Please sign in to post.

Iceland vs Norway; Dec vs March

DD’s big desire is to see the northern lights. We are planning a trip for the year she graduates (2026).

Finding it really hard to land on two things:
1) is Iceland or Norway better re: chance of lights?

2) if we go over spring break (last couple days of March/first 3 of April) will timing be good still or is late Dec (after Xmas) better?

Those are the only two timing options we have. I’m seeing stuff suggesting Iceland gets more storms at least in winter but not sure if those are over by late March. Also not sure if that very end of March/very start of April misses the lights window though.

Overall Iceland looks cooler but maximizing the odds of seeing the lights is our main priority - other stuff is nice to do’s.

Help?

Posted by
7050 posts

1) is Iceland or Norway better re: chance of lights?

If the choice is between those two, Norway is better. But if the northern lights is the most important thing there are even better places.

2) if we go over spring break (last couple days of March/first 3 of
April) will timing be good still or is late Dec (after Xmas) better?

December without a doubt. While it's not impossible to see them in late March there is in general too much daylight by then.

Posted by
2689 posts

I have not been to Norway except for in the fall and summer, so can't comment on that. I have been to Iceland many times though. Yes, the storms in the winter can be very strong, but you can also get some beautiful days. December issue usually more mild for storms than February, which is when they get the worse of them, FWIW. Since late March/early April is the very tail end of the NL season, I would opt for December. There is so much to do in Iceland in the winter, so even if the NL were not out during your trip, you would still have a great trip.

Have you considered Fairbanks by chance? I know, it's not the same, but the NL there are great when they are out.

Posted by
86 posts

Thank you both! Ok Dec it is.

Re: location - I’m open to other options but I’ll admit that it Fairbanks or middle part of Canada don’t sound too exciting. Given the distances in N America I worry we will have not much to do vs Scandinavia area. Also I thought AK and CA would likely be more freezing than that far North Europe area.

Posted by
2689 posts

Shawna--I get that about Fairbanks:) Although you can dog sled there, see reindeer, etc, but I know it issn't as glamorous sounding as Iceland or Norway. I am headed back to Fairbanks in February, but we know it well and have family there so a bit different than for most people. One of our February trips to Iceland we had storms the entire time, minus one glorious day. We did see the NL upon arrival right at the airport. That really surprised us, and was such treat. No matter where you decide, just remember to always look up when it is dark and if you wonder if it is a cloud vs the aurora, look into your camera. if it is the aurora, you will see it. So many times though we just look up and wait and see. We have had some fantastic aurora sightings in Iceland.

Posted by
10284 posts

Also I thought AK and CA would likely be more freezing than that far North Europe area.

I don't think this is right. I imagine they are about the same.

Posted by
304 posts

Alaska is definitely a lot colder than northern Europe (other than Russia), but with less precipitation which may increase your viewing chances. According to my weather book, in December:
Fairbanks, average high/low (F) 1/-16, 0.6 inches precip (total for month), 7 days with measurable precip.
Narvik, Norway, 31/24, 2.2 inches, 16 wet days.
Reykjavik, Iceland 36/24, 3.1 inches, 20 wet days.
Weather is less predictable these days due to climate change but these comparisons should still generally be valid.

Posted by
7050 posts

Regarding location, i don't know where Snohomish is but for a trip from North America, don't forget about Canada or Alaska. I'm not familiar enough with those parts of the world to give any advice but maybe someone will help.

If you're going to Europe though, Abisko is a great place to see the lights. There are many good places, but in general you should not be too close the coast.

I don't think this is right. I imagine they are about the same.

There is a lot more than latitude that determines the climate.

Posted by
717 posts

In Canada, Whitehorse, Northwest Territories is likely the best spot to see the lights. However, if price is not a concern (Norway will cost you much more compared to Canada), I would go with Norway. The distances within Norway to travel will be much more manageable and give you more options to see some other spots compared to northern Canada.

Posted by
2689 posts

Badger--It is near Seattle, but it is irrelevant to this discussion.

Posted by
2689 posts

Shawna--Yes, Fairbanks is much colder than Iceland. Fairbanks can easily get down to -40 or -50. The thing with Iceland is the wind. So typically significantly higher temps than -40, but the winds will get you and it can be very hard to even stay upright in them. This last Feburary my daughter and I had the hardest time staying upright during a blizzard, but it was still fun:)

Posted by
7050 posts

Thank you! Seattle is a city I can place on the map. And if that is where your trip starts, Canada seems much closer than Scandinavia.

Posted by
86 posts

I'm near DC so AK feels very far away :).

Thanks all for the tips. I'm leaning toward Norway at this point based on the replies. Just can't get excited about going to the Canadian spots.

Posted by
7050 posts

Thanks for the clarification mikliz97! I must have gotten you mixed you up in some way.

And Shawna, while Norway is not a bad choice I can still recommend that you consider Sweden. Going a bit further inland can increase you chance of seeing the lights a lot.