Italy (prior to relocating here), staying in only 4 locations. It was an excellent pace. We had apartments, we cooked, we wandered, we got lost.

This year, for the first time, we spent one month in one place (the Val Gardena in the Dolomites) and it was glorious. the best vacation ever, even though we are retired. In the future, I hope to do more one-month stays, starting with London and Paris.

We are 63 and 72 and quite active, but it does not mean we like to exhaust ourselves with 10-12 hour days of sightseeing!

OP may find this recent thread of interest.

https://community.ricksteves.com/travel-forum/general-europe/so-i-have-this-recurring-desire-to-get-somewhere-and-stay-there

We too just returned from our vacation in Europe, and we stayed in 5 cities on this trip and did 2 day trips. Our destinations where 5 nights in London with a day trip to Windsor, 1 night in York, 3 nights in Edinburgh, 5 nights in Munich with a day trip to Salzburg, and 4 nights in Barcelona. This trip was a lot less rushed than our first trip which we stayed longer in Europe but visited a lot more cities and saw a lot more museums and monuments. My daughters who are 14 now said that although we did less, they felt like this trip was better in the fact that we weren't rushing. I believe that over time and trips, you see what works for you and what doesn't. Everyone's style of travel is different.

I travel solo and seem to feel most comfortable in big cities, and recent trips have reinforced the fact that I do best with 2 countries in 10-14 nights. I may break up the nights in a couple of different cities (Krakow and Warsaw) and try to keep a loose schedule to allow for relaxing exploration with major must-sees worked in. Since I now realize that I seem to need to visit Budapest every year (haven't worked up to travelling all over Hungary just yet, aside from day trips) I'm doing the "something old, something new", thus in April I will visit Amsterdam first, then 3 nights in Vienna (been there before, loved it) and train to Budapest for 4 nights.

"From your heading I was expecting a "If it's Tuesday, it ..." style itinerary. Yours actually looks quite reasonably paced to me. "

That was my reaction too. Three or four nights in each place is hardly an Amazing Race itinerary. But I agree with everyone else - each person has to find what works best for them, and then follow that path.

Our second trip in 2010 looked like this (if you want to see a totally mental itin)
Flew into London overnight, took train directly to Paris.
Paris - 3 nights
Strasbourg - 1 night (and before going, we spent to better part of the day at Vimy Ridge!)
Augsburg - 1 night
Munich - 1 night (and we enjoyed our couchsurfing host so much in Augsburg, we didn't arrive until late in Munich - giving us about 8 hrs the next day to look around before moving on to...)
Salzburg - 2 nights
overnight train to Venice - 3 nights
Milan - 2 nights (with a day trip to Lake Como)
Spiez, Bern and Zurich - all 1 nighters
fly to London - 3 nights, go to Portsmouth for sister visit for 2 nights, back to London for 1 night before flying home.

Now THAT'S what I call a crazy trip. Six one night stays. And we are still trying to learn to take it slower, but are doing better. Four nights in each spot would be a dream for us..lol.

Our most leisurely trip was in 2014.
We flew to London, spent a few nights, gathered my mom up from my sister's in Portsmouth - stayed one night. Flew into Naples, arriving very late, stayed the night. Amalfi Coast, 3 nights. Rome - 5 nights, Venice - 3 nights before flying back to London for a night and coming home. Next year I'm hoping to spend 5 nights in Amsterdam, but most other stops will be 3 nights.

Hmmmm. After reading all of the replies - I don't know why we came back so tired. Maybe we really are getting old!! NOT!! The trips from Amsterdam to Bayeux and then Bayeux to Annecy were much longer travel days than we would normally do. Both of these involved changing stations in Paris, so that was an extra "burden". But the Normandy beaches and Annecy were two places my husband really wanted to go to on this trip, so that's why we did that.

My husband thinks we should stay a week in each place. I don't entirely agree with him, so we'll see what happens next year. Thanks for all of your comments. It's very interesting to read how everyone travels.

Sue, I'm with you and your husband. I prefer not to be running around for the sake of seeing 'sights'. I do that, but I also enjoy an afternoon at a cafe, or going to the same place for breakfast or coffee or pastry for an entire week or reading in a park while studying people, watching a park game, etc. We spent 10 days in Nancy, FR, relaxed, and got to the point many people would be saying 'bonjour' to us as we walked around, as they had gotten used to seeing us. Usually, we have at least a 4 day stay, depending upon the size of the place. I guess I combine resort relaxation (I hate real resorts) with being a tourist. We relax and get a feel for the place. I've spent more than two weeks, by far, in Paris, London and Florence and not finished yet, and 4 days in Eksjö, SE (population 5000), etc...for example. You get my drift. One must stop and smell the roses whenever possible. Wray

Perhaps you can compromise and "bookend" your trip with longer stays. That's always my plan, but somehow I have to keep making room for places that I decide I must visit. So my 90-day trip is mostly 3-4 night stops (I am trying for an average of 5 nights next year) with a couple of 2-night stays here and there.

So, after 40+ years of traveling, I am still conflicted; but old habits die hard.

My reaction was like Keith's and Harold's. So far, the only cities where I've spent a whole week at a time have been London, Paris, and Vienna, each with lots to see, even before considering day-trip opportunities.

In the smaller towns on your list, did you make some day trips by bus? A car could give you wider day-trip options to enhance a longer stay, but driving does take effort and back-tracking to a home base can get repetitive.

It may have been the long travel days that got to you, and you probably won't have to deal with the changing-stations-in-Paris scenario next time. If all else is equal, the opposite solution could also work, e.g, adding a stop for a couple of nights to break up a long ride.

Or it may just be the walking and standing on hard surfaces all day, as on this recent walking shoes thread.

Some years ago we were driving in rural Scotland and to the side of the road was a parked car. Next to the car was a couple with a small table and chairs. They were sipping tea as they enjoyed a magnificent panoramic view of a small hillside. I swear we saw them the next day...same spot. Surely charter members of the slower is more travel movement and not frantically searching for touristic highlights.

I also thought your schedule looked great! We generally do 3 nights stays with 4 or more nights in larger cities. We usually travel for 4 weeks and we get exhausted too, and we are in our 50's! We love having a car and rent one on every visit. It comes with its own stress, but just stay out of the cities. We love traveling through the countryside and small villages and find it much more relaxing to be on our own schedule and not a train schedule. The more we travel the more we relax over a long breakfast talking with other Europeans at our B & B's. We may not get out until 10 or 11 in the morning, but it makes for a much better feel even though we are on the go everyday for a month, and still get tired.

Interesting thread! I'm still trying to slow down since I too always find that I come back tired. On my recent trip to Paris I went to the museums I love and took a day trip to Reims where I haven't been but found that what I remember enjoying most was sitting in cafes. sketching a little, and watching life around me. I'm planning a trip to Barcelona and Venice next for maybe 4 days each and I'm trying not to look at sites like "If you only have four days..." Maybe 2 museums in Barcelona plus the Gaudi buildings (I've already been there but husband hasn't); then NOTHING in Venice. Just want to wander around the canals and eat and drink coffee and wine. I keep trying!

I think we've always traveled this way without consciously planning to. Our first trip oversees was to England and I was most excited to see London. After much research, we chose to spend nine of 16 nights in London. I don't think very many first-timers do that.

Everywhere we go, I want to find the perfect formula for time spent, which to me is defined as "enough time to see all I MUST see (and a bit more), but still leaving me a bit wistful for a return".