Chilean Fjords vs Alaska

[JWFogg]

How does the South American Chilean Fjords Cruise compare to the Alaska cruises? What are the differences in scenery and ports? (other than spanish speaking)

 

We have been to Alaska five times and loved it but have reservations that SA cruise will be like another Alaska cruise. (Not that it is a bad thing)

[dileep]

How does the South American Chilean Fjords Cruise compare to the Alaska cruises? What are the differences in scenery and ports? (other than spanish speaking)

 

Not at all. Other than both places having glaciers, the SA cruise will be totally different. For example, there are no penguins in Alaska. You will see some very interesting cities like Buenos Aires and Santiago. Go on a BA to Valparaiso cruise; it more than just Chilean Fjords.

 

Look at my videos and you will see for yourself.

[Watty]

While the Chilean Fjords are well worth seeing, in my opinion they do not compare to the magnificence of the ones in Alaska. If the only reason you're thinking of taking a cruise in South America is to see the Chilean Fjords, you might well be disappointed, but as Dileep says, there is much more to a cruise in that area. Buenos Aires, Peninsula Valdes, the Beagle Channel, and the Chilean lake area come to mind. You will not regret taking this cruise.

[jjmmcc]

We just returned from our SA cruise a few weeks ago. The comparison to Alaska was not lost on any of our fellow passengers. I agree that some of the grandeur was lost, partly due to the clouds covering the Andean range. Also, we saw very little wild life. A few whales were observed a distance from the ship but that was about it. For the most part, the trip amongst the fjords in Chile was pleasant but not breath taking. The Avenue of the Glaciers were the highlight of this part of the trip.

 

This is not why I would recommend this trip. For those that really want a South American journey, I don't think a cruise is the way to go. We took it because we just got off a hectic 18 day cruise in the Baltic and needed a restful trip. This was just the ticket. The ports were just foreign enough to be interesting, the history just familiar enough to seem relevant, and we had at least a day at sea between ports. It seemed like heaven to me!

 

If you have done five Alaskan cruises, I can't imagine that you won't find yourself feeling like you are doing another one while on board the ship. However, once you are out and about, the similarities end. The Chilean Lake district with it's volcanoes and lakes is unlike anything I saw in Alaska. The same can be said about the pampas, rain forests, Tierra del Fuego, and Patagonia. If you are fortunate to be on a ship that includes the Antarctica (as Oceana will do next season), then you'll have a very different experience.

 

One other thing to mention, most Alaskan cruises are sailing the inside passage, seldom venturing out into deep water. On the SA cruise you will find yourself out in the Pacific and Atlantic for part of the trip and it is not always smooth sailing. As far as I know, most ships avoid going 'around' the horn via Drake's Passage, choosing instead to visit Ushuaia, via Straights of Magellan and Beagle Channel, then cruising south around the east side of Tierra del Fuego, to the horn and back again along the east side. We were fortunate to have excellent weather for our entire trip, but had been told that previous trips, this season, missed at least one port due to rough seas. We were on a mid sized ship, the Oceana's Insignia.

 

I wouldn't miss going to SA, it has a lot to offer.

[dileep]

I agree that the Chilean Fjords themselves were the least exciting aspect of the trip! In fact, I am not sure why the cruise lines even mention them.

[minke]

I did the 7 night inside passage cruise to Alaska & Glacier bay back in 98, cloudy & wet so we were dissapointed after having done the Norwegian inside passage to North Cape previously (only small ships can do that). 5 years ago we did Val-BA on P&O's old Arcadia & thought it was great (there is a review on the boards). However I have just done Antarctic & Chilean fjords on MV Nordkapp. that was fantastic. The Chilean fjords we got to were totally different to the big ship ones & far more scenic (review is on CC member reviews). So my take on scenic cruising splendours is 1) Antarctic 2)Chilean fjords by small ship 3) Norwegian inside passage by small ship 4) Sorry but it has to be Alaska inside passage.

[jjmmcc]

I can't disagree with your assessment. I think the fact the Andes range was clouded over and not viewable made for a less than spectacular viewing. All we saw was green, green, green, with a splash of glacier thrown in. Had the Andes been viewable, oh, what a day that would have been.

 

I have a hunch that cloudy is pretty standard, so I wouldn't go expecting to see the Andes. We had great weather, blue skies, but the peaks of the range were covered in white, puffy clouds that hid the best of the scenery.

 

I was on a mid-sized ship, the Oceania's Insignia. I don't know what that gave us in the way of access or what it might have kept us out of.

 

The very enjoyable part of the day was just that it was very relaxing and enjoyable.

[JWFogg]

Thanks all for taking the time to respond. Your comments are appreciated. We will add it to the list of cruises to do and hopefully be able to take in the one that includes Antarctica. We are looking real hard at Celebrity/Galapagos for the next one.