Please sign in to post.

Suggested Itineraries to France in Feb 2010

Dear Travellers, my husband & I would like to spend our holidays in France in Feb next year. Here's our itineraries shown as: 2 nights in Strasbourg (will have a day trip to Colmar), next 2 nights in Dijon (a day trip to Beaune), next 3 nights in Paris (a day trip to Mont St. Michel), next 2 nights in Bordeuax (a day trip to St. Emilion) & last 2 nights in Lyon. Would like to ask for opinions is possible to make it work or not? (We will take TVG from city to city within France) Will it be too rush to go through all? Any suggestions if we want to skip one of them, Lyon or what else? Please advise! Thanks in advance for your valuable comments!

Posted by
3250 posts

Hi Oscar,

I think that your trip is too rushed! I'd spend at least 3 nights in each city--maybe 4 if you're doing day trips. It's really a matter of personal opinion on which city you might delete. Personally, I'd leave Lyon in your itinerary. For the time that you have I'd go to Paris (5 nights), Dijon (3 nights), and Lyon (3 nights).

Also, you'll need others to give an opinion about is the possibility of a day trip to Mont St. Michel--seems too far for a day.

Best wishes!

Posted by
9110 posts

Rough schedule; lots of traveling, little looking.

My idea would be to drop Lyon, drop Strasburg/Colmar (neither would be high points on a first trip).

Also you might want to drop either or both of the two wine areas (Bordeaus/St Emilion or Dijon/Beaune). For wine, Reims/Epernay makes a nice day trip from Paris.

MSM and back is rough in a day. Maybe go to Rouen (lots to see) one night, then MSM and back to Paris the next day.

Any days left over from modifications should go to Paris, you barely left yourself enough time there to get started.

Posted by
10227 posts

If this is your first trip to France I think you are trying to do too much. Mont St. Michell would be a very long day trip from Paris. If you have never been to Paris and you would only be there 3 nights (= 2 days) with one day being a day trip out of town that takes all day, well, why even bother going for only one day in Paris?? I agree that more time in less places is better. If you have 2 nights somewhere, that is just one full day. And then you have the transportation time between places. I would take a look at your list of places you want to go and take something out. Where are you flying into and out of?

It looks like you have 12 nights? I would spend at least 5 or 6 nights in Paris. You could do a day trip to Versailles. Maybe 3 nights in Strasbourg or Colmar and 3 nights in Dijon. Staying in each place longer you won't be spending all your time on the move and you would have more time to actually see the places you go to.

Don't forget the days will be short, which will affect the sightseeing you do.

Have a great trip!

Posted by
4132 posts

It's not that you can't do what you propose, rather as others have suggested it is probably not a plan that would reward most travelers with the most pleasure.

I think you suspect this, based on your question, and would suggest Paris plus one or two other destinations.

I think you are wise to limit yourselves to cities this time of year. The one exception, Mt St Michel, might prove to be not worth the candle. For a smaller-town feel, remember that Dijon can be seen as a day trip as easily from Beaune as the reverse, similarly Colmar and Strasbourg.

If wine is important, Burgundy is logistically easier than Bordeaux. So, consider Lyon-Burgundy-Paris (or the reverse), or Paris-Alsace-Burgundy.

Posted by
1525 posts

You have 11 nights mentioned here. Are you taking two weeks off work? Can you stretch this to 14-15 nights?

Right now, what you have is a great list of photo opportunities. You will come home with photos to share but no real sense of having experienced France.

Whatever the number of nights you can manage, more is better. Unless you have MORE than two weeks, I would suggest you split your time equally between Paris and one other area more rural in nature.

I would not do Mont St. Michel from Paris. It is an amazing place, but unless you are in Normandy for other destinations, I would not venture that far west of Paris for just that one site.

Pick your favorite other area (besides Paris), even if it is as far away as Provence, and make that your other base from which to do day trips. Combined with nearby daytrips from Paris, you will have gotten a reasonable taste of two very different areas of France and two different styles of life (urban and rural).

I believe that having a "home base" for a region is very important, rather than hopping from place to place every day or two. There is a wonderfully comforting feeling coming back to your "home" for a 3rd, 4th, 5th time after a long day being "away" sightseeing. Plus you can spend an hour before you turn in for the night strolling the streets of your home base and creating lasting memories.

I can recommend a good B&B in Colmar, if you need one.

Posted by
8700 posts

Have you already bought your plane tickets? If so, will you be flying into Paris and out of Lyon? Or will you have to return to Paris for your flight home?

Posted by
22 posts

Thank you all for your opinions. Actually, we have been to Paris last year but not yet covered it all. This time we want to go further other than Paris especially the winery visit. Our schedule will fly into Paris & out from Lyon then home directly. Most likely we intend to skip two cities of the above, one will be Strasbourg, & the other will either be Bordeaux or Burgundy. Could anyone suggest which one is worth to go for vineyard visit in 3-4 days stay. Best Regards

Posted by
8700 posts

I haven't been to either Bordeaux or Dijon so I can't comment on which would be better for a winery visit.

There are a few direct TGVs from CDG to Strasbourg and more service from Paris to Strasbourg. So if you decide to go to Strasbourg after all, to keep your travel time to a minimum you could skip Bordeaux. Assuming that you skip Mont-St-Michel, going Strasbourg-Paris-Dijon-Lyon would be better in terms of travel time than Strasbourg-Dijon-Paris-Lyon.

Posted by
4132 posts

To answer your second question (Bordeaux versus Burgundy): Unless you have some special reason for visiting Bordeaux (in which case you would not be asking), drop it.

Burgundy fits right into your itinerary (Paris-Burgundy-Lyon) but Bordeaux is right awkward.

Posted by
9110 posts

Having been to both Bordeuax and Dijon a few times: Bordeaux is a more interesting city; Dijon easier to do. I could give a rat's rear bumper about wine, but took wife and her friend on a wine trip all over France a couple of years back, and both areas seemed about equally interesting to them (although St Emilion seemed to hold some kinds of pilgrimage appeal to the other gal). Go for Burgendy, but I'd sure pick the ambiance of Beaune over Dijon. Regardless, if you get to Beaune, don't miss the Hotel-Dieu.

Posted by
27 posts

Oscar- I am in your same shoes, first time to France and want the most bang for my buck. But as the insanity of deciding, I chose to focus on the Alsace region.

I figure France is not going anywhere and my next trip I will feel a little more aware of trains, b and b's, etc.

Please email me or post here of your return as I would love to hear of your adventure

I will be there March 29-April 7, 2010.