Which Mediterranean Cruise?

[jdlierle]

I was thinking of taking a Trans-Atlantic cruise this year and Princess has some good deals right now. I was wondering if anyone could give any advice on deciding between these two cruises (or any other cruises you might know of).

 

The first one is Grand Princess (April 15) for 19 days starting from Galveston, TX and doing the following ports, 1. Madeira, Portugal than a Sea Day 2. Casablanca, Morocco 3. Gibraltar 4. Alicante, Spain 5. Barcelona, Spain 6. Cannes, France 7. Milan or Genoa, Italy 8. Elba, Italy 9. Florence, Italy 10. Rome. (that's a lot of ports in row (9) )

 

or The Golden Princess (May 06) for 16 days starting in New York city and doing the following ports 1. Lisbon, Portugal than a Sea Day 2. Barcelona, Spain 3. Cannes, France 4. Florence, Italy 5. Rome, Italy 6. Naples, Italy than a SEA DAY 7. Venice, Italy (get to stay a night here) and disembark the next day.

 

 

Considerations for the trip. Is the Golden a better ship than Grand these days. I was on the Grand in 2004 for a New England fall foliage cruise and was a little disappointed compared to other ships with Princess like the Sun. Also have seen some poor reviews of the Grand lately, just wondering what every ones thoughts between the two ships.

 

Which of the itineraries do you think would be better for the first time in Europe. I plan on staying about 3 extra days in Italy before coming home, probably spending my time in Rome.

 

Would the seas be any smother by taking the Texas cruise (Grand) as opposed to the cruise out of New York (Golden) in the Atlantic.

 

Both cruises cost about the same even though the Grand gives you extra 3 days. I was just wondering if the Golden would be a better ship with a better itinerary, with possible better weather by leaving 3 weeks later. Also is 19 days too much compared to 16 days, I've done about 5 cruises and I love 10 day cruises, but I'm wondering if 19 is too much? (By the time you add in travel days, this trip could end up being a month or so :eek: with me living in the Los Angles, CA.

 

Thanks for any input.

 

Doug

[Druke I]

Tough call.

 

Personally, I prefer the Grand's itinerary - love both Madeira and Gibralter. The street sleds in Madeira are a real hoot!

 

I think the Golden, with the midships stairbank, easier to get around.

 

Actually, I prefer Westbound transAtlantics - the clock is with you, and you gain time, rather than losing time. 25 hour days easier on my mental time clock than 23 hour days.

 

Perhaps you should do one in 2006 and the other 2007.

[SPI_Rick]

Doug, that really is a tough call. It's sort of like trying to decide which member of the Swedish Bikini Team you would take out to dinner......it's almost impossible to decide, but which ever choice you make you know you'll have a great time.

 

One of my favorite cities in Europe, no make that: My Favorite City in Europe is Venice....so any cruise that takes me there would be near the top of my list. But if the price is similar, the Grand cruise gives you 10 ports in Europe, while the Golden cruise gives 7, so if you want to visit as many new places as possible it might be the one to choose.

 

I recently did a 17-day Transatlantic. I thought it might be a bit long (the longest cruise I had taken before that was a 12-day), but it was fine. The days passed much too quickly and I would have been happy to have stayed onboard for another week.

 

There is no way to know about how smooth the water will be. I suspect that on average the first couple of days of the northern route will be a little rougher than the southern route, but after that both ships will be in the same area. And the fact that the Golden cruise out of New York leaves 3 weeks later than the Grand probably cancels out the rough water issue anyway.

 

In the end I think you just have to look at the itineraries and decide which one looks better to you.

[elmtree]

I LOVE Naples Italy!..My sister lives there and I have visited many times...If you get there you can see Pompei, which is one of the great wonders of the world if you ask me...But either one would be wonderful.....Enjoy

[Pam in CA]

Both itineraries are interesting with lots to do and see in each port. If you go on the Grand, you'll be stopping in Casablanca (with the option to go to Marrakesh for the day) which you might not have another opportunity to visit.

 

You might just put a couple of pieces of paper in a hat and have someone pick your trip. :) It's a win-win since both are great itineraries.

[LisaH]

Hey SPI Rick...I am in Plano too!

[balanceok]

The cruise that gives you more days in Spain.

 

We love Spain!!!!!!!!!!!

[SPI_Rick]

LisaH, it's good to see another North Texan on the boards.

[Wormy53]

If it was up to me, if the price was the same for both, I'd take the first one. The more ports the better! Since you are planning on staying in Italy post-cruise, I would be sure to take the time for Venice along with Rome. I think I could spend 3 months in Italy and not get tired! As said before, Gibraltar is fun! (However, Morocco was not my favorite. Maybe Marakesh would have been better, but I just could not stand another long bus ride.)