My friend and I are debating whether to fly directly from Stockholm to Copenhagen and spend an extra day in one of the 2 cities or take a train from Stockholm to Kalmar, staying overnight and then leaving Kalmar for Copenhagen by train. Our concern, the amount of time that it will take to travel by train vs. by plane and the train situation. If you advise to skip Kalmar, would you recommend spending an extra night in Stockholm or Copenhagen? We currently have scheduled 2 full days in Stockholm and 3 nights in Copenhagen (2.5 days) at the end of Sept. Thank you.
Posted by
11569 posts
You need more time in Stockholm. We stayed there five nights, Copenhagen three nights and it seemed about right.
Posted by
Reno, NV, USA
2547 posts
Suki, we are thinking about Scandinavia for next year. Is five days sufficient to see the highlights of Stockholm? Thanks.
Posted by
Rick Steves' Europe
16895 posts
I agree with focusing on the two cities during this short visit.
Posted by
Ajijic, Jalisco, Mexico
1924 posts
I concur with the previous commenters.
I spent 3 nights in Copenhagen and 2 nights in Kalmar and 4 nights in Stockholm. I really loved Kalmar. I rented a car for a day and drove to Öland and had a fabulous day there, and I also loved seeing Kalmar Castle and walking around the city. I wouldn't change a thing, except I wish I'd had one more night each in Copenhagen and Stockholm.
In your case, you have even less time than I had, so I think you should skip Kalmar, especially since you only would have one night there and wouldn't have the opportunity to explore Öland.
Posted by
Uppsala, Sweden
6970 posts
If you don't have more time than that my advice is that you skip Kalmar and focus on Stockholm and Copenhagen.
Note also that there are direct trains from Stockholm to Copenhagen that city centre to city centre take about the same time as flying, and is a lot cheaper and more comfortable.