Animal Kingdom vs. Busch Gardens in the summer?

[mshanson3121]

I've read many, many comments about how AK feels much more humid/hotter than the other parks in the summer just due to all the vegetation, the way it's constructed etc.

One of my biggest concerns about AK is that basically to see the animals is going to require a lot of walking, all through trails crowded/covered trails which are going to be really hot. Whereas at Busch things seem more out in the open? And not as big/spread out as AK? Though AK seems more like the animals are in their natural habitats?

So, just curious as to your thoughts when comparing the two? In the summer, is one more comfortable than the other for touring? I love how hands-on you can get at Busch vs. AK, but will it just feel like "another zoo?"

 

[JaxDad]

They will both be hot. It's hard to really differentiate. I don't consider BG to be just another zoo. It has some great rides and shows.

I think it all depends on the rest of your vacation plans. If you're doing Disney and generally staying in the bubble, it may not be worth the drive and extra expense to do BG. If you are looking for a different overall vacation, I say go for it. Check out the other Tampa area attractions such as the beaches, etc (use TripAdvisor) and you could have a nice alternative trip!

 

[MataHari22]

I cannot say I have ever been hotter at AK than any other park. In fact, the day my dad and I went to Busch Gardens, I was sick from the heat and almost passed out. I don't think it had anything to do with the park I was at, it was because it was Florida and it's hot. Busch Gardens has so many coasters, none of which I ride. I prefer the theming at AK and there's more for me to do there. And maybe because I was so hot and miserable at BG, but I think there is way more shady spots at AK. Neither park seems like "another zoo" to me, but the zoos I went to when I was a kid were The Staten Island Zoo, Castskill Game Farm and like the Bronx Zoo...

 

[palavra]

I've been to both several times, and if it is animals that you are most interested in, Animal Kingdom is better. Both parks can be very hot and humid in summer, but I also think there are more indoor rides and places to cool down at AK. BG is great if you like coasters, but those will be in the heat.

 

[Josh Hendy]

I think that the train and the skyway at BG are big advantages over AK. The train because you can actually see animals on the savannah and it goes literally all around the park The skyway because you can see animals from it AND it's also a pretty handy and fun way to get across the park.

AK has no way at all to cross the park and save your feet. The AK train shows you absolutely nothing except trees and a couple of buildings and a road, and it goes nowhere except back and forth to a petting zoo.

The animal displays at both parks are very nice. Each has some animals that the other doesn't have. I think the viewing of savannah animals (like elephants and rhinos) is better at BG because it's on foot. It's more leisurely than Kilimanjaro Safaris, it isn't bumpy and noisy, you don't have to stretch and strain to get pictures out of one side and then the other side, and you don't have a long, hot wait. I've never enjoyed the Safari queue. The enclosures at AK are more natural looking, but I doubt that the animals are more unhappy at BG ... they both still sit out on the grass or rocks in the daytime and sleep on hay in concrete buildings at night. Same lettuce and joints of beef, different pile ...

The theming at both parks is very nice, but I give a slight lead to AK for nicer-looking landscaping and pathways. If you're a tropical plant and flower enthusiast you'll enjoy both parks quite a lot. Dino Land is a pretty serious downgrade at AK, I'm afraid to say, but it doesn't actually hurt to walk through it or anything.

I always found the AK "rope drop" show on Discovery Island to be really tedious. Just let us get over to Everest, already. I'm not sure if they still bother to put it on.

The live shows line up pretty similarly AFAIK, although I didn't experience any of the shows at BG. Both have (pretty old) 3D movies, both have animal-stunt shows and both have Broadway-type stage shows. Check listings ... my information is several years out of date!

The parks' most outstanding differences are the rides. BG has far more rides. About 4 of them are pretty big and impressive coasters. Then they have some more garden-variety amusement park rides, a pretty lame raft ride, log flume, etc. AK has just the 1 great coaster, a nice raft ride (but short), a wild mouse coaster, a Dumbo-style spinner, and the indoor Dinosaur ride is IMHO not very fun ... too bumpy and noisy and fairly 'blah' theming and story.

 

[mshanson3121]

I think that the train and the skyway at BG are big advantages over AK. The train because you can actually see animals on the savannah and it goes literally all around the park The skyway because you can see animals from it AND it's also a pretty handy and fun way to get across the park.

AK has no way at all to cross the park and save your feet. The AK train shows you absolutely nothing except trees and a couple of buildings and a road, and it goes nowhere except back and forth to a petting zoo.

The animal displays at both parks are very nice. Each has some animals that the other doesn't have. I think the viewing of savannah animals (like elephants and rhinos) is better at BG because it's on foot. It's more leisurely than Kilimanjaro Safaris, it isn't bumpy and noisy, you don't have to stretch and strain to get pictures out of one side and then the other side, and you don't have a long, hot wait. I've never enjoyed the Safari queue. The enclosures at AK are more natural looking, but I doubt that the animals are more unhappy at BG ... they both still sit out on the grass or rocks in the daytime and sleep on hay in concrete buildings at night. Same lettuce and joints of beef, different pile ...

The theming at both parks is very nice, but I give a slight lead to AK for nicer-looking landscaping and pathways. If you're a tropical plant and flower enthusiast you'll enjoy both parks quite a lot. Dino Land is a pretty serious downgrade at AK, I'm afraid to say, but it doesn't actually hurt to walk through it or anything.

I always found the AK "rope drop" show on Discovery Island to be really tedious. Just let us get over to Everest, already. I'm not sure if they still bother to put it on.

The live shows line up pretty similarly AFAIK, although I didn't experience any of the shows at BG. Both have (pretty old) 3D movies, both have animal-stunt shows and both have Broadway-type stage shows. Check listings ... my information is several years out of date!

The parks' most outstanding differences are the rides. BG has far more rides. About 4 of them are pretty big and impressive coasters. Then they have some more garden-variety amusement park rides, a pretty lame raft ride, log flume, etc. AK has just the 1 great coaster, a nice raft ride (but short), a wild mouse coaster, a Dumbo-style spinner, and the indoor Dinosaur ride is IMHO not very fun ... too bumpy and noisy and fairly 'blah' theming and story.

Thanks for the review.

My son LOVES birds, as in, it's somewhat of an obsession for him - so for him to be able to go into the free flight aviary and be able to feed a bird, have photos done with the flamingos etc... would be huge for him. I know you have to pay for their Safari ride whereas AK's is free, but from what I've read at BG on their safari you get to feed giraffes. And they have 3 other exhibits where you can feed the animals.

On the flip side, there's not much for rides for my DD who is still only 40", so all she could do would be the Aerial Tram, the train, Stanley Falls, Air Grover. But that said, there's really only two ride we planned on doing at AK anyways - the Safari and Kali. I think Dinosaur and ITTBAB will be too scary for the kids, and they're too small for anything else other than the Triceratop Spin. For us, the whole point of going to AK is for the animals, so I guess I'd just rather go to which place will give the best animal experience.

 

[mshanson3121]

Though interestingly enough, just read some reviews that the train is out of commission until 2016, and that three of the main animals are gone for awhile. AK it is!!!

 

[Josh Hendy]

Though interestingly enough, just read some reviews that the train is out of commission until 2016, and that three of the main animals are gone for awhile. AK it is!!!

You'll have a great time.

 

[CAS239]

Animal kingdom dominates over Busch Gardens.

Both are just as equally hot. The reason AK feels hotter than the other 3 parks is because it's the biggest park and you don't have stores after stores to cut through for A/C.

I would never go to Busch Gardens for the animals. If you're choosing a park mainly on animal life, then no questions about it, go with AK. Busch Gardens is centered around its coasters. We had a year pass to Busch Gardens and aside from taking the skyway and going over the animals, tiger, and cheetah, we rarely saw any. While neither are a zoo in the sense, AK is the one if you want to encounter more wildlife.

Some consider AK to be a half day park, BG is even less than that. When we went, we were pretty much done after 2-3 hours.

Not trying to bash Busch Gardens as they have some great coasters. Some of the type of coasters that I wish Disney would provide. But AK beats out Busch Gardens.

 

[Mainemama]

We went to both last July. I found BG hotter... There is no shade. The only way I could stand it was 100% drenched from water rides... That felt great! I found MK felt hotter than AK. Course, perhaps temps varied.