Neuschwanstein day trip from Munich

Do it yourself with the train, it will be a whole lot less expensive than taking one of those 3rd party tours, who only babysit you out to the castle. If you don't have a Deutschland-Ticket do it with a Bayern-Ticket. Book your castle tour ahead of time on the castle website.

I opted to use a guided tour for Neuschwanstein rather than go on my own, and was very pleased with it. This is the one I used - https://www.radiustours.com/tours-in-english/neuschwanstein-castle/ . I often travel solo and it was nice to be with a small group as well as having a guide. I used the same firm for a tour of Dachau.

There is a lot more to see in the Garmish/Fussen area than the fake castle at Neuschwanstein.

Do the Zugspitze, the tallest mountain in Germany. Take the cog train or cable car.
King Ludwig had other castles in Bavaria,
https://www.tripadvisor.com/Attractions-g187293-Activities-c47-t6-Bavaria.html

I often travel solo and it was nice to be with a small group as well
as having a guide.

But whether you go out to Neuschwanstein with a group or on your own, you get the same tour of the palace with the palace's own guides.

All Radius does is babysit you on the train and bus to the town (Hohenschwangau) down the hill from the castle. And they get about $90 to do it! You still have to pay for Neuschwanstein admission either way. Even one person with a Regio-Ticket Allgäu-Schwaben only costs you $35. And if you're already on a Deutschland-Ticket, it's free.

King Ludwig had other castles in Bavaria,

No he didn't. They're all palaces, and none other than Neuschwanstein even resembles a castle. In addition to Neuschwanstein and Hohenschwangau, I've been to both Herrenchiemsee and Linderhof. Herrenchiemsee was, in my opinion, a bust. Just a second rate knockoff of the palace at Versailles.

And the main building at Linderhof was a disappointment; just a house, a few rooms for him. But the ground were nice. The Grotto is particularly impressive. But Linderhof is in no way a castle. If you want to see a real castle, go to Harburg or Burghausen.

I have done this twice- once as part of an organised tour, and once as a private group tour when I was travelling with a bigger group. Unfortunately I can't remember the name of either company, but they were both very good. Both times we were driven in a van with several other stops in addition to the castle- across both tours this included local villages to visit Baroque churches, a "little organic cheese farm" for lunch, Oberammergau (very nice Bavarian town), and lunch on a beautiful lake just over the border into Austria. We also really enjoyed the stop to visit Linderhof, Ludwig's other (much smaller) palace, where he actually lived, which also has very nice gardens. I would say have a look at the options for tours and choose based on what the other stops are and what interests you.

I consider these 3rd party tours to be the ultimate "tourist traps", designed to extract money from tourist who don't believe they are smart enough or knowledgeable enough, or are too lazy, to do it on their own. In over 24 weeks of travel in Germany, I've never spend $100 a day per person, total, for "in Europe" expenses (accommodations, in-Europe travel, meals, and incidentals). I attribute it to 1) knowing how to use local transportation, 2) not deliberately staying in accommodations lised on booking website or that accept credit cards, 3) eating where the locals do, and 4) not using 3rd party tours.

And take that bus tour, carefully contrived with substandard stop-offs to make it impossible to do with public transportation. Perfect for those who want to add to their list of place they've been to without having to actually experience being there. One hour in Linderhof! (Linderhof, check), barely enough time to tour the little Rococo Palace. In 2007, I spent 6 or 7 hours in Linderhof, visited the amazing grounds and the grotto. I was going to go on to Ettal, but I liked Linderhof so much I never got to Ettal.

And I spent two nights in Oberammergau, both nights around my visit to Linderhof. Oberammergau is a beautiful town, worthy of more than just a drive-through.

If you opt for a tour, get one that also visits Linderhof

No, as I just said, the visit to Linderhof is too short to do it justice. It's just put in there to make these tourist traps impossible to do on you own.

I would recommend visiting Linderhof for a day, maybe include Ettal if you have time, spend the night in Oberammergau, then see the castle at Hohenschwangau the next day. You can get to Oberammergau by train, Linderhof and back by bus, then by bus from Oberammergau to Hohenschwangau the next day and back to Munich by train. I did something like this in 2007, except I continued on to Schongau and Landsberg on Lech, at the beginning of my trip on the Romantic Road.

No he didn't. They're all palaces, and none other than Neuschwanstein
even resembles a castle.

Even Neuschwanstein does not resemble a castle. Technically it is also just a palace, as it is not fortified. But thanks to Disney people believe that this is how castles are supposed to look.

I must agree with those that say Palaces instead of Castles, but many use the latter word.

Don't forget to consider Herrenchiemsee, that is the King's palace that copied Versailles. It is south of Munich on the way to Salzburg.

I find the aggressive tone of this discussion a little strange. Some people want to travel on their own using public transport. Some like the convenience of an organised tour. Whether one is better than the other is completely subjective. I think we should respect the fact that different people may have different travel styles.

I went on a guided tour with Viator. The inside of the palace was not that great, but all in all it was definitely worth it.

Than you to all who respectfully replied to my question. I admit I was taken aback by some of the comments. Again, thank you to everyone who gave me a simple answer to a simple question.

I must agree with those that say Palaces instead of Castles, but many
use the latter word.

For instance, there is the Reichsburg, in Cochem, which is not even a palace, but a vacation home for a wealth Berlin merchant built on the site of a previous castle, appearing like a castle from the outside, but merely a chateau inside.

Or there is Hohenzollernburg, built about the same time as Neuschwanstein on the ruins of a previous Hohenzollern castle as an apartment for Wilhelm II and an impressive display of Hohenzollern "power" that helped to elevate Wilhelm to Kaiser.

all the emojis may make others smile. Too much for me - I only read the last line

As Lee points out with his examples, there are some place names for these buildings which confusingly include "burg" when the building itself is crying out "Palace." When you visit Reichsburg in Cochem, it's not at all a Burg from the middle ages, and by definition ought to be referred to as a palace.

But exceptions like this occur sometimes because castles came before palaces, historically. When a Palace (Schloss) is built on the site of a ruined castle (Burg), as was done in the case of the Reichsburg, there's often a certain resistance to changing the place name that had been used for centuries, no matter how much the new building might be thought of as a palace.

P.S. Emojis added to make you smile! 😄 Keep them coming, the more the merrier.