Need opinions on flying vs train between Munich and Rome. I know the plane is much faster but I want to see the countryside and mountains.
1) Is the train ride something not to miss?
2) If taking the train is it better to switch trains in Verona or Bologna?
Appreciate any thoughts and ideas on this. Thanks
Posted by
Green Bay
20032 posts
Being that it is 9 1/2 hours, I'd really look at flying.
You're probably trying to decide on which of the single-connection itineraries to take. The first one in Bologna is 15 minutes, which should be plenty of time. The one at Verona has almost an hour, time enough to grab a snack. The train with the Verona connection continues to Venice, is the only direct train that day, and therefore likely to be more crowded.
The train goes through the Alps and over the Brenner Pass, so has some nice scenery between Kufstein at the Germany-Austria border and Verona. From Verona to Bologna is flatland of the Po valley, Bologna to Florence is pretty much one long tunnel, and to Rome, nice but nothing spectacular.
Posted by
Greeley, co, usa
2394 posts
Munich to Venice is scenic but going all the way to Rome, I would fly
Posted by
Portland, Oregon
5687 posts
I would fly.
Posted by
Portland, Oregon
5687 posts
...unless time really isn't a factor and you could add another night to stop in say Venice on the way down.