Prague vs. Budapest

I would probably say Pest, the flat side of Budapest, would be the easiest to get around. There are trams all over the major streets, and if you go to Buda, there is a car to get up the Castle Hill. Plus, if you go for a week, you can take a side trip to Vienna, as it is only 2 1/2 hrs away by train! Budapest is also less crowded than Prague, and, IMO, has much better food! Have fun.

Thank you, Emily. This is very helpful. We were considering Budapest rather than Prague, but wanted to have some confirmation. Having even more specific insight regarding Pest is extremely helpful.

I would also say Prague. Old Town is flat, medieval, on relatively small area a lot of to see. Sightseeing in Budapest involves much more walking.

Thank you, Michael and Ilja. From what I understand, Budapest has hop on and off bus tours that should allow us to view the city. From our experience in Rome and Paris, we have found those very helpful when touring landmarks. Is that not similar in Budapest?

I think either one could be equally difficult but doable with careful planning. Personally, if I could do only one it would be Budapest. Prague is a very young, happening city. I'm going out on a limb but I would guess that the average tourist is about twenty years old. Budapest is less exciting but, in my view, has much more to offer.

I was more impressed with Prague than Budapest and to me Prague would be an easier walking city than Budapest.

Prague and Budapest both have a hill side and a flat side. To me Prague has so much more to offer than Budapest. Old Town side of Prague is very flat with nice wide flat walkways. Go look at photos of both cities www.flickr.com Prague is so beautiful at night. Do a search Prague Night.

Having visited both cities this fall I'd have to say Prague is the better choice.

OK, these are two of my favorite European cities, so it's a tough call. For me Prague is one of the most beautiful cities in all of Europe, and with the widest range of architectural delights, since in escaped the bombs of the WWII. The tourist sights are confined to a smalled area in Prague. Budapest (and Hungary in general) has the most interesting food in Eastern Europe (my opinion) and a fantastic Danube river cruise. Prague has tons of classical music options but Budapest has the gorgeous Hungarian State Opera House (among the most opulent in Europe but also among the most affordable). Avoid the peak summer months when Prague will be very busy. Here's a Czech friend of mine who is a FANTASTIC tour guide (and only hires fantastic guides). They may be able to arrange some tours of Prague by car or minivan to make it easier on your mother. http://www.prague-guide.info/about/allguides.html I hope, whatever your decision. you have a fantastic time!

I have been to both cities--I think both are equal in terms of the physical challenges and the touring opportunities. I'd go with my gut and pick the city that is most interesting to you personally.

Yes, if you're counting on HOHO's, definitely Budapest, as Old Town Prague isn't conducive to these. If you can take trams, these are very useful in Prague, and can take you almost anywhere you want to go outside of the Old Town. In Budapest trams are useful too, but I also used the Metro (in Prague the metro is of limited use; in Budapest I used it a lot). Otherwise, tough call - I loved them both, and they're actually VERY different. I want to emphasize this. I always see "Vienna, Prague, Budapest" put together, because of their shared history and proximity. But they're as different as apples, oranges, and bananas. Since you're likely to be taking more cabs than many other visitors, be sure to read Rick's cautions about how to get one without getting ripped off. Basically, you have to call for one, from a reputable company, and not use one waiting outside a train station. As long as you do this, people say that cabs in these cities are fine. I wouldn't know, as I never took one.

Well, I love them both and Prague was my favorite European city till I visited Budapest (I much prefer the food) I have been to both a few times and have to agree the trip of Budapest, Prague and Vienna make a good trio. We did the boat cruise as well as the hydrofoil and it was fun. Also, the HOHO bus is great in Budapest. Just be sure to go up to Castle Hill at the end of the day. Beautiful light and lots of tourists gone.

If you decide on Budapest, I can give you the number and email address of a private taxicab company - dependable, reasonable and honest. You can prearrange pickup and dropoff times. PM me if you're interested.

Part One: The question of Prague, or Vienna or Budapest often comes up. Which is "better" or how much time should I spend in each city? There couldn't be a more subjective question, but I'll try and give a little insight from my perspective Let's begin with Prague. Most of the top ten must see items in Prague are monuments. By monument I mean structures or buildings or bridges that one goes to, sees; presumably enjoys having seen and then moves on to the next. Typical of the main sights of Prague are the Charles Bridge, and the buildings of the Old Town and Castle Hill. While some of the sights in these areas have roots back to the 9th century the general impression is 17th and 18th century Baroque. The buildings in the two major tourist zones are very well preserved. Less visited, the old Jewish district houses some marvelous architecture as well including the oldest working synagogue in Europe. These survived the war as the Germans wanted to convert the district into a museum of a dead race. I can state that my experience in the Pinkas Synagogue was profound. Generally speaking the tourist zones in Prague are very well defined and heavily visited. This is very much a "look and see tourist destination" in the traditional sense. The worst description I have ever heard is that the ambiance is a little too much like Disney Land. Maybe in the crowd of people but I think the built environment is much more meaningful than anything in Disney Land. My impression of the citizens of Prague is somewhat sketchy as I came in direct contact with very few outside of the tourist industry. My impression of the Czech people that I encountered in the countryside was pleasant but nothing memorable or profound. In general, with what I know after having been to Prague I could do all I could stand in 3 days and if I had 2 days it would still have been worth the trip.

Part Two: Budapest. Yes, it is my personal favorite, and for the reasons I prefer it others may be more attracted elsewhere. Interestingly enough as we moved southeast we moved "newer" as well. Budapest was essentially constructed between 1880 and 1920 and much of that original construction still stands today. The most fascinating part of Hungarian history for me is that part of the history that is most tangible and that would be WWII through the Cold War. It's there; you can touch it, smell it and be part of it. There are places where the bullet holes are still in the walls and good and bad some of the same arguments and discussions are still on the streets. There are two clearly defined tourist zones. The first being the Buda castle district and the second being District V in Pest. But unlike Prague and Vienna only a small percentage of what is worth seeing in Budapest lies in those two narrowly defined zones, the rest is spread out and incorporated within the confines of the much larger boundaries of pre-WWII Budapest. This is not a typical look and see tourist destination. The attraction of Budapest is not what is preserved under glass, the attraction is in the eerie feeling that you are no longer completely in the 21st century, but somehow floating back and forth between reality and 1880 with stops in between.

Part Three (sorry Rick): While Prague has the grandest buildings other than them being "sights" you have no idea why they stand other than for the tourists to stare at. The buildings in Budapest on the other hand are working monuments with minor adaptations, sometimes major adaptations, to modern needs. Vienna has world class music for its tourists to enjoy and imagine how things "were" in the days of the empire, while Budapest has outstanding music and theater still supported and enjoyed; first by the local population and second by the visitors. Yes, as a tourist most times you will be among the minority in the theaters, concert halls and Opera house. When I go to the theater in Budapest today I know what my parents experienced as theater goers in pre-WWII NYC. Note that I said "experienced" not saw. Budapest is as much about experiencing from the inside out as opposed to the typical tourist experience of looking form the outside in as it is about the typical look and see tourism. That means I don't for a moment discount the outstanding museums that present topics from the early Roman settlement, to WWII and Soviet Terror to modern art. And yes, there are individual architectural examples of Art Deco, Art Nuevo, Bauhaus and Classical Revival. The city is actually rampant with fine examples of each and while individually some are stunning, together they form the fabric of the event of just living in Budapest for a few days.

Finally (i promise Rick); The people I have found to be somewhat negative in their opinion of themselves but once you get through that first layer they are a comfortable bunch to spend the day with. Budapest isn't as well defined as Prague or as spotless as Vienna (actually some of it is marvelously grungy) and if you are traveling the world ticking off the boxes as you go I think you will get bored in Budapest very quickly. The top ten things to do in Budapest involve environs more than museums or monuments and that isn't for everyone. I do relate. Really I do. I toured Egypt to see and touch the monuments and that was an experience that I would only trade for one extra week of cafés, shows, and warmth in Budapest. You need every bit of 3 full days in town. A full day is you wake up and go to bed in Budapest. 4 days is better and in 5 days you will still not be bored ... if you share my interests that is.

Thank you James for all your great insights on this and other threads. We just spent several days each in Budapest and Prague, loved both, and appreciated your thoughts on various other posts. We also liked the Hungarians we met and the food better than in Prague (though we're not especially sophisticated or dedicated eaters). That said, and re Timothy's question, for mobility purposes I'd recommend Prague because, as others have said, the major sights are closer together and the central city is more walkable. In both cases the castles are on hills and perhaps best visited on a tour to minimize stairs and hill-walking. Budapest sights are spread out, and what's between them isn't always that attractive (blame WWII). The areas in Prague around the Jewish Quarter and Old Town Square are filled with beautiful builidngs and streetscapes, relatively close together, so you get more scenic bang for walking a given distance. So my vote would be for Prague, and a week would be plenty of time to see and absorb the place without overtaxing mom. Either way, have a great trip. EDIT -- Just noticed the date of original post. Maybe this trip is over already. In which case, hope it was great whichever city you chose!

Dick, i agree 100%. I may find more enjoyment in Bpest but that doesn't discount other's taste at all. And yes with mobility impairments it might be easier in the Prague Old Town and Jewish district. I love the Jewish district in particular. When you narrow it down to that much of Prague i would think you would want to limit the time as well as for my taste old Town can get old in just a few days. maybe Vienna? Also pretty flat for the most part. Or Pest if the goal is more to live the city than hit all the sights. Of the three i think that concept is easiest in Bpest. But its all about interests and taste and there is no absolute. Its one of the things that makes traveling so wonderful.