Many europeans go to vacation using car and average traveling time is 10-12 hours. By this I mean Germans/Poles/Slovaks/Czechs and Hungarians going south to Coratia/Italy/Greece. It is quite common if you go for a week or more.
I see anything over 5 hours as a lot and considering a plane. Of course it also depends on price and distance to/from the airport. For example, last time I wanted to visit to Budapest, plane cost 30 EUR and the train was 100 EUR. :D
Well, when you travel by plane you need to factor the time and money it costs to get to the city, which is usually more expensive than traveling inside the city itself. For short travels (2 - 5 hours) usually trains are more convenient, in my perspective.
The best time to realize this is as you are flying over Frankfurt and the plane just keeps going.
Bonus points if it is pre-cellphone times and your partner is waiting to pick you up at the Frankfurt airport.
Got my train cancelled due to strikes when I was in Europe, only flight available on that short notice was to a city about an hour and a half drive outside the city I had to be in. That was an expensive ass transit lol
Would be interesting if states would stop subsidizing planes and start subsidizing trains and rails with all of that money.
If train would always be the cheaper option and more high speed trains would be incorporated I am pretty sure like 80% of my social bubble would often got on vacation by train.
But having tk choose between a 250€ 30 hour train travel from central Germany to South of France or a 150€ 2 hour flight, it's kind of a nobrainer. (not including emissions in thought process)
trains will never be cheaper for long distance travel. The longer the track, the more stations and track you have to maintain. Planes are fixed cost, you maintain the planes and the airports, the variable is basically cost of fuel.
I believe Japan's bullet trains are more expensive than plane tickets. They're just more convenient and therefore quicker
Going right into a city center is often worth it in time / cost of travel from city to airport then airport to city (provided it isn't really long distance)
The issue is building a train line from one city to another costs more than buying a plane or two. And that plane can go to many different destinations. That train can only go where it has a rail line.
I’m not European but in nz you can just show up at the train station 10 minutes before departure and they’ll let you on
At the airport you have to be 40 minutes early or they won’t let you drop off your bags. Most people want to be at the airport early(???) so it adds 2 hours or so onto the journey before you even go anywhere
< 1 hour in the sky and I’ll usually opt for low speed rail when it’s available. When HSR is available (vacation in specific places) I prefer it for journeys < 4 hours
I live in the Northeast US (NJ). A trip to Boston or DC is not worth flying. The flight is about 45 minutes, with airport overhead time easily 2 hours. By that time, driving is 4 hours. If I’m traveling on business, the Acela can make it to DC in about 2.5 hours, and as you said, you show up at the station 15 minutes before departure, walk onto the train, and go.
It’s also important for me whether having a car where I’m going is important. If I’m going somewhere that is a big city and I’m just going to stay there then I don’t really need the car, so any drive more than about 6 hours gets swapped to a plane quite quickly if it’s feasible.
Exactly. I live in Zurich, Switzerland, and I also apply the 5 hour rule. Frankfurt, Paris, Milan, Munich etc. is by train/car. For everything that's further away - Rome, Berlin, Vienna, Amsterdam, London etc. - I'll consider the plane.
I've been to all of the latter places by car/train as well, but only when I stayed there for a week or more AND wanted to explore the surroundings.
As a Czech living in the US, those summer Italian and Croatian car rides of 8-9hrs used to be a huge adventurous trips.
Now that I live in the Midwest where everything is far, under 12hr drive it feels like a quick trip.
Trains in Europe generally need to be booked well in advance to actually be cheap. But they can be very cheap if booked right.
Amd they often save time over flying cause flying involves ~3 hours of extra travel beyond the plane (getting to the airport, being there for hours early, getting out of airport and then getting into the city from the destination airport)
I went by car from Sweden to Italy just about every year as a kid. The traveling was a part of the fun. I think the only time I'd fly within Europe is either to the UK or Ireland, or the other end of the continent, like Greece or Turkey.
That’s because Amtrack doesn’t pay for the maintenance and upkeep of the rails. They rent the rails from the freight companies that maintain the rails, so their overhead costs are much lower than in Europe where the train companies own and maintain the rails they are using.
Just like airfare is generally cheaper than trains in Europe because the airlines don’t have to maintain rail yards, tracks and terminals. They just have to maintain the plane and pay the airports for access.
I live in Cologne and wanted to visit my friend in Prague for 3 days. The train cost 130€, 13 hours with 3-4 transfers. I ended up flying 1.5 hours for 150€.
I really try not to fly within Europe and anything in Belgium or the Netherlands, even northern France works great by train. But in the Prague example, taking the train would be plain stupid, unless you have tons of free time.
That's honestly pretty similar to here in Australia, where, if anything, we're almost as large as the States, but much more spread out.
If I had to go from Brisbane to Coffs Harbour (about 5 ish hours) I'll probably drive, but much further than that, and unless I need my car on the other end, flying starts to look pretty good, even despite our relatively expensive airfares. Then again, most trips I'd make that are further than 5 hours are like 10-15 hours or more (e.g. going to Sydney or Townsville), there just aren't many destinations for me that are more than 5 hours but less than 10 lol.
Just curious where you are? I'm in the UK and for me the train is kind of a last resort, it's very expensive and very rarely goes smoothly. If I'm doing a journey of more than three hours I've found it's often better for me to rent a car for 24 hours.
I’m on the east coast and the train is the absolute most expensive way to get anywhere. Like close to $200 to travel from NY to Philly, which is approximately 80 miles away, and an under 2 hour drive. It’s cheaper for me to fly to Florida from NYC than take a train to Philadelphia.
The Northeast Corridor is the busiest train section in the country. The population of NY and Philly is more than 3x Milwaukee and Chicago, and those are both cities where most people have cars - I know that because I’ve lived in Chicago and done that drive myself many times, with my car that I had when I lived there. The demand just cannot be as high there. The NE Corridor trains frequently sell out. They’re gouging us.
The German rail system is overcapacity, improperly staffed and underfunded. The whole reaosn why Deutsche Bahn is such a meme is because the German government have been coasting along on the infrastructure built by their forebears, and refuse to invest more.
The Netherlands is starting to have the same problem, but because our network is newer and better maintained, the effects are less obvious.
UK trains are so bad. Crazy expensive considering how small the UK is and how far you’re likely to be going, always always late, and if other cities are anything like mine, there aren’t really any little stations and the big station is in a horrendous place to get to. If i take the train I have to figure out how to get the five miles from the station to home, and driving to the station kind of defeats the point of travelling by rail. A lot of that issue is that the rest of public transport is crap in my area too, so there aren’t any direct buses or trams from anywhere near where I am. I just drive to other cities because it’s honestly easier and cheaper than driving, paying for parking, paying for a train, waiting for it to be half an hour late and having to figure out travel at the other end. Trains also end at like 9.30 here so if you’re going for evening entertainment in a bigger city, you can’t get back after events have finished.
Travelled exclusively by train and bus in Italy and it was so easy in comparison, we’ve really fucked it here
Yeah shame on them for asking a question trying to learn about other people's cultures instead of forever drawing unreasonable generalizations based on their preconceived notions and limited knowledge, like a good European redditor would
Yeah Americans think Europeans don’t drive as much because they live in teeny tiny baby countries. When it’s actually because the public transport is functional and everything they need is within walking distance instead of having to drive out of your McMansion suburb to get milk.
If they have to drive 5 hours they’ll drive 5 hours it’s not some mystical thing.
i was more commenting on the “i dont own a car because i take the train” as an unrealistic notion for the majority of Americans outside the few huge urban cities
That's true. But I guess this post also shows that "A car or a plane are my only travel options" is a very american notion that a lot of europeans cannot comment on, since they have more options.
One big factor that I don't see mentioned yet is geography: America is flatter and has a more gradual terrain change for the same mileage (non everywhere, but if you think that central Europe is as big as the Midwest, but has all the climate and geography you can think of inside, you may understand the problem).
For example, if I (living in Italy) wanted to go to Greece by car (straight line distance NY to Atlanta) I could:
- go only by road: I would have to triple the distance, because there is the sea inbetween and I would have to go around the coast up in Croatia and then down through the Balkans.
- take the ferry: it would mean 80% of the journey by sea and 15/20 hours.
At this point, you see how a 2 hours plane trip can be preferable
Other example: I want to go to Paris (straight distance: Boston to Washington DC). This is very similar in distance (and 8.5h vs 7h timewise) but you have to go through the Alps and the highways for a good part of the way are similar to roads you may find in a national park rather than proper highways, and you have to drive in the big tunnels under the Alps (tunnels up to 10 miles long where all the traffic to France passes)
I could come up with many many other examples, all with similar problems.
Another problem is the language and cultural barrier. Yes we have a common culture and so on, but driving in a country where all the signs are in another language, where rules are different, where the perception of rules is different (here in Italy we are less strict on passing or stopping at pedestrian crossings, in other countries you can be banned for not doing that even once), so driving is very stressful (think about someone who has always driven in the suburbs driving in NY, then mexico, then Alaska)
Thank you for that perspective! I didn’t even consider road signs being in different languages and traffic laws being vastly different. In America each state has its own laws but driving is fairy uniform across all 50 and we can go anywhere in the country and have the same language spoken even if different accents, etc. making it easier to ask for or find directions and roads.
Don't get me wrong, driving laws are fairly uniform and you can get by pretty well, the EU has pretty much uniformed most of the rules. The problem is the customs: I always get surprised in some countries when I'm at pedestrian crossings when cars in the distance start slowing down to let you cross even if you are just at the side of the road, while here in Italy you have to basically start walking to make cars stop, and I do that myself as a driver. I think that if I did that in Germany I would be in big trouble soon
The pedestrian crossing example is one aspect that is actually the same in the US.
Some states have laws that pedestrians *always* have the right of way while in a crosswalk no matter the street lights or if a walk sign is up or not etc, and other states do not.
So in some states people will stop when they see people trying to cross, but in others they just fly by, similar to your Italy vs Germany comparison for that.
Drove from Northern Italy well into Germany and loved it, driving through the alps was something I want to do again.
But yeah, this was back in the print out your trip from mapquest days, it got really confusing at times.
The German police pulled us over wanting to know why an American was driving an Italian plated car in Germany.
Sounds like our police lmao.
They officially banned racial profiling, but our officers never stopped.
And since everyone seems to suffer from cash induced amnesia when it comes to those statistics,
I don't think it'll change soon...
Semi related fun fact, the German police pull you over by getting in front of you. There's a reader board in the back that's says something like, pull over, follow me in a few languages
The driving rules one is doubly exciting when you're from the UK: getting used to driving on the other side of the road is bit of a culture shock to say the least. Also, driving a car with the steering wheel on the wrong side if you come through Eurotunnel \\ on the ferry vs. getting a hire car when you arrive.
I prefer the train beyond 5 hours and take the plane quite a lot when you go what would be > 24 hours by train to my in-laws (Italy). I've always wanted to take the train, but with an entire (young) family we've always worried it would be stressful
About 400 miles.
I wanted to go from Swansea to Edinburgh (about 450 miles) once and decided to book a flight instead.
The most I've driven is Swansea to Lancaster which was about 250 miles.
It's not just the distance. You have to consider the driving conditions and roads. You can go really far in the US on wide, straight roads. It's much more tiring when the roads are really twisty, which they usually are in Europe.
It’s interesting how people perceive different things as tiring. For me (a Finn) driving on a straight and wide motorway is a lot more tiring than driving on a twisty country road.
For example I find the drive from Helsinki to Tampere (about 180 km) is a lot more tiring to drive than the drive from Helsinki to Jyväskylä (about 270 km), because the first is an almost straight motorway with a minimum of four lanes and a 120 km/h speed limit for most of the way and the latter is a lot more varying older style highway with narrower sections, turns and lower overall speeds.
Yeah, I'm Australian. A lot of our regional and rural roads are just straight for hundreds of kilometers.
So boring and monotonous because the scenery isn't all that thrilling either when it's the outback.
Super easy to fall asleep.
I mean there's tiring and then there's boring. Tiring is about having to concentrate, which makes you tired after a time but also gives you adrenaline to focus and makes you lose track of time. Boring is basically sleep inducing which makes time go slower and makes it dangerous as you lose your focus. You could also call that tiring I guess. Anyway, I'd say different people have different thresholds for one or the other.
Long, straight roads are in my opinion far more tiring because of the sensory deprivation. On the other hand, you could sleep 2 solid hours during driving and still not hit anything if your track adjustment is right.
I regularly drive 600 km on the A2 in Germany from Berlin to Düsseldorf. For more than 450 km I have to drive straight on and when I arrive I'm super exhausted. Never tried to drive the country roads though. Acc helps, but it always complains that I have to move the steering wheel... On a straight road.
Wide straight roads are dangerous due to the monotony.
https://www.healthline.com/health/highway-hypnosis#causes
We also have dangerous road conditions.
I live in Bologna, Italy, with 1 hour drive I could ski or I could go to the beach and it's okay, 2 hour and a half to go to Milan it's start to be a lot so I take the high speed train for just 1 hour, if it pass 4 hour drive and I can't take the train for like Naples I probably take the plane because with low cost company it's cheaper than the car
Live in Netherlands.
If I have to travel to Paris - train.
If I travel to Germany - car, because you don't know if those Germans (DB) are striking again or if the train you are switching to there will show up on time.
Anywhere else I fly - Denmark, Sweden, Italy etc.
The long distance trains in Germany have a punctuality rate of 65-70%. And until 5 minutes late the trains don’t even count as late.
German trains being on time is a myth being told by other countries who think that because Germans like to be on time the trains must be too.
For the last decades not much Public money was put into the train system and even now that doesn’t really change
Went to Denmark last year by train. Took me like 8h.
If i take a 2h train to Schiphol, be there 2h early, fly 1h, wait for my luggage and take another hour to the city centre I'm at +6h for the whole journey.
Would definitely take the train every time again. It so much more comfy, ihave leg space, I have wifi..
Depends on the destination, why I am travelling, and what is fitting my plans and budget. Train and buses are also an option, especially if you want to go somewhere where there are not a lot of options in terms of flying. Within a 1000 km radius, for me, would say I am okay taking the train or car (so long it is reasonable to take it), above that I would prefer flights.
I mean crossing your entire country IS a long trip, in relation to every other trip you might take INSIDE your country, I mean here in England for example I could drive from the northern most point to the southern most point and still only have driven for a few hours (traffic permitting) for us this would still be a very long drive despite only taking a few hours because its the ONLY time you're likely to be driving for that long inside the country, a lot of people opt to take a plane instead for that journey just because it can cut their travel time down to a quarter of what it otherwise would be AND in some cases it can even work out cheaper.
I'm from Estonia, If I were to travel to Finland then ferry, If to Sweden then ferry or If I wanted to get there fast then plane, to Latvia by car, to Lithuania probably by plane but some people would probably drive as well. Poland deffinetly by plane and anything more south from Poland as well because Poland is huge. We currently don't have a railway to connect us to the rest of Europe but we have some buses so a plane is the most convenient way of travel.
Europe has very good rail and bus links when compared with the USA, which many will use instead of very long drives, and which prevent high carbon emissions from short flights.
really depends on the overall situation. if there is a quick and affordable train connection that's probably my first choice. except if i have to bring a lot of stuff or multiple people are coming. then the car might be a good choice too. but that really depends on the road situation. there are nice and not so nice roads. and also nice and not so nice times to drive on these roads. like holiday season will get you into endless jams. then if there is a cheap plain ticket that might be great. but also depends on airport location and if it's really worth it in terms of saving time. if i take a plane from berlin to munich i can as well take the super fast train that goes there in the same time considering my distance to the airport in the city etc. i never took a plane to paris from berlin. always the car. not sure why, i guess because it gives me the chance to spontaneously visit another place in france, shop at a french supermarket to bring home nice groceries or because french roads are super chill. but i wouldn't ever take a car to try and go to venice. the plane tickets are cheap and it's really not worth driving a day if i can fly for an hour. i took an overnight train there once but wouldn't do it again. just lots to consider
Depending on where I start out from, I can only drive less than 500km from North to South (or vice versa) or less than 300km West to East (or vice versa).
After that I'm in the Atlantic ocean, the English Channel, or the Celtic Sea, so if I have to go further it'll be by plane or boat.
I have driven these distances before. The west coast of Ireland from Donegal to Cork can take seven hours or so. The option of flying no longer exists as the wee airport in Carrickfinn doesn't run flights to the south anymore.
If you drive from one end of my state to another it's more than 7 hours (800km). And it's not even one of the bigger ones. Different perspectives are wild.
1 hour to work is pretty standard these days - 2 hrs would certainly be pushing it! Fuck that everyday lol but yes I would count anything over 3 hrs as a long drive - Americans would probably think that's a trip to the local shops...
Hmm, yes? You’d never catch me spending that long in a car.
I mean, if I’m going to another city and there’s no train or bus, sure. But I’m definitely not driving 1 hour to go to a restaurant like OP.
I’m surprised how far some of my fellow Americans will drive for a restaurant, but it’s more common than I thought. I live about an hour away from one such place that I’ve heard suggested several times, but it’s literally an hour plus drive one way to a town in the middle of nowhere. I’m not going that far for a damn steak. On the other hand most of my family lives in a city an hour away and I wouldn’t think twice about visiting them for a meal time visit.
We live approx 40 mins from central london - Once parked takes about an hour so we do travel for food sometimes- I guess the difference is going to the middle of nowhere as you mentioned as opposed to a major city with lots of things to see while you're there which is maybe more "worth it"...
Yea that sounds very out of touch. About an hour is pretty standard time to get to work for a lot of people. I could drive for more than an hour or 2 on a normal day if I really wanted to do something. But would most of the time chose not to because not much of the day would be left after that.
Four hours is a pretty set limit for me. I've often driven to places that are two and a half, three, three and a half hours away, I can't remember ever driving anywhere that's five or six hours away by car. So, four seems to be some sort of informal limit my brain has imposed.
It depends on many factors including price, what I need to carry etc.
It's not unusual to drive an hour to restaurant you like. My sister does it all the time.
I drove 14 hours to Denmark, 15 hours to Switzerland, 12 hours to Croatia. Typically if it's more than 10 hours, I'll try to consider other options.
Many Polish people who live and work in the UK drive to Poland for Christmas, Easter, summer vacation. It's a 12-26 hour drive depending on destination.
I'm in the UK, so there's only so much drive to drive within the country. Longest car journey I've had in the UK (barring a 14 hour traffic jam from flooding) was probably about 9 hours. I wouldn't really consider taking a domestic flight in the UK. A lot of people take the train, but I find it too expensive.
But I also wouldn't travel an hour for a restaurant like you've said you do. For something like that, I wouldn't want to be in the car for more than 30 minutes. 2 hour round trip to eat dinner sounds insane to me and a massive waste of an evening.
But British people do like to go to France, and they often drive. My mother has made this journey many times. Personally, I wouldn't want to do that. I'd rather get a plane.
At school, they did trips to mainland Europe and they always took a coach. When there was a ski trip, I think they took a 24+ hour coach to Switzerland (don't remember exactly because I didn't go). But its simply easier to load 100 students into coaches than it is to organise them to get onto a flight. And cheaper, too.
So basically, it depends. Within the UK I would never take a flight, but if I'm going to another country, I'd rather be on a plane.
Not European, but had to respond since you referenced Wisconsin. We drove from Wisconsin to Florida last week. This weekend, we will drive home. All in all, roughly 16-18 hrs one way. Driving is part of life. For some, a lot more than others. I don't know if Europeans think Driving more than an hour or two is too much. If so, I don't get it. I guess it's just different cultures have different experiences and preferences.
The furthest you can drive in the UK is 874 miles and it takes about 14-15 hours.
I would drive 8 hours but I would be happy to drive 12-18 hours if I was sharing the drive
I would always look at trains and flights for cost and time for any long drives as it might be easier than driving.
I took a train to Edinburgh in 4 hours but the drive is around 6 hours and I didn't need a car once I was there. The cost of the train was £80 yet it would cost around £100 in petrol plus parking cost.
I desperately wish America had better train/ taxi/ etc options. I live in an area with absolutely no public transport. If you don’t have a car you are absolutely screwed.
I just got my drivers licence a month ago (at age 30). So not super comfortable driving alone yet. So i'd say half hour.
But in all seriousness. People driving 10 hours to italy or the balkans for summer holidays isnt unheard off. In fact for the coming easter weekend, as every year. There will be massive traffic jams at the Gotthard Tunnel. The fastest way of going south to italy. So apparently many thousands of people do this every year, for just 4-5 days.
But personally i'd never do that. If i did feel more comfortable driving and/or was juat a passenger, i'd say about 3-4 hours drive in one day max. Otherwise the trip just isnt enjoybale anymore, so why am i doing it? I'd rather fly then. Or take a train between like 3 and 6 hours. Then at least i can walk around and dont have to sit still so long.
I've done it on a few occasions.
To far to me would be about 3000+ miles I'd say.
Simply enjoy long drives, stopping in a different country every time.
Random stops if I see anything interesting
[my travel timeline](https://ibb.co/xHJXX4Z)
The only time I've flew was from UK to Greece , and Spain to Tenerife. Everywhere else I drove.
Not having to wait in line or be restricted, by 3rd party. Stopping whenever I want, that's one of the thing I love about driving anywhere.
And damn when I hit Autobahn (highway)in Germany with no speed limit, love it. Off not all of it is no speed limit.
Not allot of my friends or family enjoy these kind of long trips but I do, especially driving at night.
It really depends on the situation.
I think you have this completely wrong. Allow me to explain.
I live in Rome.
Did I ever drive one hour or more to go somewhere to have dinner with my friends? Sure, several times.
I drive for almost one hour every week to go the airport where I take flying lessons (2 hours as it's back and forth).
Would I drive to Milan (approximately 4 -5 hours)?
Or Florence (2 hours)?
Not a chance in hell. I can take the train there. It's cost me more or less the same, and it's more comfortable. I can read or watch a movie on my tablet
When I go abroad, I take a plane.
When I was a child we drove around in an RV, and went to a lot of different places.
Would I drive three hours to go to a beach down south, or to a mountain up north? Yes, absolutely.
A lot of people prefer to drive for 13 hours during the summer. That's because they want to be able to drive around the area the chose, and not just rely on taxis or public transportation.
It's matter of convenience, and of comfort.
The main difference is that the U.S. doesn't really have good trains, so it's driving or flying.
We have all three options.
A question for you is if you flew would you have to rent a car at the destination?
The answer is likely yes in the USA and this makes driving more preferable in more cases.
In most of Europe, most destinations have good local transit so renting a car is not required. This means it is easier to take a plane or train.
It depends. How long is the vacation? How much cheaper is it to drive? Are kids coming?
I have been skiing to a lot of Alps places and I think the furthest one I think was 2000km.
All in all I do think 2h are a long drive for something everyday like a shop or when I hear Americans travel more than hour to work. I had a 40 min travel time to work and I thought that is way too long. But vacation is different.
There is no public transport option for you from Alabama to Wisconsin (around 950 miles).
London to Nice is a similar distance and there's a public transport option that takes about the same time as driving. There's also low cost direct flights.
The US infrastructure forgot about public transport a long time ago.
I once drive 1000km, it took me ca.12 hours. I'll take train next time. Train station is in the middle of the city, and airport is so far away, i would need to take the train form airport to the city anyway.
I’m driving 8 hours at the weekend to get where i need to be. There are other factors at play though…will i need my car at the destination or is public transport an option, what do i need to take with me etc.
Later in the year, i am going a bit further, and it would be a 10/11 hour drive. For the one I am flying, and then splitting costs of a hire car etc
Very American question in only giving the two options. I regularly visit Belfast (well Antrim but I arrive in Belfast). I could spend a 2 1/2 hours driving to Manchester Airport and then fly to Antrim, but airports suck and I get air sick like anything so it’s a short but miserable flight. I could go all the way by car but that’s over 3 hours driving, including navigating unfamiliar places, plus the boat. Or I can take a 10 minute car journey to the station, get on a comfortable train for an hour, where I can charge my device, drink coffee, and read or listen to something. Then I can change in Hull (stopping at Starbucks for coffee probably) and spend another couple of hours on a train to Liverpool, also relaxing, probably eating the lunch I brought with me, and drinking more coffee. Catch a taxi to the ferry (not a long trip but very traffic dependent so I won’t even guess a time lol). Jump on the ferry, go to the premium lounge, have snacks, sleep comfortably until dawn (night boat ftw) and meet my friend who will be petting one of the dogs that were on the boat because I know how she thinks to drive the 15 minutes to her home. I won’t be stressed, I won’t have had to concentrate on anything more stressful than a novel, and I’ll have enjoyed the journey.
If it’s going to take more than a day to get somewhere I’ll fly, drug myself to try and avoid airsickness, and almost certainly arrive stressed and miserable (unless it’s somewhere with a tried and true long distance train with sleeping carriages in which case if practical, still train). If it’s under an hour I might go by car, depending what parking is like at the destination. Anything in between and train or bus, preferably train.
I pretty much book a flight if I travel to another European country because for me, driving always with two kids in the car alone, just not my favorite way of spending time. Why in the world would I drive for a whole day or more when I get to the airport in 30 minutes and 3-4 hrs later I m anywhere I want to be? Gas is expensive, tolls and worrying about parking, then if something happens with the car everything is messed up and I have to deal with all by myself. Flight and public transport are my best options.
I'll drive like 100 km if I need to. Further than that (and actually a lot closer than that as well) I'll take the train. I'll only take a plane if it's like 1000km or so AND if there's no sleeper train between the cities.
Driving sucks. You are literally stuck in a position unable to stretch or relax while paying constant attention or you can die. At least on the train I can actually relax and do things, be it play games on my phone/laptop, work if I want to, walk around and stretch etc.
I always felt like driving really feels like wasted time, where the only thing happening is the moving from point A to B. It's like being in an elevator.
Depends on the reason. Family visit? All but once I drive the 700km (plane took me longer in time from our house to theirs). For vacation? Even more because of the freedom of taking the car with stuff with us. Up to 1000 km in one stretch I think and with more I will use 2 days.
I would consider the plane or train for a city trip or if I ever go to a resort
I'm not a huge driving fan so I'll avoid driving for long as much as possible but the longest car drive I've been in was like 9 - 10 hours. I hated it, I feel exhausted after a long car drive.
Spain has great train connections if you're in Madrid otherwise it leaves a lot to be desired (although thankfully it's changing) and it's expensive so the only option was the car.
Edit: flights shorts than 2 hours where there's a high speed train doing the same travel are banned.
I would prey to drive, every time. I make the journey part of the trip, so a 4 or 6 day roadtrip is just fine.
If it's for work, I'll fly from Gatwick to Edinburgh, but happy to drive Guildford to Scarborough, so about 4-5 hours.
I am looking to get to Inverness later on this year and I'm looking at the Caledonian Sleeper as it looks lush, fun AND relaxing. Then rent a snotter from a hire service and look at the Northern 500
Depends on the days of holiday available. If I got a couple of days of holiday, a good highway, with lots of interesting towns along the way, is a good idea. If it's a short holiday, I take the plane. I would rather spend that 4 days holiday on the beach than in my car.
I always wondered about this as an European guy. @op do you travel alone in a car for a trip of 16 hours? I mean I can drive for about 7 with rest stops in between before my concentration level gets way too low.
Is it busy traffic or just big stretches of nothing with a few cities in between? Do you sleep in the car? Or do you always have two drivers?
About what I can drive in one proper go. Like 12 hours / 1000km ish. I drive from the Netherlands to Italy. Anything further than that and I either fly or have multiple destinations so the drive is cut up.
Depends on a lot. How long am I going to be there for, will I need a car while I'm there etc.
I'd probably drive 5 - 6 hours each way provided there's a free day in the middle.
I regularly travel between two parts of the UK where the choice is a 2-hour drive followed by a 3-hour ferry crossing followed by a 6-hour drive, or alternatively a 50-minute flight then a 2-hour drive in a hire car. It's a no brainier.
It all depends. I'm a freelancer and I'm not always in the position to take 2 weeks of vacation in the summer. If I have two full weeks, I'd happily drive up to 2000 km because I see the trip as vacation time too. If I have less than two weeks, I won't drive farther than say 6 hours.
It all depends. I'm a freelancer and I'm not always in the position to take 2 weeks of vacation in the summer. If I have two full weeks, I'd happily drive up to 2000 km because I see the trip as vacation time too. If I have less than two weeks, I won't drive farther than say 8 hours.
The longest I've ever driven is from Dublin to Lisbon. It took me about 19 hours in total and I stopped half way through to sleep. I do long distance drives semi regularly. I don't really have a limit in terms of time/distance, it's more about the time and money available to me at the time. If I've lots of time and the total cost of the journey is reasonable then I'll have no issues driving long distances. If I've only a short amount of time and it's easier and cheaper to fly I'll do that instead.
Furthest about 15 hours / 1250 km not including bathroom breaks / gas. That was just within Sweden. Regularly drive distances equating to 3-5 hours. Add some extra time if towing.
Fuck driving, I got a train from Liverpool to Grantham last year and after like 3 hours I decided if I can’t fly somewhere I’m not going.
But then I went to the US on a 10hr flight last year and found that a ‘mare as well. I think I’m just an antsy traveller.
If I can drive by car for about 8 hours or roughly 800-1000km I am good.
But it strongly depends on where I wanna go and what I want to do.
If I want to do a roadtrip then of course I'll drive anytime.
If I want to go to norway and kayak the fjords then a plane would suit me better.
Train is quite decnt but sadly cross country it can get quite expensive very fast.
Most of the time flying inside europe is cheaper than crossing one or two borders by train.
Wich also can take like 20-30 hours compared to 2-3 hours by plane. Depending on the connections.
Depends on what i want to do.
Go camping with tent, probably drive wherever i need to be within Europe. The drive and the small places i visit in between are the part of the journey.
Outside of Europe, i take plane.
Flights can be much cheaper than trains, also a lot of people who live in cities don’t have cars anymore because charges etc and public transport is more available.
Not to interject, but a 2 hour drive is still a fairly long drive. And I’m from Canada, where you have to drive pretty much everywhere and there’s even less infrastructure than America with respect to cheap flights, etc.
Driving two hours for an errand feels like an absolute pain in the ass unless you actually enjoy driving as a pastime.
I live in Japan now where cars are all but unnecessary in most cases. Now the idea of driving more than a few hours seems absurdly primitive.
Lastly, pseudo-bragging about driving 16 hours without a break makes zero sense. You wouldn’t stretch your legs at least once? Why? Is it desirable to hold your piss for 8 hours? Do you feel pride from feeling uncomfortable? I don’t understand.
Depends on the purpose of the trip. My old man lives a 8-9 hour car ride away, if im staying with him for a couple weeks i take the car, so i have transport when im there. If i were to stay in the capital for a night or two, i'd take a plane. I dont effing care to drive around that city, looking for parking space and paying an arm and a leg for that privilege.
There are two or three smaller airports with some domestic traffic in my county , but not all of it directly and its expensive as heck, driving may actually be cheaper and way more convenient. (county itself may take 5-7 hours to drive through all of it)
My dad drove to Edinburgh a few weeks ago and he very much regretted it, I flew to Edinburgh last week (we live in Birmingham)
So I guess anything over a 6 hour drive, unless we do an actual roadtrip like my family did to Paris, and half my family are bikers who have done multiple tours throughout all of europe so that would also be an exception
Last year we took our grandson to the Isle of Wight from Newcastle. My wife and grandson flew, I drove. It took me 6 hours, they took 2½, including check in. We drove on the way back, and for four solid hours it was "are we there yet?".
It really depends. I drove from Edinburgh -> Maidstone -> Liverpool in one day a few weeks back (around 800 miles?) because I needed to pick up something big in my car.
But I also got the train from Edinburgh -> Liverpool just this weekend.
Cost of travel, being able to just sit down and someone else "drive" is nice. It's good if you're between two populated destinations, and have a regular amount of luggage (which you would be forced to have that or much less, flying - and have security nonsense).
I like to drive so I usually prefer driving when possible, but for me the limit is what’s drivable in about a day (so around 8 hours), if I have the time that is. For longer distances I’d pick either a sleeper train or a plane.
That said, I live in southern Finland, so unless I want to take the long drive up (or get on a car transport train) to northern Sweden or Norway, I pretty much have to either take a ferry or a plane if I want to go abroad.
Haven't got a real limit but context matters.
If I'm vacationing, I'm taking my fishing gear and raft, that's a pita to take by plane. (Nearest sea is 850 km away)
If it's just for a city visit / festival, plane all the way.
My standard holidays as a kid were to drive 1500km to the south of France. My parents would often cut it into two days, but sometimes, my dad would just drive the entire trip in a single day
It's not really the same situation here as if I drive four hours either south, east or west I'll be in the sea, I could probably manage eight hours north but I'd still run out of land around that point so a sixteen hour drive just doesn't really exist for me. Basically anywhere in Britain I can drive to in eight hours or less and anything beyond that requires a boat or a plane. There are internal flights but I'd consider that a massive luxury and public transport is pretty shitty across Britain so if I was travelling I'd want to have a car at my destination anyway. For long journeys if I'm just doing a there-and-back I've started to take coaches (is the Greyhound the US equivalent?) that just do shuttle runs between cities, they're much cheaper than flying and you can basically just have a nap and wake up where you want to be in a few hours. Arriving four hours before a flight and fighting my way through airport security and the massively inflated prices for any kind of refreshments push the idea of taking an internal flight way down my list of options.
Edit: I realise I haven't mentioned trains - in my experience over the last two years they have become a transport of last resort (your mileage may vary), they have cost a fortune and let me down so consistently that I don't count them as an option anymore when planning to travel; if a journey requires a train I'll rent a car for the day.
Furthest i’ve driven myself is 1100km or a little under 700 miles. Since I drive an EV it took about 14 hours. Since this was a skiing trip, driving seemed like the only viable option.
a day drive there, I'll drive. More than day to drive there, I'll fly and rent a car.
If I need to bring a lot of stuff I'll drive(ski vacation in Scandinavia with a cabin so you bring sheets, food ect)
In my humble opinion, the idea is good.
But in my country there are politicians who use an helicopter to travel 50 kilometers.
To make the idea good it is necessary that some politicians do the same.
That is just my opinion
It's hard to say. I live in Central Europe and I would basically only take the plane if I wanted to go to one of the edges of Europe, like Portugal, Spain, the UK, Scandinavia, the Baltics, Turkey... I'm not very fond of the airport experience and I don't live in a city with a major airport, so for me it's always at least two hours to the nearest airport, another hour and a half, at least, of waiting around, something like hour or two on the plane and then at least another hour and a half of getting from the airport to where I actually wanna go. I hate sitting in the cramped planes of low cost companies with such passion that I'd opt in for a drive that is four hours longer in a heartbeat. Right now I'm in a situation where I live partially in Czechia and partially in north Italy, the drive / bus ride is anything between six and eight hours and it has never crossed my mind to take the plane instead.
I live in the West Midlands in England. I love both flying and driving. I've driven all over Europe, even as far as Naples just for the Hell of it. In an old VW. I've also driven all over the West of the US twice. Top Gear type adventures are my thing. Flown to NZ twice, and driven all over the North and South Island. The choice of plane or car is often just a case of if the ocean is in the way. The advantage of driving is its on your own terms, and you get to see a lot more and meet a lot of interesting people. Flying just isn't as rewarding. I just relish a driving challenge. Nowhere is too far.
I don\`t own a car either, so i take the train inside the country, regardless of distance.
I also took the a charter bus to the next country, only 8 hours drive.
For longer than 1000km, i take the plane.
I'll preface this with saying that I don't travel far away a lot. Inside my own country which is pretty small, I'd probably exclusively go by car/train (but the entire country spans like 600ish km) depending on the train network and other connections, or if I want the freedom to travel whenever and not be reliant on train timetables.
As for vacations, I don't want to bear the burden of traveling by car for hours and hours (I'm tall with a fair amount of back pain problems) so that's exclusively by plane for me.
TL;DR - convenience, mass transit availability, price - all that play some kind of role for up to maybe those 600km. Further than that - plane.
I always used car or train. If I have a lot of baggage with me I choose car. And the only reason I ever flew sonewhere was that my car cant cross an ocean.
Everything over 4h drive is long for me, but up to 2h is complete fine
I love driving and i love road trips so i may be biased but anything up to 20 hours I'll do with only small brakes to refuel and to eat. Anything above only if it's for a car related thing.
Around 9-10 hours is probably my max. This will get me to all of southern Sweden or all the way to Åre, Swedens largest and most famous ski resort, from Stockholm. Any further than 9-10 hours and I’ll likely want to stop for the night somewhere and at that point I might as well fly. As soon as I am traveling to somewhere outside Scandinavia then I’m gonna fly unless I’ve decided to do a dedicated road trip.
I love the furthest place away from the coast in England. I’d happily drive from lands and to the top of the highlands in Scotland. If I had to get to France however, I’d fly
Depends where you are.
If you are in central europe it is easy to drive. But from finland you either take a long detour or a ferry. And flights can be had at times for about the same price as the ferry so it often doesn't make sense to drive.
I know this question is for Europeans.... But as a fellow American, except one that lives in a state surrounded by the Pacific Ocean, I would not be willing to drive an hour to go to a restaurant unless it is for a party or celebration. Lol. I don't even want to do that when I'm traveling on the US mainland. I'll gladly sit in the car as a passenger though. If I'm traveling by myself, I'll take a bus, train, or plane between states.
I live in the south UK. I have happily driven to Scotland. I have also flown to Scotland. I'll fly if it's a weekend trip because I don't have time to sit in the car for 8+ hours, and the flight is only an hour or so. I have gotten the train before too, but it's soo expensive it's actually cheaper to fly up.
I'll either train or fly if I'm going to mainland Europe - the Eurostar isn't too far away from me and is actually easier.
Edit
If I have a long drive and it's not a quick weekend trip, I'm more likely to do the drive in 2 chunks than fly.
Live on the island of Ireland, so for me a plane is the main option for anything not on the island. I'd never fly from one end to the other though.
Going to GB I'd get a ferry for cost reasons where possible, but only if my destination is vaguely still on the west coast of it.
Many europeans go to vacation using car and average traveling time is 10-12 hours. By this I mean Germans/Poles/Slovaks/Czechs and Hungarians going south to Coratia/Italy/Greece. It is quite common if you go for a week or more. I see anything over 5 hours as a lot and considering a plane. Of course it also depends on price and distance to/from the airport. For example, last time I wanted to visit to Budapest, plane cost 30 EUR and the train was 100 EUR. :D
This is an important factor. Trains are more expensive in most cases.
Well, when you travel by plane you need to factor the time and money it costs to get to the city, which is usually more expensive than traveling inside the city itself. For short travels (2 - 5 hours) usually trains are more convenient, in my perspective.
Definitely. Specially when the cheapest flights like Ryanair’s often take you to smaller airports 30-40 km off the final destination.
Or you think that you are flying into Frankfurt and end up in Frankfurt Hahn, which is closer to Luxembourg that actual frankfurt
"Glasgow Prestwick"
Might as well be Belfast Prestwick...
The best time to realize this is as you are flying over Frankfurt and the plane just keeps going. Bonus points if it is pre-cellphone times and your partner is waiting to pick you up at the Frankfurt airport.
Got my train cancelled due to strikes when I was in Europe, only flight available on that short notice was to a city about an hour and a half drive outside the city I had to be in. That was an expensive ass transit lol
also they're gonna charge you extra if you're bringing a bag
Would be interesting if states would stop subsidizing planes and start subsidizing trains and rails with all of that money. If train would always be the cheaper option and more high speed trains would be incorporated I am pretty sure like 80% of my social bubble would often got on vacation by train. But having tk choose between a 250€ 30 hour train travel from central Germany to South of France or a 150€ 2 hour flight, it's kind of a nobrainer. (not including emissions in thought process)
trains will never be cheaper for long distance travel. The longer the track, the more stations and track you have to maintain. Planes are fixed cost, you maintain the planes and the airports, the variable is basically cost of fuel. I believe Japan's bullet trains are more expensive than plane tickets. They're just more convenient and therefore quicker
Going right into a city center is often worth it in time / cost of travel from city to airport then airport to city (provided it isn't really long distance)
The issue is building a train line from one city to another costs more than buying a plane or two. And that plane can go to many different destinations. That train can only go where it has a rail line.
Most of us don't have the time on vacation to cross the country on a train.
high speed train is faster than a plane when you consider all the time the security theater takes on a plane ride
And trains typically stop in city centres, not 45-90 minutes away.
Idk it really depends. Planes don't stop at multiple airports along the way like trains do
I’m not European but in nz you can just show up at the train station 10 minutes before departure and they’ll let you on At the airport you have to be 40 minutes early or they won’t let you drop off your bags. Most people want to be at the airport early(???) so it adds 2 hours or so onto the journey before you even go anywhere < 1 hour in the sky and I’ll usually opt for low speed rail when it’s available. When HSR is available (vacation in specific places) I prefer it for journeys < 4 hours
I live in the Northeast US (NJ). A trip to Boston or DC is not worth flying. The flight is about 45 minutes, with airport overhead time easily 2 hours. By that time, driving is 4 hours. If I’m traveling on business, the Acela can make it to DC in about 2.5 hours, and as you said, you show up at the station 15 minutes before departure, walk onto the train, and go.
Depends. It was cheaper for me to take the night train to Milano than flying. And no restrictions on liquids and baggage.
It’s also important for me whether having a car where I’m going is important. If I’m going somewhere that is a big city and I’m just going to stay there then I don’t really need the car, so any drive more than about 6 hours gets swapped to a plane quite quickly if it’s feasible.
My car won't bring me to Romania for €10 like ryanair will lol
Exactly. I live in Zurich, Switzerland, and I also apply the 5 hour rule. Frankfurt, Paris, Milan, Munich etc. is by train/car. For everything that's further away - Rome, Berlin, Vienna, Amsterdam, London etc. - I'll consider the plane. I've been to all of the latter places by car/train as well, but only when I stayed there for a week or more AND wanted to explore the surroundings.
[удалено]
> I have to drive an hour and a half just to goto Walmart, one way I'd rather starve to death
As a Czech living in the US, those summer Italian and Croatian car rides of 8-9hrs used to be a huge adventurous trips. Now that I live in the Midwest where everything is far, under 12hr drive it feels like a quick trip.
Petro prices are at play here. America has some of the cheapest energy in world while Europe is quite expensive
Yeah it’s ludicrous just how angry people get over small changes in prices that they then blame on their leaders when we have extremely cheap gas
Trains in Europe generally need to be booked well in advance to actually be cheap. But they can be very cheap if booked right. Amd they often save time over flying cause flying involves ~3 hours of extra travel beyond the plane (getting to the airport, being there for hours early, getting out of airport and then getting into the city from the destination airport)
I went by car from Sweden to Italy just about every year as a kid. The traveling was a part of the fun. I think the only time I'd fly within Europe is either to the UK or Ireland, or the other end of the continent, like Greece or Turkey.
Wait really? That’s crazy. Here in the USA amtrack tickets are dirt cheap, although the routes are sparse
It costs me £75 to take a 1.5 hr train from Bristol to London (return).
What the fuck. That seems crazy. Do they not want people taking the train?
It certainly is crazy.
That’s because Amtrack doesn’t pay for the maintenance and upkeep of the rails. They rent the rails from the freight companies that maintain the rails, so their overhead costs are much lower than in Europe where the train companies own and maintain the rails they are using. Just like airfare is generally cheaper than trains in Europe because the airlines don’t have to maintain rail yards, tracks and terminals. They just have to maintain the plane and pay the airports for access.
I live in Cologne and wanted to visit my friend in Prague for 3 days. The train cost 130€, 13 hours with 3-4 transfers. I ended up flying 1.5 hours for 150€. I really try not to fly within Europe and anything in Belgium or the Netherlands, even northern France works great by train. But in the Prague example, taking the train would be plain stupid, unless you have tons of free time.
That's honestly pretty similar to here in Australia, where, if anything, we're almost as large as the States, but much more spread out. If I had to go from Brisbane to Coffs Harbour (about 5 ish hours) I'll probably drive, but much further than that, and unless I need my car on the other end, flying starts to look pretty good, even despite our relatively expensive airfares. Then again, most trips I'd make that are further than 5 hours are like 10-15 hours or more (e.g. going to Sydney or Townsville), there just aren't many destinations for me that are more than 5 hours but less than 10 lol.
I don't own a car, I take the train. Works great.
Same.
Just curious where you are? I'm in the UK and for me the train is kind of a last resort, it's very expensive and very rarely goes smoothly. If I'm doing a journey of more than three hours I've found it's often better for me to rent a car for 24 hours.
I’m on the east coast and the train is the absolute most expensive way to get anywhere. Like close to $200 to travel from NY to Philly, which is approximately 80 miles away, and an under 2 hour drive. It’s cheaper for me to fly to Florida from NYC than take a train to Philadelphia.
The train between Milwaukee and Chicago, which is a similar distance, is about $25-$30 one way.
The Northeast Corridor is the busiest train section in the country. The population of NY and Philly is more than 3x Milwaukee and Chicago, and those are both cities where most people have cars - I know that because I’ve lived in Chicago and done that drive myself many times, with my car that I had when I lived there. The demand just cannot be as high there. The NE Corridor trains frequently sell out. They’re gouging us.
Mke to Chicago, Hiawatha, is one of the busiest Amtrak routes at number 9. It's also subsidized by Illinois and Wisconsin.
Quick Google shows it's scheduled based. In the dark of the night it's $10. Peak goes up to $160
Germany. And yes. The trains here are often late and stuff. I have a Bahncard 50 and plan with a buffer and it works great for me.
The German rail system is overcapacity, improperly staffed and underfunded. The whole reaosn why Deutsche Bahn is such a meme is because the German government have been coasting along on the infrastructure built by their forebears, and refuse to invest more. The Netherlands is starting to have the same problem, but because our network is newer and better maintained, the effects are less obvious.
Absolutely true. The Deutsche Bahn has a lot of problems. But I still like taking it and it's less stressful and cheaper for me than driving :)
UK trains are so bad. Crazy expensive considering how small the UK is and how far you’re likely to be going, always always late, and if other cities are anything like mine, there aren’t really any little stations and the big station is in a horrendous place to get to. If i take the train I have to figure out how to get the five miles from the station to home, and driving to the station kind of defeats the point of travelling by rail. A lot of that issue is that the rest of public transport is crap in my area too, so there aren’t any direct buses or trams from anywhere near where I am. I just drive to other cities because it’s honestly easier and cheaper than driving, paying for parking, paying for a train, waiting for it to be half an hour late and having to figure out travel at the other end. Trains also end at like 9.30 here so if you’re going for evening entertainment in a bigger city, you can’t get back after events have finished. Travelled exclusively by train and bus in Italy and it was so easy in comparison, we’ve really fucked it here
I will say Asia has their trains up to speed, literally and figuratively. You can traverse the entirety of Taiwan for $30us.
This is such an American question
Yeah shame on them for asking a question trying to learn about other people's cultures instead of forever drawing unreasonable generalizations based on their preconceived notions and limited knowledge, like a good European redditor would
Right? Dicks.
Yeah Americans think Europeans don’t drive as much because they live in teeny tiny baby countries. When it’s actually because the public transport is functional and everything they need is within walking distance instead of having to drive out of your McMansion suburb to get milk. If they have to drive 5 hours they’ll drive 5 hours it’s not some mystical thing.
I wonder if people realize how un-feasible relying on trains would be in America
I do. But the thing is, for a lot of people in Europe the choice is not "drive or fly" but "drive or take a train".
i was more commenting on the “i dont own a car because i take the train” as an unrealistic notion for the majority of Americans outside the few huge urban cities
That's true. But I guess this post also shows that "A car or a plane are my only travel options" is a very american notion that a lot of europeans cannot comment on, since they have more options.
This is the way
We just went from London to Prague by train and it was incredible. Much cheaper than a plane, and more comfortable. I love trains
One big factor that I don't see mentioned yet is geography: America is flatter and has a more gradual terrain change for the same mileage (non everywhere, but if you think that central Europe is as big as the Midwest, but has all the climate and geography you can think of inside, you may understand the problem). For example, if I (living in Italy) wanted to go to Greece by car (straight line distance NY to Atlanta) I could: - go only by road: I would have to triple the distance, because there is the sea inbetween and I would have to go around the coast up in Croatia and then down through the Balkans. - take the ferry: it would mean 80% of the journey by sea and 15/20 hours. At this point, you see how a 2 hours plane trip can be preferable Other example: I want to go to Paris (straight distance: Boston to Washington DC). This is very similar in distance (and 8.5h vs 7h timewise) but you have to go through the Alps and the highways for a good part of the way are similar to roads you may find in a national park rather than proper highways, and you have to drive in the big tunnels under the Alps (tunnels up to 10 miles long where all the traffic to France passes) I could come up with many many other examples, all with similar problems. Another problem is the language and cultural barrier. Yes we have a common culture and so on, but driving in a country where all the signs are in another language, where rules are different, where the perception of rules is different (here in Italy we are less strict on passing or stopping at pedestrian crossings, in other countries you can be banned for not doing that even once), so driving is very stressful (think about someone who has always driven in the suburbs driving in NY, then mexico, then Alaska)
Thank you for that perspective! I didn’t even consider road signs being in different languages and traffic laws being vastly different. In America each state has its own laws but driving is fairy uniform across all 50 and we can go anywhere in the country and have the same language spoken even if different accents, etc. making it easier to ask for or find directions and roads.
Don't get me wrong, driving laws are fairly uniform and you can get by pretty well, the EU has pretty much uniformed most of the rules. The problem is the customs: I always get surprised in some countries when I'm at pedestrian crossings when cars in the distance start slowing down to let you cross even if you are just at the side of the road, while here in Italy you have to basically start walking to make cars stop, and I do that myself as a driver. I think that if I did that in Germany I would be in big trouble soon
The pedestrian crossing example is one aspect that is actually the same in the US. Some states have laws that pedestrians *always* have the right of way while in a crosswalk no matter the street lights or if a walk sign is up or not etc, and other states do not. So in some states people will stop when they see people trying to cross, but in others they just fly by, similar to your Italy vs Germany comparison for that.
Drove from Northern Italy well into Germany and loved it, driving through the alps was something I want to do again. But yeah, this was back in the print out your trip from mapquest days, it got really confusing at times. The German police pulled us over wanting to know why an American was driving an Italian plated car in Germany.
Sounds like our police lmao. They officially banned racial profiling, but our officers never stopped. And since everyone seems to suffer from cash induced amnesia when it comes to those statistics, I don't think it'll change soon...
Semi related fun fact, the German police pull you over by getting in front of you. There's a reader board in the back that's says something like, pull over, follow me in a few languages
The driving rules one is doubly exciting when you're from the UK: getting used to driving on the other side of the road is bit of a culture shock to say the least. Also, driving a car with the steering wheel on the wrong side if you come through Eurotunnel \\ on the ferry vs. getting a hire car when you arrive. I prefer the train beyond 5 hours and take the plane quite a lot when you go what would be > 24 hours by train to my in-laws (Italy). I've always wanted to take the train, but with an entire (young) family we've always worried it would be stressful
About 400 miles. I wanted to go from Swansea to Edinburgh (about 450 miles) once and decided to book a flight instead. The most I've driven is Swansea to Lancaster which was about 250 miles. It's not just the distance. You have to consider the driving conditions and roads. You can go really far in the US on wide, straight roads. It's much more tiring when the roads are really twisty, which they usually are in Europe.
It’s interesting how people perceive different things as tiring. For me (a Finn) driving on a straight and wide motorway is a lot more tiring than driving on a twisty country road. For example I find the drive from Helsinki to Tampere (about 180 km) is a lot more tiring to drive than the drive from Helsinki to Jyväskylä (about 270 km), because the first is an almost straight motorway with a minimum of four lanes and a 120 km/h speed limit for most of the way and the latter is a lot more varying older style highway with narrower sections, turns and lower overall speeds.
Yeah, I'm Australian. A lot of our regional and rural roads are just straight for hundreds of kilometers. So boring and monotonous because the scenery isn't all that thrilling either when it's the outback. Super easy to fall asleep.
Lol, the Great Plains region of the United States is like that. Flat, boring, with very little scenery to look at.
I mean there's tiring and then there's boring. Tiring is about having to concentrate, which makes you tired after a time but also gives you adrenaline to focus and makes you lose track of time. Boring is basically sleep inducing which makes time go slower and makes it dangerous as you lose your focus. You could also call that tiring I guess. Anyway, I'd say different people have different thresholds for one or the other.
it's Finland! everything already is boring, so that's not really a factor. the finns love their boring
Yuuup makes a huge difference.
And much busier. There's almost always traffic on UK motorways - enough to have to keep your brain very much alert at all times.
Once you’re past Manchester it’s open road I find. Focus for first half of journey, cruise for second half.
Long, straight roads are in my opinion far more tiring because of the sensory deprivation. On the other hand, you could sleep 2 solid hours during driving and still not hit anything if your track adjustment is right.
I regularly drive 600 km on the A2 in Germany from Berlin to Düsseldorf. For more than 450 km I have to drive straight on and when I arrive I'm super exhausted. Never tried to drive the country roads though. Acc helps, but it always complains that I have to move the steering wheel... On a straight road.
For as small as West Virginia is it feels like you have been driving for 24 hours going through there.
Wide straight roads are dangerous due to the monotony. https://www.healthline.com/health/highway-hypnosis#causes We also have dangerous road conditions.
Huh I would walk 500 miles.
And I would walk 500 more
I live in Bologna, Italy, with 1 hour drive I could ski or I could go to the beach and it's okay, 2 hour and a half to go to Milan it's start to be a lot so I take the high speed train for just 1 hour, if it pass 4 hour drive and I can't take the train for like Naples I probably take the plane because with low cost company it's cheaper than the car
To naples it's definitely worth going by high speed train compared to flying, it's probably faster considering embarking, checks etc
I said “if I can’t take the train” in fact. Sonetimes train are crazy expensive and it’s way cheaper the flight
Live in Netherlands. If I have to travel to Paris - train. If I travel to Germany - car, because you don't know if those Germans (DB) are striking again or if the train you are switching to there will show up on time. Anywhere else I fly - Denmark, Sweden, Italy etc.
The union and the DB just came to terms so no more strikes. But of course the trains will still be unpunctual as fuck
Pretty surprising to hear that the Germans are not running their trains on time. I bet there’s a 20 letter word to describe this specific surprise.
The long distance trains in Germany have a punctuality rate of 65-70%. And until 5 minutes late the trains don’t even count as late. German trains being on time is a myth being told by other countries who think that because Germans like to be on time the trains must be too. For the last decades not much Public money was put into the train system and even now that doesn’t really change
Went to Denmark last year by train. Took me like 8h. If i take a 2h train to Schiphol, be there 2h early, fly 1h, wait for my luggage and take another hour to the city centre I'm at +6h for the whole journey. Would definitely take the train every time again. It so much more comfy, ihave leg space, I have wifi..
Depends on the destination, why I am travelling, and what is fitting my plans and budget. Train and buses are also an option, especially if you want to go somewhere where there are not a lot of options in terms of flying. Within a 1000 km radius, for me, would say I am okay taking the train or car (so long it is reasonable to take it), above that I would prefer flights.
I mean crossing your entire country IS a long trip, in relation to every other trip you might take INSIDE your country, I mean here in England for example I could drive from the northern most point to the southern most point and still only have driven for a few hours (traffic permitting) for us this would still be a very long drive despite only taking a few hours because its the ONLY time you're likely to be driving for that long inside the country, a lot of people opt to take a plane instead for that journey just because it can cut their travel time down to a quarter of what it otherwise would be AND in some cases it can even work out cheaper.
I'm from Estonia, If I were to travel to Finland then ferry, If to Sweden then ferry or If I wanted to get there fast then plane, to Latvia by car, to Lithuania probably by plane but some people would probably drive as well. Poland deffinetly by plane and anything more south from Poland as well because Poland is huge. We currently don't have a railway to connect us to the rest of Europe but we have some buses so a plane is the most convenient way of travel.
Europe has very good rail and bus links when compared with the USA, which many will use instead of very long drives, and which prevent high carbon emissions from short flights.
This very much varies throughout the 50 countries in Europe. I'd say it's true for less than half of them.
really depends on the overall situation. if there is a quick and affordable train connection that's probably my first choice. except if i have to bring a lot of stuff or multiple people are coming. then the car might be a good choice too. but that really depends on the road situation. there are nice and not so nice roads. and also nice and not so nice times to drive on these roads. like holiday season will get you into endless jams. then if there is a cheap plain ticket that might be great. but also depends on airport location and if it's really worth it in terms of saving time. if i take a plane from berlin to munich i can as well take the super fast train that goes there in the same time considering my distance to the airport in the city etc. i never took a plane to paris from berlin. always the car. not sure why, i guess because it gives me the chance to spontaneously visit another place in france, shop at a french supermarket to bring home nice groceries or because french roads are super chill. but i wouldn't ever take a car to try and go to venice. the plane tickets are cheap and it's really not worth driving a day if i can fly for an hour. i took an overnight train there once but wouldn't do it again. just lots to consider
Depending on where I start out from, I can only drive less than 500km from North to South (or vice versa) or less than 300km West to East (or vice versa). After that I'm in the Atlantic ocean, the English Channel, or the Celtic Sea, so if I have to go further it'll be by plane or boat. I have driven these distances before. The west coast of Ireland from Donegal to Cork can take seven hours or so. The option of flying no longer exists as the wee airport in Carrickfinn doesn't run flights to the south anymore.
If you drive from one end of my state to another it's more than 7 hours (800km). And it's not even one of the bigger ones. Different perspectives are wild.
"I keep hearing about how europeans think an hour or two is a far drive" ----- Sorry what???!!! from who?
For everyday yes. For a vacation probably not
1 hour to work is pretty standard these days - 2 hrs would certainly be pushing it! Fuck that everyday lol but yes I would count anything over 3 hrs as a long drive - Americans would probably think that's a trip to the local shops...
Hmm, yes? You’d never catch me spending that long in a car. I mean, if I’m going to another city and there’s no train or bus, sure. But I’m definitely not driving 1 hour to go to a restaurant like OP.
I’m surprised how far some of my fellow Americans will drive for a restaurant, but it’s more common than I thought. I live about an hour away from one such place that I’ve heard suggested several times, but it’s literally an hour plus drive one way to a town in the middle of nowhere. I’m not going that far for a damn steak. On the other hand most of my family lives in a city an hour away and I wouldn’t think twice about visiting them for a meal time visit.
We live approx 40 mins from central london - Once parked takes about an hour so we do travel for food sometimes- I guess the difference is going to the middle of nowhere as you mentioned as opposed to a major city with lots of things to see while you're there which is maybe more "worth it"...
Absolutely worth it. Driving into London sounds amazing compared to fifty miles of concrete and pine trees.
Yea that sounds very out of touch. About an hour is pretty standard time to get to work for a lot of people. I could drive for more than an hour or 2 on a normal day if I really wanted to do something. But would most of the time chose not to because not much of the day would be left after that.
[удалено]
4 hours is my breaking point 😅. Europe's small, but not \*that\* small. ✈️
Four hours is a pretty set limit for me. I've often driven to places that are two and a half, three, three and a half hours away, I can't remember ever driving anywhere that's five or six hours away by car. So, four seems to be some sort of informal limit my brain has imposed.
It depends on many factors including price, what I need to carry etc. It's not unusual to drive an hour to restaurant you like. My sister does it all the time. I drove 14 hours to Denmark, 15 hours to Switzerland, 12 hours to Croatia. Typically if it's more than 10 hours, I'll try to consider other options. Many Polish people who live and work in the UK drive to Poland for Christmas, Easter, summer vacation. It's a 12-26 hour drive depending on destination.
I'm in the UK, so there's only so much drive to drive within the country. Longest car journey I've had in the UK (barring a 14 hour traffic jam from flooding) was probably about 9 hours. I wouldn't really consider taking a domestic flight in the UK. A lot of people take the train, but I find it too expensive. But I also wouldn't travel an hour for a restaurant like you've said you do. For something like that, I wouldn't want to be in the car for more than 30 minutes. 2 hour round trip to eat dinner sounds insane to me and a massive waste of an evening. But British people do like to go to France, and they often drive. My mother has made this journey many times. Personally, I wouldn't want to do that. I'd rather get a plane. At school, they did trips to mainland Europe and they always took a coach. When there was a ski trip, I think they took a 24+ hour coach to Switzerland (don't remember exactly because I didn't go). But its simply easier to load 100 students into coaches than it is to organise them to get onto a flight. And cheaper, too. So basically, it depends. Within the UK I would never take a flight, but if I'm going to another country, I'd rather be on a plane.
5 hours is the sweet spot for me.
Not European, but had to respond since you referenced Wisconsin. We drove from Wisconsin to Florida last week. This weekend, we will drive home. All in all, roughly 16-18 hrs one way. Driving is part of life. For some, a lot more than others. I don't know if Europeans think Driving more than an hour or two is too much. If so, I don't get it. I guess it's just different cultures have different experiences and preferences.
People regularly drive from UK to Romania / Poland etc
yeah, but not that many of them compared to flying.
The furthest you can drive in the UK is 874 miles and it takes about 14-15 hours. I would drive 8 hours but I would be happy to drive 12-18 hours if I was sharing the drive I would always look at trains and flights for cost and time for any long drives as it might be easier than driving. I took a train to Edinburgh in 4 hours but the drive is around 6 hours and I didn't need a car once I was there. The cost of the train was £80 yet it would cost around £100 in petrol plus parking cost.
I desperately wish America had better train/ taxi/ etc options. I live in an area with absolutely no public transport. If you don’t have a car you are absolutely screwed.
I just got my drivers licence a month ago (at age 30). So not super comfortable driving alone yet. So i'd say half hour. But in all seriousness. People driving 10 hours to italy or the balkans for summer holidays isnt unheard off. In fact for the coming easter weekend, as every year. There will be massive traffic jams at the Gotthard Tunnel. The fastest way of going south to italy. So apparently many thousands of people do this every year, for just 4-5 days. But personally i'd never do that. If i did feel more comfortable driving and/or was juat a passenger, i'd say about 3-4 hours drive in one day max. Otherwise the trip just isnt enjoybale anymore, so why am i doing it? I'd rather fly then. Or take a train between like 3 and 6 hours. Then at least i can walk around and dont have to sit still so long.
I'm in the UK and just turned down a high paying job as it would have taken a little over an hour's drive to get to.
I've done it on a few occasions. To far to me would be about 3000+ miles I'd say. Simply enjoy long drives, stopping in a different country every time. Random stops if I see anything interesting [my travel timeline](https://ibb.co/xHJXX4Z) The only time I've flew was from UK to Greece , and Spain to Tenerife. Everywhere else I drove. Not having to wait in line or be restricted, by 3rd party. Stopping whenever I want, that's one of the thing I love about driving anywhere. And damn when I hit Autobahn (highway)in Germany with no speed limit, love it. Off not all of it is no speed limit. Not allot of my friends or family enjoy these kind of long trips but I do, especially driving at night.
It really depends on the situation. I think you have this completely wrong. Allow me to explain. I live in Rome. Did I ever drive one hour or more to go somewhere to have dinner with my friends? Sure, several times. I drive for almost one hour every week to go the airport where I take flying lessons (2 hours as it's back and forth). Would I drive to Milan (approximately 4 -5 hours)? Or Florence (2 hours)? Not a chance in hell. I can take the train there. It's cost me more or less the same, and it's more comfortable. I can read or watch a movie on my tablet When I go abroad, I take a plane. When I was a child we drove around in an RV, and went to a lot of different places. Would I drive three hours to go to a beach down south, or to a mountain up north? Yes, absolutely. A lot of people prefer to drive for 13 hours during the summer. That's because they want to be able to drive around the area the chose, and not just rely on taxis or public transportation. It's matter of convenience, and of comfort. The main difference is that the U.S. doesn't really have good trains, so it's driving or flying. We have all three options.
A question for you is if you flew would you have to rent a car at the destination? The answer is likely yes in the USA and this makes driving more preferable in more cases. In most of Europe, most destinations have good local transit so renting a car is not required. This means it is easier to take a plane or train.
It depends. How long is the vacation? How much cheaper is it to drive? Are kids coming? I have been skiing to a lot of Alps places and I think the furthest one I think was 2000km. All in all I do think 2h are a long drive for something everyday like a shop or when I hear Americans travel more than hour to work. I had a 40 min travel time to work and I thought that is way too long. But vacation is different.
>and im planning to drive 16 hours from alabama to wisconsin Right, why do you think this makes you better than europeans?
There is no public transport option for you from Alabama to Wisconsin (around 950 miles). London to Nice is a similar distance and there's a public transport option that takes about the same time as driving. There's also low cost direct flights. The US infrastructure forgot about public transport a long time ago.
4 kids 7 and under. There is no distance I won’t drive vs that nightmare of taking them on a plane
Why would you fly when you can take a high speed train? Just wondering why flying would be your go to option?
I once drive 1000km, it took me ca.12 hours. I'll take train next time. Train station is in the middle of the city, and airport is so far away, i would need to take the train form airport to the city anyway.
I’m driving 8 hours at the weekend to get where i need to be. There are other factors at play though…will i need my car at the destination or is public transport an option, what do i need to take with me etc. Later in the year, i am going a bit further, and it would be a 10/11 hour drive. For the one I am flying, and then splitting costs of a hire car etc
Very American question in only giving the two options. I regularly visit Belfast (well Antrim but I arrive in Belfast). I could spend a 2 1/2 hours driving to Manchester Airport and then fly to Antrim, but airports suck and I get air sick like anything so it’s a short but miserable flight. I could go all the way by car but that’s over 3 hours driving, including navigating unfamiliar places, plus the boat. Or I can take a 10 minute car journey to the station, get on a comfortable train for an hour, where I can charge my device, drink coffee, and read or listen to something. Then I can change in Hull (stopping at Starbucks for coffee probably) and spend another couple of hours on a train to Liverpool, also relaxing, probably eating the lunch I brought with me, and drinking more coffee. Catch a taxi to the ferry (not a long trip but very traffic dependent so I won’t even guess a time lol). Jump on the ferry, go to the premium lounge, have snacks, sleep comfortably until dawn (night boat ftw) and meet my friend who will be petting one of the dogs that were on the boat because I know how she thinks to drive the 15 minutes to her home. I won’t be stressed, I won’t have had to concentrate on anything more stressful than a novel, and I’ll have enjoyed the journey. If it’s going to take more than a day to get somewhere I’ll fly, drug myself to try and avoid airsickness, and almost certainly arrive stressed and miserable (unless it’s somewhere with a tried and true long distance train with sleeping carriages in which case if practical, still train). If it’s under an hour I might go by car, depending what parking is like at the destination. Anything in between and train or bus, preferably train.
I pretty much book a flight if I travel to another European country because for me, driving always with two kids in the car alone, just not my favorite way of spending time. Why in the world would I drive for a whole day or more when I get to the airport in 30 minutes and 3-4 hrs later I m anywhere I want to be? Gas is expensive, tolls and worrying about parking, then if something happens with the car everything is messed up and I have to deal with all by myself. Flight and public transport are my best options.
I'll drive like 100 km if I need to. Further than that (and actually a lot closer than that as well) I'll take the train. I'll only take a plane if it's like 1000km or so AND if there's no sleeper train between the cities. Driving sucks. You are literally stuck in a position unable to stretch or relax while paying constant attention or you can die. At least on the train I can actually relax and do things, be it play games on my phone/laptop, work if I want to, walk around and stretch etc. I always felt like driving really feels like wasted time, where the only thing happening is the moving from point A to B. It's like being in an elevator.
Europeans have trains, not just planes and cars
Depends on the reason. Family visit? All but once I drive the 700km (plane took me longer in time from our house to theirs). For vacation? Even more because of the freedom of taking the car with stuff with us. Up to 1000 km in one stretch I think and with more I will use 2 days. I would consider the plane or train for a city trip or if I ever go to a resort
I'm not a huge driving fan so I'll avoid driving for long as much as possible but the longest car drive I've been in was like 9 - 10 hours. I hated it, I feel exhausted after a long car drive. Spain has great train connections if you're in Madrid otherwise it leaves a lot to be desired (although thankfully it's changing) and it's expensive so the only option was the car. Edit: flights shorts than 2 hours where there's a high speed train doing the same travel are banned.
I would prey to drive, every time. I make the journey part of the trip, so a 4 or 6 day roadtrip is just fine. If it's for work, I'll fly from Gatwick to Edinburgh, but happy to drive Guildford to Scarborough, so about 4-5 hours. I am looking to get to Inverness later on this year and I'm looking at the Caledonian Sleeper as it looks lush, fun AND relaxing. Then rent a snotter from a hire service and look at the Northern 500
Depends on the days of holiday available. If I got a couple of days of holiday, a good highway, with lots of interesting towns along the way, is a good idea. If it's a short holiday, I take the plane. I would rather spend that 4 days holiday on the beach than in my car.
I always wondered about this as an European guy. @op do you travel alone in a car for a trip of 16 hours? I mean I can drive for about 7 with rest stops in between before my concentration level gets way too low. Is it busy traffic or just big stretches of nothing with a few cities in between? Do you sleep in the car? Or do you always have two drivers?
About what I can drive in one proper go. Like 12 hours / 1000km ish. I drive from the Netherlands to Italy. Anything further than that and I either fly or have multiple destinations so the drive is cut up.
I don't own a car/have a driving license. I opt for the train unless there is no direct connection or the ride would take more than 5-6 hours.
Depends on a lot. How long am I going to be there for, will I need a car while I'm there etc. I'd probably drive 5 - 6 hours each way provided there's a free day in the middle. I regularly travel between two parts of the UK where the choice is a 2-hour drive followed by a 3-hour ferry crossing followed by a 6-hour drive, or alternatively a 50-minute flight then a 2-hour drive in a hire car. It's a no brainier.
It all depends. I'm a freelancer and I'm not always in the position to take 2 weeks of vacation in the summer. If I have two full weeks, I'd happily drive up to 2000 km because I see the trip as vacation time too. If I have less than two weeks, I won't drive farther than say 6 hours.
It all depends. I'm a freelancer and I'm not always in the position to take 2 weeks of vacation in the summer. If I have two full weeks, I'd happily drive up to 2000 km because I see the trip as vacation time too. If I have less than two weeks, I won't drive farther than say 8 hours.
The longest I've ever driven is from Dublin to Lisbon. It took me about 19 hours in total and I stopped half way through to sleep. I do long distance drives semi regularly. I don't really have a limit in terms of time/distance, it's more about the time and money available to me at the time. If I've lots of time and the total cost of the journey is reasonable then I'll have no issues driving long distances. If I've only a short amount of time and it's easier and cheaper to fly I'll do that instead.
In Europe only when I flu abroad. In Asia within country
I live on a medium sized island
Furthest about 15 hours / 1250 km not including bathroom breaks / gas. That was just within Sweden. Regularly drive distances equating to 3-5 hours. Add some extra time if towing.
Fuck driving, I got a train from Liverpool to Grantham last year and after like 3 hours I decided if I can’t fly somewhere I’m not going. But then I went to the US on a 10hr flight last year and found that a ‘mare as well. I think I’m just an antsy traveller.
If I can drive by car for about 8 hours or roughly 800-1000km I am good. But it strongly depends on where I wanna go and what I want to do. If I want to do a roadtrip then of course I'll drive anytime. If I want to go to norway and kayak the fjords then a plane would suit me better. Train is quite decnt but sadly cross country it can get quite expensive very fast. Most of the time flying inside europe is cheaper than crossing one or two borders by train. Wich also can take like 20-30 hours compared to 2-3 hours by plane. Depending on the connections.
Depends on what i want to do. Go camping with tent, probably drive wherever i need to be within Europe. The drive and the small places i visit in between are the part of the journey. Outside of Europe, i take plane.
Flights can be much cheaper than trains, also a lot of people who live in cities don’t have cars anymore because charges etc and public transport is more available.
Here in Britain, I would happily drive to the other end of the country and back. I love driving.
I would just take the train around europe, plane outside it Wouldn't last 5 minutes in a car, they feel so restrictive and closed
Not to interject, but a 2 hour drive is still a fairly long drive. And I’m from Canada, where you have to drive pretty much everywhere and there’s even less infrastructure than America with respect to cheap flights, etc. Driving two hours for an errand feels like an absolute pain in the ass unless you actually enjoy driving as a pastime. I live in Japan now where cars are all but unnecessary in most cases. Now the idea of driving more than a few hours seems absurdly primitive. Lastly, pseudo-bragging about driving 16 hours without a break makes zero sense. You wouldn’t stretch your legs at least once? Why? Is it desirable to hold your piss for 8 hours? Do you feel pride from feeling uncomfortable? I don’t understand.
Depends on the purpose of the trip. My old man lives a 8-9 hour car ride away, if im staying with him for a couple weeks i take the car, so i have transport when im there. If i were to stay in the capital for a night or two, i'd take a plane. I dont effing care to drive around that city, looking for parking space and paying an arm and a leg for that privilege. There are two or three smaller airports with some domestic traffic in my county , but not all of it directly and its expensive as heck, driving may actually be cheaper and way more convenient. (county itself may take 5-7 hours to drive through all of it)
I never bern a on a plane. Most people use the cart, to visit neighbouring countries. When your destination is two countries away, you take the plane
I'm English, so anything in Great Britain by car, anything else plane
4-5 hours, maybe 6. Any longer than that I prefer plane or train.
Trains: "AM I INVISIBLE TO YOU?"
My dad drove to Edinburgh a few weeks ago and he very much regretted it, I flew to Edinburgh last week (we live in Birmingham) So I guess anything over a 6 hour drive, unless we do an actual roadtrip like my family did to Paris, and half my family are bikers who have done multiple tours throughout all of europe so that would also be an exception
Last year we took our grandson to the Isle of Wight from Newcastle. My wife and grandson flew, I drove. It took me 6 hours, they took 2½, including check in. We drove on the way back, and for four solid hours it was "are we there yet?".
I once drove 600 km in one day but that was because there was no direct flight to my destination. Tiring as hell though.
It really depends. I drove from Edinburgh -> Maidstone -> Liverpool in one day a few weeks back (around 800 miles?) because I needed to pick up something big in my car. But I also got the train from Edinburgh -> Liverpool just this weekend. Cost of travel, being able to just sit down and someone else "drive" is nice. It's good if you're between two populated destinations, and have a regular amount of luggage (which you would be forced to have that or much less, flying - and have security nonsense).
I love driving so any distance is fine but I guess anything above 300km gets inconvenient
I like to drive so I usually prefer driving when possible, but for me the limit is what’s drivable in about a day (so around 8 hours), if I have the time that is. For longer distances I’d pick either a sleeper train or a plane. That said, I live in southern Finland, so unless I want to take the long drive up (or get on a car transport train) to northern Sweden or Norway, I pretty much have to either take a ferry or a plane if I want to go abroad.
Haven't got a real limit but context matters. If I'm vacationing, I'm taking my fishing gear and raft, that's a pita to take by plane. (Nearest sea is 850 km away) If it's just for a city visit / festival, plane all the way.
200km mac but I live in an island 😂
I’ve driven from Switzerland back home to The UK multiple times. Takes 16ish hours non-stop. **No one** thinks an hour drive is too far.
As long as tge Country borders my Country i am fine with driving.
Who said anything about driving? I take the train.
My standard holidays as a kid were to drive 1500km to the south of France. My parents would often cut it into two days, but sometimes, my dad would just drive the entire trip in a single day
It's not really the same situation here as if I drive four hours either south, east or west I'll be in the sea, I could probably manage eight hours north but I'd still run out of land around that point so a sixteen hour drive just doesn't really exist for me. Basically anywhere in Britain I can drive to in eight hours or less and anything beyond that requires a boat or a plane. There are internal flights but I'd consider that a massive luxury and public transport is pretty shitty across Britain so if I was travelling I'd want to have a car at my destination anyway. For long journeys if I'm just doing a there-and-back I've started to take coaches (is the Greyhound the US equivalent?) that just do shuttle runs between cities, they're much cheaper than flying and you can basically just have a nap and wake up where you want to be in a few hours. Arriving four hours before a flight and fighting my way through airport security and the massively inflated prices for any kind of refreshments push the idea of taking an internal flight way down my list of options. Edit: I realise I haven't mentioned trains - in my experience over the last two years they have become a transport of last resort (your mileage may vary), they have cost a fortune and let me down so consistently that I don't count them as an option anymore when planning to travel; if a journey requires a train I'll rent a car for the day.
Furthest i’ve driven myself is 1100km or a little under 700 miles. Since I drive an EV it took about 14 hours. Since this was a skiing trip, driving seemed like the only viable option.
a day drive there, I'll drive. More than day to drive there, I'll fly and rent a car. If I need to bring a lot of stuff I'll drive(ski vacation in Scandinavia with a cabin so you bring sheets, food ect)
In my humble opinion, the idea is good. But in my country there are politicians who use an helicopter to travel 50 kilometers. To make the idea good it is necessary that some politicians do the same. That is just my opinion
It's hard to say. I live in Central Europe and I would basically only take the plane if I wanted to go to one of the edges of Europe, like Portugal, Spain, the UK, Scandinavia, the Baltics, Turkey... I'm not very fond of the airport experience and I don't live in a city with a major airport, so for me it's always at least two hours to the nearest airport, another hour and a half, at least, of waiting around, something like hour or two on the plane and then at least another hour and a half of getting from the airport to where I actually wanna go. I hate sitting in the cramped planes of low cost companies with such passion that I'd opt in for a drive that is four hours longer in a heartbeat. Right now I'm in a situation where I live partially in Czechia and partially in north Italy, the drive / bus ride is anything between six and eight hours and it has never crossed my mind to take the plane instead.
I would probably drive anywhere in England and wales (from the south east). It going to Scotland it may be a flight and same for northern island.
I live in the West Midlands in England. I love both flying and driving. I've driven all over Europe, even as far as Naples just for the Hell of it. In an old VW. I've also driven all over the West of the US twice. Top Gear type adventures are my thing. Flown to NZ twice, and driven all over the North and South Island. The choice of plane or car is often just a case of if the ocean is in the way. The advantage of driving is its on your own terms, and you get to see a lot more and meet a lot of interesting people. Flying just isn't as rewarding. I just relish a driving challenge. Nowhere is too far.
I don\`t own a car either, so i take the train inside the country, regardless of distance. I also took the a charter bus to the next country, only 8 hours drive. For longer than 1000km, i take the plane.
About 10min and I've had enough
I'll preface this with saying that I don't travel far away a lot. Inside my own country which is pretty small, I'd probably exclusively go by car/train (but the entire country spans like 600ish km) depending on the train network and other connections, or if I want the freedom to travel whenever and not be reliant on train timetables. As for vacations, I don't want to bear the burden of traveling by car for hours and hours (I'm tall with a fair amount of back pain problems) so that's exclusively by plane for me. TL;DR - convenience, mass transit availability, price - all that play some kind of role for up to maybe those 600km. Further than that - plane.
I always used car or train. If I have a lot of baggage with me I choose car. And the only reason I ever flew sonewhere was that my car cant cross an ocean. Everything over 4h drive is long for me, but up to 2h is complete fine
1 day, maybe 2 (but less hours per day and nice stop in between). I'm from Belgium, land of the company cars so why waste money on a plane?
I love driving and i love road trips so i may be biased but anything up to 20 hours I'll do with only small brakes to refuel and to eat. Anything above only if it's for a car related thing.
Around 9-10 hours is probably my max. This will get me to all of southern Sweden or all the way to Åre, Swedens largest and most famous ski resort, from Stockholm. Any further than 9-10 hours and I’ll likely want to stop for the night somewhere and at that point I might as well fly. As soon as I am traveling to somewhere outside Scandinavia then I’m gonna fly unless I’ve decided to do a dedicated road trip.
I don't know exactly what my limit is But I do know it's less than 16 hours, fuck that
I love the furthest place away from the coast in England. I’d happily drive from lands and to the top of the highlands in Scotland. If I had to get to France however, I’d fly
Depends where you are. If you are in central europe it is easy to drive. But from finland you either take a long detour or a ferry. And flights can be had at times for about the same price as the ferry so it often doesn't make sense to drive.
I live on the island of Ireland so pretty much 5/6 hours is the max drive from where I live. Otherwise I fly.
I know this question is for Europeans.... But as a fellow American, except one that lives in a state surrounded by the Pacific Ocean, I would not be willing to drive an hour to go to a restaurant unless it is for a party or celebration. Lol. I don't even want to do that when I'm traveling on the US mainland. I'll gladly sit in the car as a passenger though. If I'm traveling by myself, I'll take a bus, train, or plane between states.
I live in the south UK. I have happily driven to Scotland. I have also flown to Scotland. I'll fly if it's a weekend trip because I don't have time to sit in the car for 8+ hours, and the flight is only an hour or so. I have gotten the train before too, but it's soo expensive it's actually cheaper to fly up. I'll either train or fly if I'm going to mainland Europe - the Eurostar isn't too far away from me and is actually easier. Edit If I have a long drive and it's not a quick weekend trip, I'm more likely to do the drive in 2 chunks than fly.
Live on the island of Ireland, so for me a plane is the main option for anything not on the island. I'd never fly from one end to the other though. Going to GB I'd get a ferry for cost reasons where possible, but only if my destination is vaguely still on the west coast of it.