Is staying off site at WDW all that bad?

[Disneyland1084]

I have reservations at Double Tree Suites in Disney Springs (in case nothing better comes up) for my first trip to WDW next June. It's DH, me, our two DD's and DH's sister. That makes 5. If a good deal comes up at a Disney resort for a room that can fit 5, we will take it. Otherwise, we find that it's cheaper to stay off site. We will be there for TWO weeks with ten day park hopper tickets. I'm familiar with the perks I'll be missing out on by not staying on site. But what I really want to know is, is staying off site ok? Are the trips still fun? I know some say it takes away from the Disney magic. If this matters, most of the times I've been to Disneyland I've stayed at a good neighbor hotel and it NEVER took away from any of the magic. Of course I would love to stay on site at WDW, but if we can't justify the extra money, then what's the point? Please tell me all the goods to staying off site please.

 

[Schilltastic4]

I think attitude comprises at least 80% of a trips success and it sounds like you've got that down! We stayed off site for several trips because we couldn't swing the onsite resorts. We still had super great visits! We stay on site now because our kids are old enough to take full advantage of extra magic hours. You are going to have a blast!

 

[Schilltastic4]

oh, and we actually stayed at that hotel and they have warm cookies! and super HUGE rooms! and our room had a soaking tub!! It was great!

 

[Disneyland1084]

I think attitude comprises at least 80% of a trips success and it sounds like you've got that down! We stayed off site for several trips because we couldn't swing the onsite resorts. We still had super great visits! We stay on site now because our kids are old enough to take full advantage of extra magic hours. You are going to have a blast!

You're right. For a whole year I did massive research and planning for this trip. I was all set to book a package at one of the values when my SIL said she got the time off for the trip. That's when we started looking at off site hotels. I was so bummed at first, but then we came to the compromise that we'll stay at an off site hotel as long as it was walking distance to Disney Springs.

 

[mickey2minnie1]

While onsite is what we prefer, we stayed at a 3 bedroom beautiful condo in a luxury resort. It had three baths too. We had a car and it was fantastic!​

 

[Deb & Bill]

This is your difference. DLR is 160 acres (0.25 sq miles). WDW is 43 sq miles. DLR has three hotels on the property. WDW has over 25 hotels on the property. WDW is the size of San Francisco. Can you walk around San Francisco? I think not. You are a mile from Disney Springs staying at the Doubletree Guest Suites. And you are still miles from any of the four theme parks. Staying at a Good Neighbor hotel at DL is not the same as staying offsite at WDW.

Getting to the theme parks from your hotel and then back to the hotel is going to eat up your time. Plus getting between parks if you decide to go to a different park on the same day. Your bus will not drop you off at the MK; you'll be dropped off at the Ticket & Transportation Center - then monorail or take a boat over to the MK.

My guess is that after a few days of spending a lot of time riding to where you want to go you will try to find something onsite. Two weeks offsite is a long time.

 

[Jennasis]

We own DVC and stay on site...but since we are out of points and wanted a last minute trip this December, we are staying off-site. I have stayed off-site many times in years past, and our trips have always been great. We have a car, so that helps with transportation. Driving to the theme parks has never taken us longer than waiting for Disney transportation whether on site or off. Our trips are always magical no matter where we stay. Of COURSE we prefer our on site stays when possible, but off-site is a great option.

 

[EmmyKay]

In 2015 my family stayed offsite at the Hilton Bonnet Creek. The hotel was gorgeous with a fantastic pool. My only complaint with staying offsite is the transportation was not as good as it is with on site resorts. If I stay offsite in the future, I would not plan on taking mid day breaks because the commute back and forth was way too time consuming. Other than that, you can absolutely have an amazing, magical time offsite. Have a wonderful trip!

 

[ols386]

We've stayed at Wyndham Bonnet Creek, and loved it, except that they didn't have many food options. We ate most meals at the parks. Loved their lazy river. They also have programs for kids, and miniature golf.

 

[Govols1997]

We just returned from a week off site. We had a six bedroom home with a private pool and hot tub. We loved being off site. We were about four miles from AK. It was so nice to have our own car. We actually did more park hopping than we did last year on site. It was so nice to have took to relax and spread out at the house. I could not go back to an over priced hotel on site now. The buses, tiny fridges, one bathroom. It doesn't compare. Maybe if we could afford a villa or something I'd go back on site. We paid $1500 for a six bed four bath house. Even with $20 parking, no way we could beat that deal.

 

[potterfanatic]

I have primarily stayed off site and always had a great time. I found staying off site so much more budget friendly (as a family of 5 also) when we drove to WDW. However, please remember to take into consideration the cost of renting a car and parking at the parks if you are flying in. When I did the math my last trip it ended up cheaper for me to stay at POR than to stay at a hilton brand hotel.

 

[DisneyPiPhi]

It's not bad at all, particularly in a nice hotel like Doubletree! We stay onsite because we are a family of three, so for us, POP Century (or sometime last one of the mods) is cheaper than or comparable to an off site hotel + paying $20 to park every day. With 3 adults, Ineould certainly look at off site resorts or condos.

 

[mernin]

We've stayed off site more than on site and have had great trips each time. We rent a condo less than 20 minutes from door to TTC for far less than an onsite hotel. We rent a car and it gives us some freedom to go outside the park.

I'm excited to stay onsite on our next trip, but honestly likely will miss the space at the condo!

 

[Nancyg56]

I think that offsite if fine but you need to be realistic about transportation and costs associated with that. My sister stayed at her time share, and enjoyed it, but found that travel back and forth was time consuming.

If I was staying two weeks, and was staying offsite, my touring plans would be a little different than an onsite stay. I doubt that I would plan mid day breaks. My plan would be to either arrive early, stay til a specific time and then leave, or arrive later in the day and stay til park close.

 

[kmb584]

I have reservations at Double Tree Suites in Disney Springs (in case nothing better comes up) for my first trip to WDW next June. It's DH, me, our two DD's and DH's sister. That makes 5. If a good deal comes up at a Disney resort for a room that can fit 5, we will take it. Otherwise, we find that it's cheaper to stay off site. We will be there for TWO weeks with ten day park hopper tickets. I'm familiar with the perks I'll be missing out on by not staying on site. But what I really want to know is, is staying off site ok? Are the trips still fun? I know some say it takes away from the Disney magic. If this matters, most of the times I've been to Disneyland I've stayed at a good neighbor hotel and it NEVER took away from any of the magic. Of course I would love to stay on site at WDW, but if we can't justify the extra money, then what's the point? Please tell me all the goods to staying off site please.

My opinion is no. We have stayed offsite many times, mainly at the Sheraton Vistana, and I don't feel that our offsite stays lacked in magic whatsoever. We travel as a party of 5, ages ranging from 7-83, and having two bedrooms, two bathrooms, and space to escape one another are key. At the Vistana, our 10-night trip cost around $2,000 for a 2-bedroom unit. We've recently started staying in a 2-bedroom villa at BLT to the tune of almost $12,000 for the same length of stay. Transportation can be an issue as offsite resorts run their shuttles at odd times, but we always have a car and drive to the parks so it did not affect us. Take parking fees into consideration too. We're AP holders so, for us, it's free; otherwise, be sure to tack on $20/day if driving to the parks.

 

[Hopefully]

It will matter to me. The offsite shuttle inconvenience is huge. We like to take a mid day break and then back out for dinner and the evening.
You will still have a good trip, but you have to realize it is nothing like Disneyland.

 

[AtlantaDisneyDreamer]

You can have a wonderful vacation on or off site. If I am going on vacation to go to WDW, I want to be onsite. No question. I don't like to leave the Disney bubble. But then, we are a family of four and can get a beautiful standard room at AKL for not much more than we can get a nice room or suite off site. I don't need much room, but I do like being in such beautiful surroundings. I also love being able to split up two and two and head to or leave the parks early, depending on which child wants to do what. A couple of weeks ago my younger daughter really wanted to stay and watch the parade, while the older one was exhausted and wanted to go back to the resort. Because we were staying on site, that was very easy to do. DH took the older one back and I stayed with the little one. Staying off site, you really have to travel as a group. I definitely miss some magic staying off site and when it is up to me, we choose on site. For the kids, I don't think we can beat the Disney-themed pools. They are just much neater than the generic pools (although admittedly often nice) pools at the off site resorts.


DH, on the other hand, cares a lot more about personal space and room to spread out. He also does not mind driving through Orlando traffic to go back and forth to the parks. He prefers to get a large suite at an off site resort. He doesn't care about theming, either.

I think the kids would be happy wherever we were.

When we travel with my mom and become a family of five, off site is definitely more appealing. We love the cabins at FW, but they are very expensive. They are worth the cost to me, but not necessarily to my husband (and since I pay for the vacations, we usually end up on site anyway).

It really is a matter of what you want and what your priorities are. If being immersed in Disney and convenient transportation are the priorities, then on site is the way to go. If having room to move and an extra bathroom and your budget are the priorities, then off site is a great choice.

 

[nursejackie]

We have stayed off site and on site. It would be stating the obvious to say we prefer on site but we would stay off site again if:

1. We could not afford to stay on site. I think sticking to your budget is the best thing to do as you may feel the need to penny-pinch while you are there to make up for the overspend.
2. They get rid of EMH. There are rumours they are phasing them out (there are less this December than ever). If this happens we won't be paying thousands extra to stay on site (usually 15-17 nights). We have a car and rarely use the transport so how can we justify it?

 

[Mousemommy1]

For us, it would be that bad, but our Disney bubble is a priority on vacation. DH doesn't want to have to drive, and we just love the Disney resorts so much that we would be sad staying elsewhere. But, plenty of people do it just fine. We are willing to pay the money for the exact experience we are looking for and shelling out $$ to stay onsite is necessary in our case.

 

[rwdavis2]

Boy, for 2 weeks I would rent a vacation home. Most are not very expensive. We've used All Star Vacation homes in Windsor Hills, about 10 minutes off property.