Thoughts on this itinerary? 2 weeks, Amsterdam > London > Dublin > Iceland

Personally I would swap 2 nights in Amsterdam and one night in Rotterdam for an extra 3 nights in London.

As you have only one full day in London, I would just skip it and give yourself more time in Ireland, so you can see things there, rather than just zip by them

My $0.02

I agree with Joe to skip London. If you feel.you must see London fine but I would fly from Amsterdam.rather then train to save time. Just my thoughts too.

Given that you will lose at least a half day to travel every time you change locations, you will be shortchanging everywhere except Amsterdam. Prioritize your must sees and delete one of the locations, dividing that time amongst the others.

Looks like great fun to me! Sure, you could skip a stop-- but you could also add a stop!

Either way I'm sure you'll have a great trip!

It is rushed, you'll spend a lot of time -- all or part of about half your days -- moving from city to city, in and out of hotels, stations, airports, etc. But presumably you have only so much time, you want to visit those places, and for at least one of you our host's mantra, "assume you will return," may not apply. They're all good places to visit, all worth more time than you can give them, and all surrounded by other very worthwhile places. It seems like most of you have visited Europe before, so maybe these are repeat visits for some of you. This looks like a "compromise" itinerary where everyone gets something they want and nobody gets all they want.

Without knowing more than you've told about your group, may I offer a suggestion? One of you has never been to Europe before and may never return. You might want to consider building the trip around that person's priorities, since the rest of you probably will have future chances to visit places on your group's list. Perhaps you've already done this, in which case it looks fine to me.

Very good considerations, Dick.

You might go to the Iceland forum for input on that part of your trip. But, like the rest of your itinerary, 2-3 nights in Reykjavik doesn't give you much time. You definitely won't have time to go to Vik, which is 5 hours from Reykjavik one way. Perhaps you could do the Golden Circle one day and the Snæfellsnes Peninsula one day. Reykjavik is 45 minutes from the airport, and you need to be there 3 hours before your flight. So even with 3 nights you'd only have two full days.

2 nights in Amsterdam, 4 nights in London. There's much more to see in London than in Amsterdam.

DO NOT try to visit so many places wasting so much time traveling.

We did Iceland in 2021 and spent a week doing the ring road tour. It was amazing. Just going to Reykjavik you won't see much.

We did Amsterdam in 2022 and stayed a week and didn't do it all.

2 nights in London, you won't see much.

Pick one or perhaps two countries and do it properly. Plan you trip including transport between each city. Use TripAdvisor "things to do" in a city and see what there is to do.

If you look at tour itineraries of RS tours, OAT tours, Tauck tours, etc, you'll see they are typically faster paced than your itinerary. If you read the Rick Steves suggested itineraries on this very website for various countries, you'll again see lively paced trips. However, if you read the comments on this forum, you'll routinely receive advice to slow down and do less. Which is right? Rick Steves? All the other tour companies? Or the forum posters?

Well, both are right!

You have four nights in Amsterdam. Too much for me. But sounds good for you! I (like others have suggested here) would trade the time for another night in London. In Ireland, I'd head to Dingle instead of Waterford. Am I right or are you? I dunno. Your trip sounds kinda awesome to me still. Adding Iceland? Wow. Great idea!

Some here will tell you mid-trip flights are a downer-- but that has never bothered me. I think as folks have many trips to Europe they tend to advocate lingering, savoring and less repositioning. As I age, I too drift in that direction. But in a couple weeks the wife and I are heading out on another fast paced RS tour and we're gonna love it!!

Happy travels.

After reading David's comments, I agree that some prefer faster pace of travel.

Also, comparing Rick Steves Tours and other group tours, sometimes you only spend a few days in a city.

HOWEVER, traveling with a group tour you tend to make the most of your touring time. You arise early in the morning and the tour company is more efficient in touring sites than you would be on your own.

ALso, if you want to see more places and only 4 days in Amsterdam (for example), suggest picking touring sites closer together.
For example, there is a lot more to see in Great Britain than London.

I'll note that the OP did say that, although it's 4 nights in Amsterdam, there will be a couple of day trips, so essentially 2 days in the city.

Great points, David. I agree that as we age, and as we have more trips, we tend to recommend slowing down. My husband and I have done a lot of 1 and 2 nighters in Ireland, and England, when we've rented a car. Several trips were when B & Bs were plentiful and we could choose the occasional accomodation on the fly. And all our trips were great!

However, with the additional travel time in this itinerary, I would be looking to eliminate at least one location. I'm guessing, though, the locations were decided with best knowledge of finances, dreams and some personal realities.

Enjoy the trip!!

The place I would drop in favor of more time elsewhere, is Iceland. Nothing wrong with it, but I think your other destinations have far more to offer. It looks like you come from the Pacific Northwest. Iceland’s attractions are rather similar to what you have at home — rugged landscape, geothermal stuff, waterfalls, glaciers, whale watching, lava beds — except without any of the trees. Yellowstone has better geysers. Washington state is better than Iceland for pretty much everything I’ve listed above IMO. And with better food. Whereas the history and culture of places like London and Amsterdam is something you cannot find at home, much as I like Seattle.