South America and Chilean Fjords Extensions

[millybess]

Any information about your personal experience on any of the extensions would be very helpful.

 

At the moment, we’re considering:

Best of Peru

Wildlife of the Galápagos Islands

Gateway to Patagonia

[OneSixtyToOne]

4 hours ago, millybess said:

Any information about your personal experience on any of the extensions would be very helpful.

 

At the moment, we’re considering:

Best of Peru

Wildlife of the Galápagos Islands

Gateway to Patagonia

We looked into Gateway to Patagonia for our Expedition cruise of the fjords. We decided against it because of the very long bus ride involved on top of flight times. Remember, you will be sailing in Patagonia so it seems a bit redundant. 

IMO The other two will offer more variety. I’d pick Machu Picchu.

Edited July 9 by OneSixtyToOne

[millybess]

19 hours ago, OneSixtyToOne said:

We looked into Gateway to Patagonia for our Expedition cruise of the fjords. We decided against it because of the very long bus ride involved on top of flight times. Remember, you will be sailing in Patagonia so it seems a bit redundant. 

IMO The other two will offer more variety. I’d pick Machu Picchu.

Thanks!  After looking into it further, you're right about Patagonia.  It's proving difficult to find reviews on any of the pre/post extensions.

 

Could you please provide a link to your "live" trip.  We both found it very interesting at the time and would like to read it again.  

[millybess]

@OneSixtyToOne  Just found it.  Thanks.

[OneSixtyToOne]

4 hours ago, millybess said:

@OneSixtyToOne  Just found it.  Thanks.

For the benefit of others reading this posting, here is the link to my writeup of our Expedition cruise to the Chilean fjords:

 

[deec]

If you can visit Iguaza Falls either on your own or with Viking they are truly worth seeing and the Hotel Melia is very nice and so convenient!

[dreamercruise]

On 7/9/2024 at 5:52 AM, millybess said:

Any information about your personal experience on any of the extensions would be very helpful.

 

At the moment, we’re considering:

Best of Peru

Wildlife of the Galápagos Islands

Gateway to Patagonia

Background - I have never taken any of the above mentioned Viking extensions, but want to share my own experience and preference. I took a guided land tour of Machu Picchu (Peru, about 10 days from Lima all the way to Titicaca) and an expedition cruise of Galápagos Islands (10 days/7 nights on cruise ship), but have not taken Gateway to Patagonia (chose Viking’s Iguazu Falls extension instead due to time conflict).

My take - Both guided trips were wonderful and memorable. If I were to choose again, I would no doubt choose the same, longer way to fully experience and appreciate the places in a leisurely and fun way. I briefly read Viking’s “extension” (rather excursions), and would not choose them. Reason is not both Machu Picchu and Galapagos require at least two days to fly or take train(s) into/from the sites, not to mention acclimation time needed for adjusting to the high altitude Cusco and MP. The relatively short, 4-5 days excursion will leave you only a day or so to see a part of the places. To me, it is a waste of time and effort, not to mention the stress from rushing from place to place.

As for the Patagonia extension that I missed, my friends who took it liked it a lot. I think I’ll redo Chilean shores, this time via Viking’s expedition cruise with a pre and post extension to Easter Islands and Patagonia.

[millybess]

1 hour ago, dreamercruise said:

Background - I have never taken any of the above mentioned Viking extensions, but want to share my own experience and preference. I took a guided land tour of Machu Picchu (Peru, about 10 days from Lima all the way to Titicaca) and an expedition cruise of Galápagos Islands (10 days/7 nights on cruise ship), but have not taken Gateway to Patagonia (chose Viking’s Iguazu Falls extension instead due to time conflict).

My take - Both guided trips were wonderful and memorable. If I were to choose again, I would no doubt choose the same, longer way to fully experience and appreciate the places in a leisurely and fun way. I briefly read Viking’s “extension” (rather excursions), and would not choose them. Reason is not both Machu Picchu and Galapagos require at least two days to fly or take train(s) into/from the sites, not to mention acclimation time needed for adjusting to the high altitude Cusco and MP. The relatively short, 4-5 days excursion will leave you only a day or so to see a part of the places. To me, it is a waste of time and effort, not to mention the stress from rushing from place to place.

As for the Patagonia extension that I missed, my friends who took it liked it a lot. I think I’ll redo Chilean shores, this time via Viking’s expedition cruise with a pre and post extension to Easter Islands and Patagonia.

Thanks much for this. One of our concerns is not having the time to adjust to the altitude and, therefore, not getting as much enjoyment out of the extensions. Thanks for chiming in. 

[millybess]

2 hours ago, deec said:

If you can visit Iguaza Falls either on your own or with Viking they are truly worth seeing and the Hotel Melia is very nice and so convenient!

It must be an amazing trip because it sold out very quickly. 

[millybess]

@OneSixtyToOne How would you rate the pre-extension in Santiago?  It seems like you were on your own for the duration and the only benefits were airport transfer, 2 hotel nights and the transfer to Valparaiso.  Did you think it was good value, especially with the transfer to Valparaiso included in the pre?

[OneSixtyToOne]

25 minutes ago, millybess said:

@OneSixtyToOne How would you rate the pre-extension in Santiago?  It seems like you were on your own for the duration and the only benefits were airport transfer, 2 hotel nights and the transfer to Valparaiso.  Did you think it was good value, especially with the transfer to Valparaiso included in the pre?

As you indicated it was hotel room and transportation. We always arrive before embarkation day (a flight delay almost cost us a sailing years ago so we learned a valuable lesson). Since air was included it was only logical to book an extension with Viking, as DYI arrangements would have cost us a deviation fee. We like using Viking air because they take care of everything. Just hand over your luggage at the airport and you are on vacation. Although people say they can do it cheaper themselves, the cheap is sometimes expensive. You are paying thousands, maybe tens of thousands on a cruise. I’m not sweating saving a few hundred bucks. We rather have the seamless integration and not worry about missing the ship, lugging bag around, and dealing with unforeseen problems that might arise. For us it was definitely worth the cost. 

Edited July 10 by OneSixtyToOne

[millybess]

Thank you.  I would think that the transport to Valparaiso was worth quite a bit.  Also the Marriott looks pretty nice.  Was it walkable from there to good restaurants, a few sites?

 

[OneSixtyToOne]

12 minutes ago, millybess said:

Thank you.  I would think that the transport to Valparaiso was worth quite a bit.  Also the Marriott looks pretty nice.  Was it walkable from there to good restaurants, a few sites?

 

As I mentioned in my review, the hotel is next to a huge upscale shopping mall that has many nice restaurants ranging from food court to fine dining. It is a block away on the main access road. Very easy to walk to.

To see the main tourist attractions you need a cab. DO NOT use the Black Cabs around the city. The hotel has a private transportation service in the lobby and they can take you anywhere in town for a very reasonable price. You can also arrange a pickup. We made the mistake of not arranging a pickup on our 2nd day and a $15 ride cost up $70 in a Black Cab.

 

Edited July 10 by OneSixtyToOne

[dreamercruise]

millybess,

I took the regular ocean cruise of South America and Chilean Fjords.  The itinerary allowed me to visit Falklands Island and combine with a pre-cruise extension to Iguazu Falls. I am happy with the arrangement, as Iguazu was/is my first choice of extension. The expedition itinerary will allow me to view fjords and places closer to inland away from the ocean. My main interest is the ability to take the extension to Easter Islands.  Being able to also do Patagonia is a bonus. Both regular ocean and expedition cruises are nice to take.

Since I took the pre-cruise extension, I needed not worry about airport transfer. Upon disembarkation, I took an independent tour (choice of Valparaiso and Vina del Mar) that picked me up at the pier and dropped me off at either airport or hotel in Santiago at end of tour (lunch and wine tasting included). I stayed in Santiago for 2 extra nights (booked hotel on my own), and took a very informative free walking tour. There are good restaurants in Santiago (within walking distance from hotel and can also be reached by Uber).

[Mich3554]

4 hours ago, millybess said:

It must be an amazing trip because it sold out very quickly. 

It’s easy enough to do on your own.  That’s how we did it.

[CurlerRob]

7 hours ago, millybess said:

Thanks much for this. One of our concerns is not having the time to adjust to the altitude and, therefore, not getting as much enjoyment out of the extensions. Thanks for chiming in. 

 

@millybess, FWIW, we took a 3-day shorex in 2013 as part of a longer SA cruise. Briefly, the itinerary was:(day 1) fly Lima to Cusco, arrive before lunch, with some gentle tours in Cusco and dinner; (day 2) Hiram Bingham train to Machu Picchu and return to Cusco; (day 3) return flight to Trujillo to catch up with the ship ( another story entirely!).

 

The trick, as we were repeatedly coached on, was to take it easy on day 1, especially after landing and during that day's excursion. Cusco is about 11,500 feet in altitude, and the transition is instant when the plane lands. However, unless you are highly susceptible to altitude sickness, we found that pacing ourselves allowed a very rapid acclimatization and the rest of the trip was not affected. MP is much lower, around 8,000 ft and is actually easy after leaving Cusco.

 

We would have enjoyed some more time at MP, but actually never felt rushed on the tour and thought we had a good look at both MP and Cusco. Certainly the visit to MP was among our finest experiences. The trip back on the Hiram Bingham train is a hoot - great party in the bar car!

 

My only other caution would be that (at least back then), there were a few open staircases on our tour of MP that were very difficult for those with height problems. On one, I looked to my left and wondered if I'd bounce even once on the 2,000 ft drop should I slip! Incas were clearly more sure-footed than I.

 

Unless you have a separate option in the future, we highly recommend the Cusco/MP visit in some form. 🍺🥌

[1985rz1]

17 hours ago, millybess said:

@OneSixtyToOne How would you rate the pre-extension in Santiago?  It seems like you were on your own for the duration and the only benefits were airport transfer, 2 hotel nights and the transfer to Valparaiso.  Did you think it was good value, especially with the transfer to Valparaiso included in the pre?

Not @OneSixtyToOne, but we did the pre-cruise extension on our Viking Expedition cruise, doing our own fights.  Since airport to hotel was included with the extension, it went smoothly. Viking met us at the airport, collected our luggage, and took us to the hotel.  Also the transfer to the ship was included.   We had Viking advisors at the hotel who helped us decide what to do, as we were mostly on our own. Good restaurants in the area. We enjoyed the extension very much and thought it was worth the money.

 

Same with the Gateway to Patagonia post cruise extension from Ushuaia.  Although there were long bus rides, it was a quite enjoyable trip.  There's a lot more to Patagonia than what you can experience on a cruise.  The trip included both the Chilean and Argentina sides of Patagonia.  We were very happy with it, and the accommodations and food were great.

[OneSixtyToOne]

1 minute ago, 1985rz1 said:

but we did the pre-cruise extension on our Viking Expedition cruise, doing our own fights.

I’m curious. Every expedition sailing I’ve seen for the Chilean fjords offered free air. Because of this we upgraded to premium for a moderate cost. Was this not available?

[1985rz1]

Just now, OneSixtyToOne said:

I’m curious. Every expedition sailing I’ve seen for the Chilean fjords offered free air. Because of this we upgraded to premium for a moderate cost. Was this not available?

In our case we chose DIY because we could get Business Class tickets using miles.  

[millybess]

20 hours ago, dreamercruise said:

millybess,

I took the regular ocean cruise of South America and Chilean Fjords.  The itinerary allowed me to visit Falklands Island and combine with a pre-cruise extension to Iguazu Falls. I am happy with the arrangement, as Iguazu was/is my first choice of extension. The expedition itinerary will allow me to view fjords and places closer to inland away from the ocean. My main interest is the ability to take the extension to Easter Islands.  Being able to also do Patagonia is a bonus. Both regular ocean and expedition cruises are nice to take.

Since I took the pre-cruise extension, I needed not worry about airport transfer. Upon disembarkation, I took an independent tour (choice of Valparaiso and Vina del Mar) that picked me up at the pier and dropped me off at either airport or hotel in Santiago at end of tour (lunch and wine tasting included). I stayed in Santiago for 2 extra nights (booked hotel on my own), and took a very informative free walking tour. There are good restaurants in Santiago (within walking distance from hotel and can also be reached by Uber).

We would be interested to know more about your independent tour and where you stayed in Santiago.  Thanks!

[millybess]

20 hours ago, Mich3554 said:

It’s easy enough to do on your own.  That’s how we did it.

Would you mind providing your itinerary.  Iguazú Falls is something we are looking into.

[millybess]

17 hours ago, CurlerRob said:

 

@millybess, FWIW, we took a 3-day shorex in 2013 as part of a longer SA cruise. Briefly, the itinerary was:(day 1) fly Lima to Cusco, arrive before lunch, with some gentle tours in Cusco and dinner; (day 2) Hiram Bingham train to Machu Picchu and return to Cusco; (day 3) return flight to Trujillo to catch up with the ship ( another story entirely!).

 

The trick, as we were repeatedly coached on, was to take it easy on day 1, especially after landing and during that day's excursion. Cusco is about 11,500 feet in altitude, and the transition is instant when the plane lands. However, unless you are highly susceptible to altitude sickness, we found that pacing ourselves allowed a very rapid acclimatization and the rest of the trip was not affected. MP is much lower, around 8,000 ft and is actually easy after leaving Cusco.

 

We would have enjoyed some more time at MP, but actually never felt rushed on the tour and thought we had a good look at both MP and Cusco. Certainly the visit to MP was among our finest experiences. The trip back on the Hiram Bingham train is a hoot - great party in the bar car!

 

My only other caution would be that (at least back then), there were a few open staircases on our tour of MP that were very difficult for those with height problems. On one, I looked to my left and wondered if I'd bounce even once on the 2,000 ft drop should I slip! Incas were clearly more sure-footed than I.

 

Unless you have a separate option in the future, we highly recommend the Cusco/MP visit in some form. 🍺🥌

That would be ideal and it sounds like it was a really great trip and a lot of fun!

 

Having met you and your lovely wife, I think we are about the same age.  We did book the Peru extension, but having thought about it, we aren't sure it is for us -- maybe 11 years ago!!😉

 

We did talk to our TA yesterday and she has had several people who were quite ill on similar Peru excursions who obviously weren't cautious enough.  In our case, it's a pre and we would be concerned that it might have an impact on the rest of our voyage. Having said that, we are continuing to look into it.  Thanks Rob for your encouragement. 😊

[millybess]

3 hours ago, 1985rz1 said:

Not @OneSixtyToOne, but we did the pre-cruise extension on our Viking Expedition cruise, doing our own fights.  Since airport to hotel was included with the extension, it went smoothly. Viking met us at the airport, collected our luggage, and took us to the hotel.  Also the transfer to the ship was included.   We had Viking advisors at the hotel who helped us decide what to do, as we were mostly on our own. Good restaurants in the area. We enjoyed the extension very much and thought it was worth the money.

 

Same with the Gateway to Patagonia post cruise extension from Ushuaia.  Although there were long bus rides, it was a quite enjoyable trip.  There's a lot more to Patagonia than what you can experience on a cruise.  The trip included both the Chilean and Argentina sides of Patagonia.  We were very happy with it, and the accommodations and food were great.

Thanks very much for this.  That is very good to know.  

 

At the moment we have the Santiago pre booked and the Patagonia post.  But are considering other possibilities if something opens up.  It's good to know that you enjoyed. these.  Thanks again.

[SJD117]

55 minutes ago, millybess said:

Thanks very much for this.  That is very good to know.  

 

At the moment we have the Santiago pre booked and the Patagonia post.  But are considering other possibilities if something opens up.  It's good to know that you enjoyed. these.  Thanks again.

 

I'll chime in with my observations, knowing that you appear to have made your decision.

 

I've been to all of the areas you mentioned, with the exception of the Galapagos. Caveat: I visited them on DIY trips in 2000 and 2005, with no cruise or tour group involved. So I had to do quite a bit of research to find out what I'd encounter: raging guanacos, angry Incas, etc.  😀

 

From the standpoint of pure scenic value, you can't go wrong with Patagonia, Peru and Iguazu Falls. I'd go back to all of them in a heartbeat. Altitude is an issue for some in Peru, though it wasn't for me. And if I saw an intestinal bug anywhere, I quickly took care of the problem with some fine Chilean wine.   😜

 

You'll love Patagonia! Are you going to Torres del Paine National Park? Simply spectacular. If you're there and able, try to walk up to the base of the famous rock spires. Or, take a boat on the glacial lakes. You'll have a great time regardless.

 

Let me know if you have any Qs.

 

 

Edited July 11 by SJD117

[millybess]

6 minutes ago, SJD117 said:

 

I'll chime in with my observations, knowing that you appear to have made your decision.

 

I've been to all of the areas you described in your OP, with the exception of the Galapagos. Caveat: I visited them on DIY trips in 2000 and 2005, respectively, with no cruise or tour group involved. So I had to do quite a bit of research to find out what I'd encounter: raging guanacos, angry Incas, etc.  😀

 

From the standpoint of pure scenic value, you can't go wrong with either Patagonia or Peru. I'd go back to both in a heartbeat. Altitude is an issue for some in Peru, though it wasn't for me. And if I saw an intestinal bug anywhere, I quickly took care of the problem with some fine Chilean wine.   😜

 

You'll love Patagonia! Are you going to Torres del Paine National Park? Simply spectacular. If you're there and able, try to walk up to the base of the famous rock spires. Or, take a boat on the glacial lakes. You'll have a great time regardless.

 

Let me know if you have any Qs.

 

Thanks very much.  We haven't totally made up our minds.  We were slow deciding -- very unlike us -- and much is sold out.

 

If the Galapagos opens up, we will consider that rather than the pre in Santiago.  Although Quito is at high altitude, we wouldn't be there for longer than an overnight.

 

The Patagonia post does include Torres del Paine National Park and that does look spectacular.

 

It won't take an intestinal bug for us to sample the wonderful Chilean wines.  😉