Comparing DL to WDW

[DLRExpert]

Like others have said if you want an entire Disney experience vacation, go to WDW. I use to go to Orlando just for WDW, but now I take a few days for Universal Orlando, then a day at Discovery Cove, and then a few days in WDW. WDW doesn't hold my interest like it use to.

To me Disneyland is a great attraction, but you should also plan to go out and see the rest of Southern California as well.

People I know usually make the trip to visit and see California and add Disneyland for a few days on top of that.
For example, they may stay in San Francisco for a few days, then take a day for Hollywood maybe Universal, then a few days for Disneyland, go to Knott's, Magic Mountain if you are into big coasters, then travel down to San Diego, and maybe go to Las Vegas after that (Yes I know Vegas is in Nevada).

 

[PiratesMansion]

Disney World is a grander, more encompassing vacation, but I prefer Disneyland.

I focus most of my time on rides and shows, and I feel that DL generally has a better collection of both. I find it to be a more relaxing experience when I can go at my own pace and not be beholden to a dining schedule. It's much easier to plan.

I think some people, whether they know it or not, want DL to be just like WDW, discover that it's not, and leave disappointed. My cousin, used to DL, experienced the same situation in reverse when she went to Magic Kingdom with us. She wanted her Mickey Beignets from New Orleans Square, and was quite unhappy to discover that neither of those things existed in Florida. Then Haunted Mansion wasn't where she thought it was supposed to be, and so on. She let it ruin her trip. Don't be like my cousin

DL can be very different from what frequent WDW visitors are used to: There isn't much of a bubble. DL Park always feels congested, even if the ride lines are short. There's not much to the property outside of the parks. The vibe is much more relaxed, which can be both a blessing and a curse. And so on.

DL visitors going to WDW have to adjust too: Everything is bigger and more spread out. You have to consider transportation, a non-issue in Cali. It's important to check out the non-park offerings too. Dining is a much more important part of the experience and must be planned FAR in advance. And so on.

Both Disney properties are wonderful, and I think that if you can adjust to the differences between them, you'll find DL a wonderful experience.

 

[tarheelalum]

Disneyland is a locals park where people often go for a day or a few hours after work. Disney World is a huge tourist destination. You can't really compare the two.

 

[Angel Ariel]

Let's be fair to OP and not set her up for disappointment.

People want to argue it's comparable, Disneyland is great but it is not in anyway comparible to disneyworld.
The argument that WDW is too big and therefore not as good (?) is like saying my ice cream sundae was too big. Silly. I agree with that buses are no fun, so the easy fix at WDW is rent a car, use über or stay on a monorail hotel.
After that you will be immersed in a magical world for as long as you are there.

Disneyland is a miracle in itself and an amazing vision of Walt, but he could not own that much land so he was heavily restricted and therefore just outside the gates is endless hotel and food chains (not very magical).
When he could do everything he really wanted to do it was all done and more in Orlando.
Relax west coasters, there's tons of other things to do in Southern California that's worth the trip to the west coast but don't convince a person to make a trip to Disneyland and think it will be as immersive as disneyworld.

I don't compare DLR and WDW atall. They are 2 very different experiences, that's for sure. IMO, one is not "better" than the other in overall experience, they are just different. We personally prefer the current DLR experience to the current WDW one, but not for reasons regarding theming or immersiveness.
However, the immersiveness you mention is a matter of opinion. We stay offsite, so yes, 2x/day we see the "real world" as we go to and from the hotel, but that doesn't negatively affect the immersiveness of the parks for me. When I am in the esplanade and then the parks, it is just as much of an immersiveness Disney experience for me as WDW is. We spent 5 days in DLR last year, and we did not do everything we wanted to...not because of crowds or long lines, but because there is *so much* packed into those 2 parks that we just couldn't get to it all.

 

[Angel Ariel]

Exactly the point.

No ones going to Disneyland for 2 weeks.

Land not a world.

I wouldn't go to either park for 2 weeks without seeing other things in Orlando/Anaheim. If I had the time and ability, I'd definitely spend 2 weeks in Anaheim, spending at *least* a week just at DLR just as I would at wdw. There is almost just as many attractions in dlr's 2 parks as in wdw's 4...and that doesn't include the unique street act experiences at DLr (like musical chairs at Coke corner)

 

[WonkaKid]

FWIW and as an aside, I've been to all the parks (except for Shanghai) and DL Anaheim is definitely my favorite, followed by Tokyo and then DW.

 

[agamble]

No ones going to Disneyland for 2 weeks.

Hmmm...well I think there are plenty of people from Australia, etc. on the boards who talk about going for 10 days with their special Aussie tickets. And I've even read of some buying APs just so they could go every day of their two week + vacation. Also, when you add the days that AP holders (even non-locals) go to Disneyland in a year, many go for well over two weeks.

That being said, I think 4 days is the number of days you need to do most "everything" at Disneyland. Five is better. But the same goes for WDW. If you were only going to the theme parks you could go to each park for one day and do most "everything" there. So really...

I like Disneyland. I like being able to walk from my hotel. I like being able to park hop easily. I like not wasting time waiting for busses. I like not wasting an hour just traveling to and from the hotel so I can take my midday nap. We will take our kids to WDW some day as I think they should get to experience it as DH and I have. When we go it will probably be for two weeks, but we won't be in the parks every day for two weeks. We'll explore FL, etc. just as suggested someone could do while visiting DL.

 

[Mabel67]

No ones going to Disneyland for 2 weeks.

Land not a world.

We live in Canada. We may not go for 2 weeks at a time. But we will go to DL multiple times a year and usually have an annual pass for this. Have gone 2-3 times a year for the past 6 years or so. Have been to WDW - not eager to return, though will be going once next May. WDW is just way more stressful for us and requires just too much advance planning. Booking restaurants months in advance? Fast passes too? Not sure right now where and when I want to eat on September 15. So, I would never consider multiple trips to WDW in one year. Much prefer the relaxed feeling of DL, with a greater ability to be more spur-of-the-moment with our planning. Obviously we try hard not to go at peak times, too. But to each his own. Without WDW there would be way more people at DL, which would obviously be bad!

 

[grnflash]

I think some people, whether they know it or not, want DL to be just like WDW, discover that it's not, and leave disappointed.

Generally speaking, I sorta think the opposite. Going to DLR, you know upfront what it is not. It is not an all-encapsulating, activity-rich bubble. It's an obvious fact and even if you wish it weren't, you've planned a vacation around that fact. I think that's part of why so many first-timers from WDW fall in love with DL. They've prepared for no bubble, lowered their expectations, then entered DL and game on - the sublime charm and atmosphere of DL make up for a lot.

 

[cruisehopeful]

Since it is your first visit and you'll be going during a busy holiday season, I'd suggest doing 5 days. If you get bored of the parks, you can do something else for a half day. If you do that, you will need a car.

Food is expensive and it really isn't good. When you are walking around all day and you are starving, it is good. Otherwise, it is mediocre and you pay for the experience of being there rather that quality of food. You may want to book a hotel with a kitchen and be able to serve yourself a few meals. Some of those even include breakfast.

It isn't as easy as going to WDW in that you set up your own travel from airport to hotel, but as everyone has said, there are many hotels walking distance to the theme parks. You could stay at Grand Californian and be right next to the park, but it's an expensive option. We think it is worth it sometimes, but if we are just going to use the room to sleep and shower, we are happier staying somewhere else that is less expensive and has less expensive restaurants near it.

 

[momof2cuties]

Thanks all - thinking it may not be for Thanksgiving, but going to try to give DL a go sometime soon. I'm not seeing posts about different hotels, like there are for WDW in the resort area. Is there a good place to go to get an idea of lodging near DL - anything within walking distance?

 

[Spyral]

Here is a recent thread about nearby hotels/motels may want to check out:

Where are you staying on your next Disneyland Trip and Why?​

 

[Angel Ariel]

Thanks all - thinking it may not be for Thanksgiving, but going to try to give DL a go sometime soon. I'm not seeing posts about different hotels, like there are for WDW in the resort area. Is there a good place to go to get an idea of lodging near DL - anything within walking distance?

This DIS Unplugged DLR podcast has done a ton of reviews of the Good Neighbor hotels, many of which are in walking distance. Our personal preference is the Tropicana. We've always had clean, comfortable rooms and great service (and it's a 5 min walk to the turnstiles!).

Here is the Master List of the Reviews that Tom has done for the DLR podcast. I hope this helps!

 

[GrandBob]

http://www.accommodationsneardisney.com/Disneyland/default.asp

Stay at one of the hotels in the green area, and you won't be sorry. Close enough to walk and to take afternoon breaks.

 

[momof2cuties]

http://www.accommodationsneardisney.com/Disneyland/default.asp

Stay at one of the hotels in the green area, and you won't be sorry. Close enough to walk and to take afternoon breaks.

That's perfect. Thank you !

 

[bcla]

Disneyland is a locals park where people often go for a day or a few hours after work. Disney World is a huge tourist destination. You can't really compare the two.

I wouldn't know about that at this point. While locals get certain breaks on admission and have huge numbers with annual passes, the sheer number of hotels around Anaheim would indicate that there are a lot of people around the world who view Disneyland as a tourist destination. However, Southern California itself is a pretty big tourist destination, where maybe a day or two at Disneyland can be part of the travel plans.

Generally speaking, I sorta think the opposite. Going to DLR, you know upfront what it is not. It is not an all-encapsulating, activity-rich bubble. It's an obvious fact and even if you wish it weren't, you've planned a vacation around that fact. I think that's part of why so many first-timers from WDW fall in love with DL. They've prepared for no bubble, lowered their expectations, then entered DL and game on - the sublime charm and atmosphere of DL make up for a lot.

That's the way most people view going to an amusement park. At the end of the day you go back home, to your hotel, or maybe a friend's house. You have fun, then take a break, and maybe come back (or not).

 

[bcla]

People want to argue it's comparable, Disneyland is great but it is not in anyway comparible to disneyworld.
The argument that WDW is too big and therefore not as good (?) is like saying my ice cream sundae was too big. Silly. I agree with that buses are no fun, so the easy fix at WDW is rent a car, use über or stay on a monorail hotel.
After that you will be immersed in a magical world for as long as you are there.

No - what many are saying is that once there was a lot of land to build larger parks, that land was used to make it more expansive. Possibly less attention to detail, but more overall space to make it seem less packed. The tighter layout can make for a good experience with kids (or adults) tired of walking.

It's a different experience. Whether or not the experience of being at the park is better or worse is an individual opinion.