Layout of WL?

[trayletha]

How spread out is the WL, as compared to the GF? We've stayed at the GF twice and I loved it - very convenient. So as compared how is the WL, am I going to be disappointed after the GF?

 

[grimley1968]

I've never stayed at GF, so I can't really give you a valid comparison. However, if you're familiar with the Poly, WL sort of has a similar feel to it, except that it really has the main lobby, and two wings surrounding the feature pool, open on the end facing the lake. The Poly similarly has the GCH and two longhouses surrounding its feature pool and is open facing the lake. Of course the Poly has all those other longhouses, while WL really has no other buildings, except of course the Villas.

I found WL very slightly easier to get around than the Poly. It's also easier to walk around indoors than the Poly, which really separates its longhouses more, for obvious theming reasons.

I'd say WL is probably just slightly more spread out than GF, simply because it seems to accommodate more guests. But then, if you get a woods or standard view room near the lobby, walking around to the food court, lobby, etc. really is quite easy and quick. The WL has the quickest elevators I've ever seen. If you get a courtyard view, you're more likely to have a bit of a walk to the lobby, since most courtyard view rooms are along the wings.

 

[helenk]

To me the GF and the WL are complete opposites. The WL is rustic, the lobby is beautiful, the resort is set up in kinda of a l_l shape the lobby is in the center and there are the two wings. In the courtyard is the main pool, over to the right is the VWL, and the quiet pool is between the wing and the VWL The rooms are smaller than the GF and they are "darker" to fit in with the rustic theme.
The food court is nice, we thought it had a pretty good selection, it is actually on the floor below the lobby. Everything is more "contained at the WL, as the GF has the main building and then the outer buildings.
Of course you do not have the monorail to the MK but the boat system was fine.
The GF, as you know, is light and airy and the rooms are bigger, they have 2 queen beds as well as a day bed, whereas the WL only has the 2 queen beds.
In order to get to the snack bar you have to leave your building and go to Gasparilla's.
I loved staying at both resorts, but since they are so different in their themeing it just depends on what your looking for.

 

[GF Girl]

There is really no comparing the two.
The WL is really a beautiful and rustic atmosphere. I have stayed there 2 times and I was very happy there.
But I am also an annual vistor to the GF, which is absolutely gorgeous. I love the victorian themes.
WL will be great if you are ready for a bit of a change. It is slightly more affordable too! The layout is not as spread out as GF. It is shaped like a squared U. All rooms have access to the Lobby without walking outside, unless you are staying at the Villas.
Atmosphere is very dark, rustic and layed back. I think you will enjoy it, I would recommend it to anyone.

 

[daannzzz]

Compared to the Grand Floridian the Wilderness Lodge is somewhat compact. It is all in one building and even if you are at the end of the hallway it isn't that far.

 

[trayletha]

Thanks everyone - sounds like it is actually easier to get around, so I've got my fingers crossed. DH talked me into it, I am a GF girl - if it is Victorian and frilly sign me up!

 

[Troy08]

It is very easy to get around the WL. There are all kinds of shortcuts to bypassing the lobby if you want to get to the Roaring Forks , mercantile or the pool area. It is a very beautiful, rustic and relaxing resort. The theming is outstanding.

If you should happen to run into some lousy weather and want to spend time in the hotel, just meander on down the lobby, sit for a spell and people watch. It's a fun thing to do or sit in front of the giant fireplace in one of the large wooden rockers. For a large hotel, it is extremly compact, and very easy to navigate.

 

[SueM in MN]

Here's a link to the WL map and a link to the GF to compare with.
GF has 900 rooms and WL has 728, so it is more compact.

 

[pooh2001]

SueM in MN - thanks for the WL map - you are the best.

We have been to WDW many times before- but never stayed at WL.
Plan to do so next June.

The map is a great way to get to know the WL before we go.

Hint: If you can not print it from the link- then do a copy and save to a file on your thinkpad. Then use a picture print program (Windows Picture and Fax Viewer or Kodak picture print).
The map will look smaller - but still readable.

 

[sleepydog25]

Here's a link with a great aerial view of WL: http://www.disboards.com/showthread.php?t=876259&highlight=nature+trail
Go down to the 12th post (by Bicker, I believe) and you'll find a great shot of WL (green roofs) and VWL (red roof). It really is a cozier resort than most--very easy to get around. . .or to lose yourself in a rocking chair by a fireplace. Hope this helps! aw:

 

[jarestel]

Thanks everyone - sounds like it is actually easier to get around, so I've got my fingers crossed. DH talked me into it, I am a GF girl - if it is Victorian and frilly sign me up!

Just to prepare you... WL is the exact opposite of Victorian and frilly. Still a wonderful hotel, but definitely not "frilly".

Have a great trip!

 

[SueM in MN]

SueM in MN - thanks for the WL map - you are the best.

Thanks.
We have gone to GF many times to eat and spend a little time away from MK, but we never stayed there.
We have stayed at DVC at WL. The resort is very nice, compact and easy to get around. As someone else said, definitely not frilly, but very impressive and nice. The woods around it and the decor do make you feel like you are in some resort in Montana.