Please sign in to post.

Stopovers between Paris and rome

We will travel by day train between Paris and Rome in late Sept/early October.
One of our goals is to see some of the countryside, so we have ruled out flying and the overnight train. We can stop over one night or two nights on the way. I am considering a stopover in Kandersteg, then I'd very much like to at least see the Cinque Terra. I'm wondering if it would be feasible to take the train through that area to Rome? Or feasible to spend one night in one of the villages, then continue to Rome the following day? Or is there a better option for an overnight? Or should I just skip the second stopover to have another night in Rome? (We normally don't like big cities much, but do want to see some of Rome's highlights.)

Posted by
1589 posts

" Or should I just skip the second stopover to have another night in Rome? (We normally don't like big cities much, but do want to see some of Rome's highlights.)" As much as I love the CT, this is your best bet unless you have at least 3 extra days.Keep an open mind regarding Rome- there is sooo much to see.

Posted by
1068 posts

Rome is not just a city. It is a CITY. I'm an ex-New Yorker, and adore cities (the speed! the honking! the people! the congestion! the smells! the craziness!) and Rome almost ate me alive my first time there. The problem is that, like Bob says, there is SO MUCH to see that with so little time, you run the risk of shortchanging yourself on Rome by doing a one day stopover elsewhere. So on balance, I'm going to vote for... an extra day in Rome. You'll be less rushed, too, so you can program fewer big sights into each day, and build in some relaxing pauses for downtime.

Posted by
21 posts

Okay, so nix the stopover in the Cinque Terra unless I can rearrange the itinerary and steal a night from somewhere else. But would it be worth the time to take the train through there just to see the area? I know it would take lots of time, but I'm having trouble figuring out just how much extra time. We like train travel (once we're actually on the train, lol). Since most of our trips are road trips with 6-10 hour days in the car, train travel is a lot more relaxing.

Posted by
1589 posts

" But would it be worth the time to take the train through there just to see the area?" Paula, let's give this a Western Slope analogy- would you divert from a trip from Montrose to Seattle to see the scenery in Taos, New Mexico? I will now suggest a little map time so that you might think this out- planning a trip is part of the fun. Alway assume that there will be another trip!

Posted by
21 posts

lol, Bob! I recently helped a traveler with a similar dilemma, who wanted to go from Denver to Telluride to Durango to Taos to Las Vegas, NV. They finally decided to go south to Taos first, then Durango, etc. But of course it would've been much quicker to fly to Las Vegas, or to drive via Interstate 70! Believe me, I have been doing map time! It seems to me, by looking at the map, anyway, that the Cinque Terra is in the same general direction I want to go, albeit with lots of stops and on slow trains instead of fast ones. My map does have rail routes on it, but it is still a little confusing and I realize that sometimes you "just can't get there from here" and what looks possible or even easy on the map doesn't work out that way in reality. Just trying to get opinions on whether taking the long way 'round would be worthwhile (or even possible) just for the views if I don't have time to make the stop over. Thanks!

Posted by
21 posts

But it is looking like it wouldn't be feasible and I'll just have to keep that area on the bucket list for next time! Thanks

Posted by
2196 posts

Hi Paula I don't think you should give up so easily. I think Cinque Terra is definitely worth a stopover. What a nice break it would be. You will then arrive in Rome fairly rested, which you'll need there. You didn't mention how many days you have for Rome, but I think if you have at least 2, that's plenty. I looked at a map too and CT doesn't seem out of the way. See if you can route yourself from Paris to Genoa (Genova); then it's a straight shot down the coast to the CT. Or even if you're going through Milan, again you could easily get to Monterosso and the rest of the CT. In fact, if you could get to the CT from Paris in one long day, it might be worth spending both your nights there. That will give you a full day to soak in the beautiful sights and take a little hike. Then you can wake up the next morning, hop a train for Rome and you'll be there in about 4 hours.

Posted by
3696 posts

Paula.. I agree with Charlene especially since you indicated you do not love big cities. I have been to Rome a few times and the CT many, and while I enjoyed Rome, give me CT and the villages and the Sea over another day in Rome. Personal preference, but I would have my day in CT. If you have a few days in Rome and love it... you can always return there if you want...no need to give up what you want to do.

Posted by
4418 posts

Paula, I don't see where anyone has already mentioned this, so use Bahn.com (the German rail company - they show lots of international routes, too) to look at your train routes. Sometimes a map leads you to be over optimistic :-( For instance, many train routes in France will take you through Paris, even though it's waaaay out of the way. They work on a spoke system, like the hub system used by some USA airlines. You're thinking 1 hour, but it's 4 with a train change! It can be the same thing with getting to the CT...or many other places. Some routes don't use fast, or even 'quickish' trains, while other routes you'd expect to be pokey milk runs zip along at 160MPH. Spend some time on Bahn.com looking at train availability, routing, and prices (3 months in advance = great savings...but generally speaking, you can only book German trains on the German site). You can also buy cheap tickets on other countries' websites, but that's a whole 'nother topic ;-)