r/travel • u/Driewieler123 • 19d ago
Trip to west coast USA
Currently planning a trip to the west coast of the USA for our honeymoon in august this year. There’s so much (positive) information online and on reddit for that area that we have difficulties deciding. Also, we have never planned such trip before, so hoping to get some advice and insights here!
As we have around 10 full days, we’d like to visit some cities and national parks and travel by car between the sights.
For now we mainly consider LA, SF, SD trip with Yosemite or Seattle, Portland and Vancouver with national parks around there. Or perhaps a combination of both, Seattle to SF.
What’d you recommend?
8
u/Traveler_Arik 19d ago
You are in for a real treat :) I live in LA (so somewhat biased) and have visited most of the west coast area with the exception of Vancouver.
Absolute cannot, do not miss Yosemite. It is unreal.
If you want to try out van life look up indie campers. I've rented from them a few times and really enjoy their vans.
As others mentioned this is a lot of ground to cover in 10 days.
If you were just doing california my recommendation would be
- Fly into SF
- 2 days SF
- Drive over to Yosemite for 2 days
- Back to the coast and drive down over a day or two, stopping and enjoying the little towns
- 2 days in LA
- 2 days in San Diego, specifically the little beach towns in north san Diego
- back to LA to fly out
Feel free to DM me if you want more specifics!
3
3
u/Driewieler123 19d ago
This one sounds very interesting. Thank you for your insights! So you’d think SF, LA, SD ánd Yosemite is possible in 10 days?
6
u/pudding7 United States - Los Angeles 19d ago
That itinerary is a good one. Yes it's possible but you're really cramming it in. I'd skip SD and add an extra day to SF, Yosemite, and LA.
1
12
u/Tracuivel 19d ago
Yah, the first trip is always the hardest to plan. For your first intercontinental trip, I'd definitely trim this list down. Even for a well traveled American, that is potentially a very busy schedule. For a ...Dutch? couple with little travel experience, that could be very overwhelming to the point of not being fun anymore.
As I suspect you are about to be told by many people, the travel distances between these cities are not trivial; for a European it would be like bouncing around between countries. Without knowing you personally, I'd say just doing LA and San Diego is probably a good trip, with Joshua Tree somewhere in there. I know Yosemite is tempting, but it's very crowded and you need to reserve well in advance, and so on. It's worth the hassle, but for your first trip to the US, that might be a bit much to deal with.
6
u/RIPGeech 19d ago
Agreed, I did a tour of Vancouver-Seattle-San Francisco-LA and it was a struggle in 2 weeks, never mind 10 days. The train from Seattle to SF took 24 hours in itself, beautiful trip but it made me understand that North America is huge.
You could split the two, Vancouver has Lion’s Bay which is really close to the centre and is beautiful. From there Seattle is about 3 hours by bus/car, and then fly down to either SF or LA where you can explore the national parks from.
3
u/Driewieler123 19d ago
Good estimate, indeed a Dutch haha! Well we have been to the USA before, but really simple locations such as Miami City and Boston + NYC. Ofcourse nothing compared to a trip with multiple destinations in the west.
We’d really love to combine our trip with some insane sights, to make it unforgettable. Also kind of afraid we get bored being in a city for the full time.
Would you prefer LA over SF? Any other national parks you’d recommend which are unforgettable? Seattle and Portland with Olympic and North Cascades was one consideration with less travelling, but most of reddit states that the pacific is boring compared to the south.
4
u/redvariation 19d ago
I'd recommend San Francisco and Yosemite, with perhaps Monterey or even LA at the most. Yosemite is just stunning, but research the crowds and possible admission reservations for your dates. Also lodging in and near the Park is quite difficult.
If you want mountains you could also consider Sequoia/Kings Canyon national parks, which are in the area and also beautiful. Joshua Tree if you want to see amazing desert landscapes.
In San Francisco, a fairly short trip north takes you to Muir Woods, with giant coastal redwood trees. It is also magnificent.
The ideas above reduce your travel distances compared to what you original posted while preserving great scenery and wow factors.
3
u/dankney 19d ago
I've lived in all of the cities you're considering minus SD. The answer really depends on what you're looking for.
If this is about nature and the outdoors, then Seattle/Portland is by far the better choice, but you will need a car. I'd encourage you to consider the Oregon Coast west of Portland and look at the 101 N from there as it loops through various parks to Port Angeles at the north end of Washington. You can either grab a ferry into Victoria British Columbia from there and see a little of Canada or simply head toward Seattle. I'd recommend a slight detour through Port Townsend on your way into Seattle.
If you want urban experiences, LA is the place to go for live music, art, nightlife and the like. You will also need a car there.
San Francisco is the city to go to if you're trying to avoid needing a car. It's less vibrant than LA, but much more compact -- you can get by on Taxis/Ubers/etc plus walking.
Portland, LA, and San Francisco all have great food scenes. If food it a major motivator, Seattle isn't the best choice.
EDIT: If nature is the motivating factor, consider the southwest. The Grand Canyon and Utah parks (Bryce Canyon, Arches, Zion) and natural wonders unlike anyplace else I've ever seen. But it's a very different trip than what you're already talking about.
3
u/satellite779 19d ago
The Grand Canyon and Utah parks (Bryce Canyon, Arches, Zion) and natural wonders unlike anyplace else I've ever seen
Not in August. It's hot.
PNW on the other hand is ideal for National parks in July, and August (assuming no fires).
2
u/Driewieler123 19d ago
Good way of looking at it. We are not really into nightlife or life music, more into wandering into towns and exploring. So based on that, you’d recommend the north? Regarding the food scene, good to know Seattle isn’t big on that. My wife prefers vegan most of the time. Do you know how the vegan culture is in the cities?
5
u/dankney 19d ago
I'm a vegetarian rather than vegan. Portland's Vegan food scene is lit (I have a vegan Dim Sum recommendation for you if you head that way). Seattle will be easy to eat in, but very few places put the same level of thought and care into vegan options as they do the rest of the menu (again, I can make recommendations if you decide to go north).
Also important to know, the northwest has a late summer, so ideal weather is August whereas California is likely June before it gets too warm.
2
u/datamuse 19d ago
This is the way. I live in Seattle and I love it but visitors here regularly do not realize how much driving they're setting themselves up for (especially if they want to try to fit Rainier, Olympic, and North Cascades into a single trip). Hitting the Oregon coast and coming up 101 is a great idea. Olympic National Park doesn't really have a big main entrance but coming up the western side of the peninsula and then looping around to the north will give you quite a few access options. (Check road conditions and plan your route in advance, we currently have some washed out roads and some areas don't have cell service.)
3
u/satellite779 19d ago
As a European living in Seattle, I'm not a huge fan of West Coast cities since they are so new. There's no old world charm you're used to in Europe.
But, the West Coast has a beautiful nature that's often untouched, which is hard to find in Europe. For an August visit, assuming there are no forest fires, PNW is ideal for visiting national parks. Mt Rainier, North Cascades, Olympic. Then there's also Mt Baker, Mt Hood, Columbia River gorge, Oregon Coast. You won't be able to see it all in 10 days if you're into hiking. If you can shift your visit to the middle of July you'll have a lower risk of forest fires.
1
u/Driewieler123 19d ago
Hmm fair point from an European viewpoint. I mainly see the cities to experience the ‘bigness’ of USA, like the supermarkets, buildings, life and stuff. That’s why we want to include the nature which looks so amazing on photo’s. You’d prefer PNW over Cali?
1
u/satellite779 19d ago edited 18d ago
Year round I definitely prefer Southern California because of the weather.
But, you're visiting in August which is basically the best month to visit PNW, especially if you're into nature, hiking etc. Everything will be green, no rain. Southern California will be brown. But, I'm a big nature fan so maybe I'm biased.
Do you think you'll visit California at a later time? I think it's a really good option for a winter vacation coming from Europe as the weather is so much nicer then, so you get to escape rain/snow.
4
u/RatticusGloom 19d ago
LA is kinda rundown and gritty. I would skip it and focus on the Pacific Northwest.
3
u/Tracuivel 19d ago
Well I live in SF so I'm not sure I can assess it objectively. SF and LA are very different cities, though, so it really depends on what sort of person you are. As a general answer, I think LA might be a better choice for most tourists. There are more obvious tourist attractions, and it's culturally a more interesting place. SF is prettier, and arguably has a better fine dining scene, but LA's food scene is probably superior as a whole.
It's tough to pick among the national parks. I'm a big fan and a regular visitor, and they're pretty much all breathtaking. But I think for a European, maybe a desert park like Joshua Tree might be best, as the parks notable for snow-capped mountains might be similar enough enough to the Alps that it might be less interesting to you. This is based on my visit to Wadi Rum, a desert in Jordan where I met Europeans who were really awestruck. To me it was beautiful and worth visiting, but sort of similar to Arizona.
But yeah, where West Coast national parks go, you basically can't go wrong.
3
u/Driewieler123 19d ago
One of the first times I actually see someone suggests LA over SF! Usually mainly SF and SD are mentioned. Makes it even more difficult. Well at least we are considering cramping less destinations for this trip. Do you think you could combine SF and SD for example, with 1-2 parks?
2
u/Tracuivel 19d ago
If planes are involved, in ten days, sure. If you're coming to SF and you're interested in our parks, then I'd also go to Muir Woods National Monument, which is close by. It's not technically a "National Park" by the definition Americans use when they're making their bucket lists, but it's a large enough forest of redwood trees for you to go hiking without hearing motorcars and such. Much closer than Yosemite; you might even be able to Uber there from SF, although it will cost a pretty penny.
I know I said all our national parks are great, and they are, but having said that, I don't know if I want to send you to Pinnacles, which is the closest NP to SF. It's mostly notable for being a place where you can see California condors, which I don't know if anyone other than old wildlife geeks like me care about. If you're already going to Joshua Tree, I don't think a European needs to do Pinnacles.
4
u/ChapterWaste7898 19d ago
To truly explore and experience these places I would cut down your locations. I’ve done- San Fran, Big Sur, Yosemite, Redwood Forest and that felt like a lot. You could most likely do a similar itinerary and add Oregon to your travels.
2
u/Driewieler123 19d ago
Would you recommend Oregon with Redwood over going south to San Diego? How many days was your trip?
3
u/Creek0512 United States 19d ago
I've done Oregon and Redwoods in a 10 night trip:
Fri - flew to PDX, stayed the night
Sat - picked up car and did the Columbia River Gorge to Hood River
Sun - did some hikes around Mt. Hood and drove down to Bend
Mon - did some hikes at Smith Rock and in the Deschutes forest, 2nd night in Bend
Tue - visited Crater Lake NP, and then on to Grants Pass for the night
Wed - Jedediah Smith Redwoods SP
Thu - Redwoods NP
Fri - Prairie Creek Redwoods SP
Sat - drove up Oregon coast to Cannon Beach
Sun - back to Portland, return car
Mon - fly home
2
u/ChapterWaste7898 19d ago
I’m reading your other comments… you can land in San Fran, go to Yosemite, go back to Big Sur, drive the scenic route down to San Diego and stop somewhere along the way. That would probably be best! Our trip was 8 days ! We spent three days in Yosemite though
1
u/Driewieler123 19d ago
Ah good to know a comment at least says its possible haha! This sounds like a great option for now - thank you!
2
u/ChapterWaste7898 19d ago
Best of luck! It’s beautiful in Northern California and Yosemite is breathtaking. Are you looking to stay in Yosemite? And camp? You need a permit FYI. We did not have one and had to travel about two hours in to the park to find an open campground. It wasn’t the worst option :)
4
u/Disastrous_Thanks171 19d ago
I would recommend either sticking to California (SD, SF, and surrounding areas) or the PNW (Seattle, Portland, and surrounding areas). As others have said, the distances are huge and you don’t want to spend your whole trip driving or on trains/planes.
As to which one is better I think that it depends what you are looking for. They are very different areas in terms of culture and climate.
Southern California is much warmer and dryer with beautiful beaches. Yosemite is absolutely worth a visit, but unless it is really the top of your list I would skip it on this trip. It will be very crowded and it’s a ~4 hour drive from SF.
The PNW is very green and wetter/colder than California. (Though in August it’s likely to be sunny and fairly warm -high 20s to low 30sC)The coast is beautiful but too cold for swimming/sunbathing. There are a lot of beautiful national parks, waterfalls, mountains.
I live in Portland and the PNW is absolutely my favorite part of the country, but given where you are coming from and the fact that it’s your first west coast trip I would probably recommend doing Southern California unless you really prefer forests to beaches. It’s a classic travel destination for a reason.
Also because I’ve not seen it mentioned yet: August is forest fire season on the west coast. Keep an eye on the local news for wherever you are headed and be prepared to change your itinerary if needed.
3
u/satellite779 19d ago edited 18d ago
The PNW is very green and wetter/colder than California. (Though in August it’s likely to be sunny and fairly warm -high 20s to low 30sC
PNW has better weather in July than e.g. San Diego IMO. There's a reason people in SD say: May grey, June gloom, July no sky.
It doesn't really rain in PNW during July/August.
2
u/Driewieler123 19d ago
Thank you for the advice! The option to combine both is at least off the table now; so either California or indeed PNW.
It’s so conflicting; I read lots of positive things about both both also negatives. Why do you think for a tourist California is better?
Also good to know: we don’t like beaches. Well, to see them is okay, but we do not like lying on beaches for days and sand.
4
u/keleko451 19d ago
I’ve lived in LA, San Diego, SF, and near Yosemite. Also, my wife is from Seattle, so I’ve spent a considerable amount of time in the Pacific Northwest. Now I live in Lisbon, so I’ve traveled around Europe quite a bit, including the Netherlands. So here’s my take.
The Pacific Northwest and California are pretty different trips. As different as spending 10 days in southern Spain vs northern Italy. Actually, even San Francisco and San Diego are super different. So it really depends on what kind of trip you’re looking for.
If you want sun and beach, Southern California is great. But it can also get pretty hot in August- very different than what you’re used to. Also, the public transportation in California is awful and driving in the summer when everybody else is on vacation will be terrible.
Although the public transportation in the Pacific Northwest isn’t nearly as good as what you would find in the Netherlands, it’s significantly better than California.
If it were me, I would choose the Pacific Northwest and probably start out in Portland. Then take the train to Seattle- that’s a beautiful train ride. Then after Seattle, take a ferry to Victoria (on Vancouver Island). Finally, travel to Vancouver.
I really think you’ll appreciate the landscape in the Pacific Northwest and the weather will likely be better than Southern California. Plus, the food in Portland is amazing- unlike anything you’ll get in the Netherlands. And I f you like beer, both Portland and Seattle have a lot of great breweries. Victoria and Vancouver are beautiful cities, with so much nature.
I hope that helps! Keep us posted on what you decide. Now I’m super curious!
3
u/Away_Hiking_0502 19d ago
I would absolutely agree with PNW over CA. I've lived in San Diego and spent a ton of time in LA. Unless you're obsessed with celebrity culture and really want to do the Hollywood thing, LA is going to be enormous , hard to get around and can be expensive.
Portland to Seattle to Olympic NP to Victoria/Vancouver is just magical. Really spend some time looking into transit times, even getting a car from Seattle to Olympic NP entrance is 2 hours. If you're renting a car, tag on another hour. That area is lush, quaint, and has some amazing seafood. If you're a nature lover, it's hard to top.
3
u/Driewieler123 19d ago
Thank you sir for your advice. Really helpfull with THAT experience, awesome. Actually am going to visit Lisbon in a couple of weeks! Your suggestion is one of our top options. Wanted to start at Seattle or Vancouver, but this makes more sense. So it’s either going to be this option, or a variant in California, but leaning towards pacific, since we don’t like beaches.
Reading some comments regarding Portland and Seattle being boring. How do you see that after seeing both?
2
u/keleko451 19d ago
You’re welcome! I hope you love Lisbon.
If you don’t like beaches, don’t go to Southern California. The best parts of SoCal are the beaches.
In terms of the Pacific Northwest being boring, I guess that depends on your idea of boring. What are the types of activities you’re most interested in doing, both day and night?
1
u/Driewieler123 19d ago
Difficult to say since we are used to European holidays, in which we explore charming cities and its beauty and history, with some museums. Which is also why we will be going to Lisbon! We went to Miami City and Curacao and beach life was nothing for us. Nice to do for a day to recover but that’s about it. Also visited NYC and Boston. While NYC was ofcourse fascinating with loads to see, Boston felt boring after a few days (we were young). Both totally not into nightlife or life music.
2
u/datamuse 19d ago
I think a few people have mentioned this but cities here in the western U.S. are much younger than what you're used to--Seattle was founded in 1851 for instance (though this region has had people living here for thousands of years). Not many large museums but you'll find all sorts of smaller museums and cultural centers around the city.
-1
u/sgtapone87 19d ago
The ride from Seattle to Portland isn’t anything special, especially since they reopened the bypass through Tacoma.
Seattle to Vancouver BC is very scenic, though. Until you get to Canada.
3
u/keleko451 19d ago
If you didn’t like Miami, I doubt you’d like LA. It’s even more spread out and the traffic is a nightmare.
Since you’re going to Lisbon, I’d add SF to the list. The cable cars in each city were added around the same time, in the late 1800s. There are other unique similarities too.
So maybe consider flying to SF and spend three days there. Then fly to Portland from SF and spend two days there. Then take the train to Seattle for two more days. Then take the ferry to Victoria for at least one night. Then take the ferry to Vancouver for another two nights.
You have to love nature and food though, because that’s really what the Pacific Northwest is known for.
1
u/Driewieler123 19d ago
Hmm interesting option to fly between SF and the north. LA is indeed slowly being scrapped from the list. So either SF and Yosemite or PNW. But SF and fly north to include Olympic sure makes me consider again…
6
u/krokendil 19d ago
Well that's just waaaay too much. You could do SF, LA and Yosemite, maybe San Diego, but that's about it in 10 days.
3
u/haysu-christo Hafa Adai ! 19d ago edited 19d ago
No way to cover the west coast in just 10 days so I’d group them and fly into one city and out of another. For example: SF-Yosemite-LA or SF-Portland-Seattle or LA-Death Valley (if you want, hell hot in August though)-Vegas-SD or SF- Big Sur-Santa Barbara-LA.
3
u/Krieghund 19d ago
Our national parks are some of the best parts of America, hands down. Unfortunately I'm expecting them to be a bit stressed this year as they're going to be under staffed. Make reservations as soon as possible!
August might be extremely hot in Southern California. I would focus on going further north.
Some years the west cost has really bad air quality because of widespread forest fires. You would be best served by having some flexibility in your plans. If you flew into Portland you could either make a loop south into Oregon or north into Washington State.
3
u/SeattleBrother75 19d ago
A loop from Portland to Seattle, over to the Olympic rainforest then the coast and back would be fun and doable with 10 days easily
2
u/lascriptori 19d ago
Yup, that's way way way too much for 10 days. I would pick either California or the pacific northwest. Either one would be a great trip.
The Pacific northwest is so gorgeous. You could do a trip where you go from either the Portland area or Seattle to Olympic national park, and take the ferry across to Vancouver Island. Honestly I've been all over the globe and I think Olympic national park is some of the most beautiful landscapes I've ever seen.
Or, you could do a California trip. Los Angeles to San Francisco is like a 6-7 hour drive. Check out Big Sur, Yosemite, etc. Ideally you could fly into LA and out of SF, or do the LA to SF drive, drop off the rental car and catch a cheap flight back to LA.
2
u/lizmatiq 19d ago
What are your favorite things about the cities you have been to? There’s so much in both north and south maybe we can suggest the best choice based on what you know you already like.
2
u/Driewieler123 19d ago
Fair point! Difficult the precisely say since we haven’t been to a lot of places. Been to Miami and Curacao, but the beach life wasn’t our thing, even though we loved the weather. Also been to Boston and NYC. NYC ofcourse was spectacular, but Boston felt a bit boring after some days. In European countries we like to alternate city strolling with visiting nature, hiking or history and architecture. Totally not into nightlife or bars.
3
u/lizmatiq 19d ago
I would probably lean more towards SF than LA. LA has the beaches but the nature is more all on the coast and a lot of what’s appealing about LA is restaurants, bars, and nightlife. There are some good museums but SF has museums too if you’re into that. In SF you get more quaint little neighbors hoods with nature kind of woven in.
I live in NorCal and it absolutely never gets old. I would suggest doing Big Sur with Yosemite and then up into SF and further on to Mendocino. That would keep you busy for 10 days but if you’re worried if not enough you could also reach up to the Redwoods and the Oregon Coast which also stunning.
2
u/gluppitygoo 19d ago
highly recommend the oregon or washington coast, but definitely make sure you see seattle, olympic national park, and mount rainer if you have the time
2
u/wander_wisely 19d ago
If you have any time, kayaking the sea caves at Channel Islands NP is very cool. Native small foxes on the island, and we took a guided kayak tour there. The boat left from Ventura harbor.
3
1
u/AutoModerator 19d ago
Notice: Are you asking for travel advice about the US West Coast?
Read what redditors had to say in the weekly destination thread for the West Coast/Pacific
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
1
u/LumpyElderberry2 19d ago
What are you looking for, fun cities? Culture? Nightlife? Food? Proximity to nature? For food and fun cities you can skip LA and Seattle. Culture skip LA, Seattle and Portland. Proximity to nature, Seattle and Vancouver BC you cannot beat, but keep an eye on wildfires. Honestly in 10 days, I would choose either California or the PNW instead of trying to do both regions
I know I shit on Seattle, but the PNW is really one of the most beautiful places on earth. If you’re looking for warm beaches, nightlife and killer Mexican food go to Southern California
1
u/DaveB44 18d ago
My personal preference would be a round trip based on Seattle. The Pacific Northwest is one of my favourite parts of the US, although it may be more expensive to fly to Seattle compared with the California airports.
Olympic NP & the Cascades are some of the best - Mount Rainier is simply breathtaking! National Parks will be crowded in August. Some parks are now operating a timed entry system for which to need to buy a pass in advance so check before you go; on entry to the first NP you visit buy an America the Beautiful pass.
1
0
1
u/AnotherPint 19d ago
If you only have ten days I would forget the Northwest and stick to San Diego, Los Angeles, then end up San Francisco -- with a one-day drive up Highway 1 from LA to the Bay Area, via Big Sur. You might like a stopover in Monterey en route.
Don't underestimate the distances involved.
You should be able to buy open-jaw air tickets that let you arrive in San Diego and depart from SFO without additional cost.
2
u/Driewieler123 19d ago
This was one of our options indeed. So you prefer the south over northwest? Do you think that for example adding Yosemite is also feasible?
2
u/AnotherPint 19d ago
I feel like you can have three trip tentpoles, max, in ten days. I would do San Diego, LA (if I'd never seen it before), and the drive up to San Francisco, culminating there. You could also do LA, then (by car) Monterey and Yosemite, then steam back west to SFO to catch your flight. But it's a lot of additional driving and Yosemite can be a bumper-to-bumper crowd scene at popular times of year. You decide how much driving and repositioning time you want to bake into a short trip.
3
u/NOLApanam 19d ago
Delete San Diego — do LA and SF. I wouldn’t try to squeeze in Yosemite but if the latter is important to you, just do SF and Yosemite.
1
1
9
u/Accomplished-Bug4327 19d ago
Don’t skip San Francisco! The city that’s skippable IMO is LA.
San Francisco is beautiful and has so much to do and amazing food, architecture, and nature. Also the redwood forests nearby are a must see