Norway cruise: Regent vs. Seabourn

[cruiseej]

I have been fortunate to have only cruised on Regent over the past 15 years. For my mother's 85th birthday next year, she has decided she would like to do a cruise to Norway. We are looking at a 20-day trip on the Regent Voyager versus a 14 day trip on the Seabourn Quest. The length of the Regent trip is a bit of a stretch for my wife and I work-wise, and would preclude spending any extra time in Copenhagen. The Seabourn trip is an easier length for us to manage (we could tack on a few days in Copenhagen) and seems to include more scenic fjord cruising, but it omits Murmansk and the Solovetsky Islands in Russian and Spitsbergen and the Magdelene Fjord off the coast of Norway.

 

I know some of you on this forum have taken this Regent itinerary, and I know I can go read on the Seabourn forum for additional information. But I'm posting here because I'm most interested in any comments from Regent travelers who have also traveled on Seabourn (particularly the Seabourn Quest) in recent years about differences, good or bad, between the two cruise lines, the ships, or these itineraries. Thanks in advance!

[cruiseej]

Wow. Nothing? No comments on Regent vs. Seabourn? On the Seabourn Quest vs. Voyager? On how much of a "must see" the northernmost ports on Regent's itinerary are or are not? Any words of advice at all?

[Travelcat2]

Just did a similar itinerary a couple of months ago but have not sailed on Seabourn. IMO, Murmansk is a good port to miss. Very disappointing (the only disappointing port on our 30 night cruise.) Loved Spitsbergen and the Magdelene Fjord. Absolutely wonderful!

 

Regent only does this itinerary once (maybe twice) a year so you may need to be patient for responses.

Edited September 23, 2014 by Travelcat2

[Sunviking]

We have not sailed on those itineraries but have sailed on both the Quest and the Voyager and IMO the Quest wins hands down. We liked the size of the Quest better. In our opinion the food and service were superior. We did transatlantic cruises on both. Others may no doubt disagree, but that was our experience.

[jhp]

I've done two cruises to Norway, and both stand out as two of my best, that's why I went back. While I have cruised on Regent many times, I haven't done Seabourn yet. Certainly would not hesitate to do so with the right price and itinerary. I'm sure either would be wonderful, and if you got great weather, it would be just perfect.

Edited September 23, 2014 by jhp

[Patti22]

Sailed on Seabourn Sojourn from Stockholm to Copenhagen one year ago for 21 days including St. Petersburg for three days and in and out of fiords and to up above Arctic Circle (Hanningsvag, sp.) Absolutely the best cruise ever. We had a wonderful time on this ship. Never been on Quest.

[cwn]

We have not sailed on those itineraries but have sailed on both the Quest and the Voyager and IMO the Quest wins hands down. We liked the size of the Quest better. In our opinion the food and service were superior. We did transatlantic cruises on both. Others may no doubt disagree, but that was our experience.

 

I have been on Regent's Mariner and Seabourn's Sojourn (Sister ship to the Quest). We much prefer Seabourn for all the reasons listed above, especially the standard of service particularly in the dinning room. We think the size of Seabourn.s three big sisters is perfect. The dinning room is beautiful and there is plenty of space in the public areas...Seabourn Square is a great place.

 

Plus we feel the Sojourn/Quest stateroom is much more comfortable. We found the chair and sofa on the Mariner very uncomfortable for relaxing. The table and two chairs on the Sojourn (and Quest) are really nice when having room service, plus the sofa was extra comfortable.

 

Now that Seabourn has gone to the country club casual/ formal optional dress code that Regent has had for some time, we have no complaints at all. My husband got tired of wearing a jacket to dinner all the time on long cruises (3 + weeks) on Seabourn, so we did room service more than we usually do to get around that for him.

 

We have done the two itineraries you are looking at. They are both nice, but we like to have a few days before and after the cruise...gives us a chance to do and see a little more plus we are rested when we get on the ship...that might make a difference to you also if your time is tight.

 

Didn't include the islands on either cruise, but have been to Spitsbergen and the Magdelene Fjord. Once was enough....the Fjord wasn't all that impressive especially compared to fjords in Norway or Alaska. Spitsbergen was interesting, but not too much to do and very cold & windy when we were there.

 

Regent and Seabourn are both cruising luxury, but we have found over and over that Seabourn is the better deal and the service is superior.

[cruiseej]

Thanks, all. I appreciate all the feedback, and the Seabourn trip is looking better and better based on these comments.

 

Aside from the Norway itinerary, are there any negatives from the perspective of a longtime Regent cruiser going to Seabourn (aside from the fact that I'd need to pay for Internet!)?

[Texan1636]

We are mainly Regent cruisers (as you can see from cruises below), but here is a link to our prior review of a great Seabourn Norway cruise we took in 2011 on the Sojourn. There were things that we liked better about Regent and things we liked better about Seabourn, but I think a Norway itinerary (with small ports in fjords, etc.) is a great itinerary for a slightly smaller Seabourn ship (as compared to Voyager or Mariner).

 

We would gladly cruise Seabourn again for the right itinerary (and only on one of their newer ships).

 

http://www.cruisecritic.com/memberreviews/memberreview.cfm?EntryID=87128

[Patti22]

We cruise both Seabourn and Regent and like them both. We choose by itinerary usually and the Seabourn ships can get into places the larger Regent ships perhaps cannot. Ambiance is slightly different but both feel like luxury cruising to us.