I'm asking this question both here and on the camping board. I know this isn't the best spot, but I want the opinions of people who are not "diehard" on-site fans. I'm not sure I'll get that on the other board... BACKGROUND We are thinking about taking a "dirt cheap" tent camping trip to the world next July. I have rewards to cover two-day park passes with water parks and more for the four of us. By then, I may also have enough rewards to take care of lunch each day. The rest of our meals we'll have to get off-site on the cheap or make ourselves at the campground. We would be going to Epcot, both water parks, and either AK or DHS. (My kids are teens so MK isn't a fave anymore.) I've priced out two nice campsites offsite and camping at Ft. Wilderness (similar sites and ammenities). Ft. Wilderness will cost $121 more for four nights. We will have to pay parking at the two major parks if we stay offsite, so that brings it down to just under $100 difference. I checked mapquest and the drive time seems to be comparable (about 15-20 minute); so, gas would be comparable on site or off... We will not be using the onsite transportation because we don't want to waste a lot of time on transfers between campground buses and resort-park buses and buses to the water parks (from my experience that eats up a lot of time). AND NOW THE QUESTIONS: Would you spend about $100 just for the privaledge of staying onsite and having access to EMH? Or would you save those couple bucks toward food and stay offsite? Are there any good, inexpensive dining places near the parks that we should know about? CiCi's or similar? Are there any other perks or drawbacks that I'm missing as far as onsite and offsite? Thanks for any and all opinions!