Southeast Asia forum

I understand the idea of not trying to do too much in a little time window but the reality is that many of us only have a couple weeks. Telling people they need two months per country isn't productive as (unfortunately) that's just not feasible for many of us.

My wife and I are leaving this Saturday for a 16 day trip to Indochina. We've gone back and forth on how much we want to do. Neither of us have been to any of the four countries before and we've heard amazingly convincing arguments to spend our whole time in each place. Our solution? We've reserved a hotel in Saigon for our first two nights and we'll figure the rest out on the fly. I imagine we'll have to cut either Laos or Thailand due to time but we're just going to let price of flights/bus/train tickets determine that. Ideally, we'll see Saigon a couple days, Mekong Delta a day or two, Angkor Wat 2-3 days, and then head to Laos or Thailand for 5 days before getting to Phu Quoc Island for the last 3-4 days. That's how it works in my head anyway.

I'll try to remember to post my thoughts upon our return. Maybe I'll be one of those people telling you to just stay in one place your whole trip! :) Cheers!

Two weeks is ample time to get a taste of two places in two countries, and as fifchuck said we don't all have two months. You have to work with the time you have. If you're looking for ón the go'sightseeing'then Angkor Wat or Luang Prabang would both fit the bill. Angkor Wat has been the highlight of our trip (just finishing up now), and we also took a day out to visit Kompong Kleang, a fishing village on Lake Tonle Sap. Luang Prabang itself is sleepy (although there's more than enough in town to occupy a few days of sighseeing), but there are loads of options for trekking, kayaking, cycling etc in the surrounding areas. The scenery around Luang Prabang is stunning. Have fun choosing. I'm sure you'll have a great time wherever you go.