on vs off site have you done both?

[IMADSNYLOVR]

Hi. We have only been to WDW one time and stayed at POR; we really enjoyed it but this time we are going to Universal also so we are thinking of staying at the Hawthorn Suites on Canada Ave/Dr? Then this Fantasy Pkg came out and we can stay at the Beach Club for 7 nights and the Hawthorn for the other 3. I am wondering if we should just stay at Hawthorn the whole time as planned or switch. I don't want to be totally let down after staying at BC and I know Hawthorn will be no comparison. Have you stayed off site and enjoyed it? Did you rent a car or take the shuttles? Thanks in advance!

 

[disneysteve]

This is a frequent source of discussion: on-site vs. off-site. Many people are passionately on one side or the other. Here's my input, and I'm sure you'll get lots more.

I've done both many times. The on-site hotels are wonderfully themed, but at the end of the day, as far as I'm concerned, a bed is a bed. Disney's rooms are very small, even in the nicer hotels. Disney's prices are very high compared to similar properties off-site.

I much prefer doing one of two things. If we want to spend as little as possible, we stay at an off-site budget hotel like Days Suites, EconoLodge Maingate, etc. Just as an example, in November 2002, we had a huge 1-bedroom suite with full kitchen at Days Suites for $39.95/nite. In March 2002, we had a 2-bedroom suite at Quality Suites for $105.00/nite (we split that 50-50 with a relative so only cost us $52.50/nite).

The other option when there are several of us is to rent a pool home. For under $150/nite, you can rent a 3-5 bedroom house with in-ground screened-in pool, fully equipped kitchen, TV's and often VCR's and video game systems. They also have a washer and dryer (not coin-op).

I doubt that we will stay on-site again until my daughter, now 7, is old enough to be on her own and wants to be able to use Disney transportation to get around. Until then, we're firmly in the off-site camp. And yes, we always have a car - either rented or our own if we drive down.

Steve

 

[hercamore]

Well, I have done only onsite, only offsite and a combination of off/on during the same trip.

A couple trips, we stayed at the aKL for a couple nites and then switched to the Residence Inn. We loved the AKL, but the space at the RI and free breakfast, plus reasonable rates make it such a value in lodging.

Once we stayed at Hard Rock for a couple nites for the FOTL, and then switched to the CBR. DD liked the HR better than the CBR.

We have had great vacations every time. We always rent a car and then switching hotels is easy. I have really liked our offiste site lodging.

It just depends on the rate I can get for a Disney hotel for our vacation time and who is coming with me. I have 2 adult children that need space for all our sanities.

Our last trip we stayed at OKW the entire time in a 2 br. It was lovely, but there are many offsite condos just as nice.

herc.

 

[Aubrey]

IMHO, if money is no object, and I mean REALLY no object, a monorail resort is the way to go. Okay, so only once in my life have I been able to do that (at the Poly). So, since the Disney busses are really no better than the shuttles from off-site I vote for off-site. I especially look for condo deals like Sabal Palms with access to the great themed pool at MWOC, or "old Florida" experiences like Tropical Palms (much like Fort Wilderness but nicer and cheaper). I make sure I have a car because I don't want to spend an hour in a bus lot at the end of the day with tired children. Theming is in the eye of the beholder and someplace like Tropical Palms is unique enough to be "themed" even without Mickey on the shampoo bottle. The money I save more than pays for the themed treats I bring to spread around among the kids. My kids would much prefer finding a Disney themed toy or two that they can bring home than a few hidden Mickeys in their hotel lobby. So my 2 cents is rent a car, stay offsite at someplace with a unique quirk to make it memorable, bring some themed items and scatter them around the room as soon as you check in. Then enjoy the savings and spacious digs.

We also did a pool home one year with our extended family. It was great having 5 bedrooms! For smaller groups though, a condo or cottage at Tropical Palms feels more "vacation-y" to me because it is more different than real life for us.

Oh, I think the point about teens making their way around the Disney parks on Disney transport is an excellent one. When our kids are 15 and older, we'll be back to onsite for a few years.

 

[Lisa AF]

We stayed in a vacation home last time. It was great to be able to spread out.

The only thing that would entice me back to "on site" is Early Entry. We love that hour that we can walk onto everything.

 

[merrywether]

I've done both, and there are pros and cons to both, as has already been discussed with the earlier postings. A few years ago, to conserve money, we split the cost of a vacation home with some friends. I was skeptical at first because I had always been a die-hard for staying on property. However, the house was fantastic. It was almost brand new and was incredibly clean. We were 10 mins. by car from Disney and 5 minutes from 192 with supermarkets, Walmart, CVS, etc. The house had 3 bedrooms and 2 full baths. Most vacation homes have their own private, inground, screened in pools and all the amenities of home.
We enjoyed it so much, my husband and I booked a house for our honeymoon last December. The privacy and all the room we had were priceless. We saved money by staying offsite (our house was $90 a night), which we used to eat at some of the nicer restaurants in WDW that we wouldn't have been able to afford otherwise. In a couple weeks, we're bringing my parents and my in-laws to WDW with us and we're all staying in a 4 bedroom vacation home which is costing us approx. $100 a night. The vacation home companies charge by the size of the home, not the size of your party. We also got an AP rate of about the same to stay at CBR, so we're staying there the last 2 nights of our vacation. It will be a nice mix of onsite and offsite.
So yes, staying offsite is fine, and very cost and space effective if staying with more than 2 adults in a room.

 

[undertheradar]

I agree that this is a tough choice. You don't provide enough info to make a true comparison. In some instances, each option has merit. In my experiences, I have found that staying offsite is best for my family. As a family of five- kids are DS 12, DD 5 and DD 7, we need the benefit of more space and we need to watch our costs. Depending on time of year that you travel, ages in your group or family and individual taste in lodging are all factors to consider. My trip budget always reflects savings from lodging with a kitchen. We find that a week or more of nothing but eating out does not agree with us. My family loves going to Albertsons and picking out those all important comfort foods that each prefers. We do some meals out, but find the flexibility of a kitchen a BIG plus.
Our history of stays by hotel: Disney Inn(1 DS), Poly(0 DK), PO(3 DK), FWH (2 DK), GF (2 DK), CTD-DTD (3 DK), Grosvenor (3 DK), Sunspree ( 2 DK), Grande Vista (3 DK)- this is my kids favorite place.
If you want to be immersed in Disney 24 hours a day, stay onsite. If you enjoy a break, stay offsite. Remember to factor in driving when making a choice. Some like to explore, and driving down 192 is an experience. If you don't like driving once you get to your resort, then staying onsite is the best choice.
Hope this helps!

 

[Lewisc]

1) HAVE A CAR if you stay offsite. The shuttles are scheduled and limited.

2) I'd stay at a Universal hotel for a few nights. Should be able to get a rate of $100-$150 (Entertainment rate or Hotwire). Deluxe hotels, walk or boat to Universal parks and front of the line access.

The Universal on site hotesl offer so much more for the $$ than Disney on site hotels.

 

[tebright]

I think it is complete personal preference but it's a hard decision. I was going through the same thing a month ago but I finally did book my Disney trip last week and we are staying off site at HIFS.

It just works for our family. I don't mind staying offsite because we drive to the parks anyway but I would like to stay onsite sometime but I would need to stay at a home away from home resort which I can't afford right now.

I have an 11 year old autistic son that needs complete darkness and quiet to go to bed and just needs his own space. If we would stay at a value or moderate resort in Disney we wouldn't have that.

So maybe in a couple of years I will be able to splurge and stay at a home away from home resort but not for right now. Sometime I'll have to try renting a home but never had an interest in that because we like to be around the action and people. The kids love all the activities at the hotels.

Good luck in your planning and just think about what is most important to your family.

 

[MulanMom]

We've done both. Others have already done a great job highlighting the pros and cons of on and off property accommodations. However, you might want to consider that the FTP is likely the best deal you'll come across on WDW resorts *and* tickets. If in the future you wanted to try the BC, you may be paying much more for it. Off-property deals are abundant and will always be there.

 

[Aubrey]

Ooh, very good point, MulanMom. If the Fairytale Package is available during one's visit then that is almost too good to pass up. Unless you really utilize the extra space to spread out and cherish having a kitchen available.

 

[Skinsfan]

We've done both. We prefer off-site,(because we book 2-br condos...one you've had one, you'll never go back!), If you really love Disney, and this is your first time then you should try to stay on-site. It's a wonderful experience. After that first magical time, however, then on subsequent trips, I would stay off-site, for many of the reasons the previous posters stated. Hope this helps!

 

[Lisa P.]

If you had planned on using those park passes for every day of your stay anyhow, it may be a good deal for the onsite portion. Disney Deluxe hotels are very nice. If you wanted to stretch your value with park hopper passes (which don't expire), it may not be the deal you'd thought.

Having done both (on/off) many times with a family of 5 (plus guests on some trips) and preferring to spend a few days of our trips relaxing around the pools, this is what I'd consider:

If you'll go from an onsite hotel room to a spacious offsite condo or suite, that's fine. You'd probably really appreciate the added (personal) space at the end of a long trip together! If you'll go from an offsite, decent hotel room to an onsite deluxe resort, that's fine too. You'll enjoy the upgrade in resort amenities. If you'll go between an onsite Disney hotel and an onsite Universal hotel, visit Universal last because they offer FOTL privileges (no waiting in lines), which spoil people!

But if you're planning to go from an onsite, themed, deluxe resort hotel room to an offsite, modest hotel room, then you're in for a real letdown, IMHO. Even if you thought you were prepared. If that's your game plan, see if you can switch your reservations to stay in the ordinary hotel first and move to the deluxe, themed resort second.

This is a pet peeve of mine. Folks on some of these boards tend to compare deluxe onsite resorts with basic offsite hotels, then comment negatively (and rather definitively) about staying offsite. No kidding, if that's the comparison!

FWIW, our family really prefers and enjoys all the deluxe amenities of spacious, luxury condos. These are (by far!) most affordable offsite and we love them! We don't like to get up early on vacation for EE. We prefer to drive rather than stand in line for crowded, smelly buses. And we really appreciate the inroom jacuzzi, washer/dryer, kitchen, extra bathrooms and TVs. We've done the onsite DVC thing and the themes are nice but don't make or break our vacation. So, offsite timeshares are our choice. YMMV. HTH.

 

[debbie655]

We had been going to Disney for years and never stayed onsite. I really felt I was missing something. A few years ago I was able to get a really good rate at the CBR. While it was nice and we had a great vacation, I realized that we had a great vacation wherever we stayed. For me, there really was nothing "special" about staying onsite. We stayed at the HIFS the following year and loved it. We've also stayed at the Vistana Villages and Marriott Horizons. For me, the extra space was so worth it and didn't affect the "magic" at all for my family. Last year (we are staying there again next month too) we stayed at the Royal Pacific Resort, now in that case it is worth it to me. Easy access to the parks, gorgeous hotel, front of line access on the rides and a rate that can't be beat. It's really a personal thing, some wouldn't stay anywhere else but a Disney resort.

 

[Favorite Auntie]

I have been going to Disney since 1976, and we have always stayed on site. It seems to complete the feeling of magic for me. But that is just me. We stayed in the Villas once and they didn't have the same Disney feel, I felt like I was off site, so I will never stay there again. The Polynesian is my favorite, with the Contemporary coming in a close second. I evel LOVE Fort Wilderness! They just all have the Disney feel to them.

 

[Robinrs]

Are you going to Universal or both Disney and Universal? The onsite hotels at Universal are simply awesome and the FOTL advantages are worth every dime if you check it out.

As for onsite Disney vs offsite Disney I guess it depends on the individual. I prefer SPACE and lots of it so I stay offsite mostly. I have stayed onsite twice, once at a suite at the Dolphin which I got for a deal but it usually goes for $1100 a NIGHT! Not going to do that again!

I would always have a car offsite. The shuttles are way too much of a hassle especially with little ones.

 

[KLAIT]

We have done both and actually prefer off site. At the end of a hectic and busy day, we have enjoyed heading out of Disney to sort of "decompress" - especially with little ones. We have found that there are usually less people around and can swim or sit in the hot tub and relax a bit.

 

[jeff968]

We have done both for many years and as with everything, there are pros and cons to both. Given the choice, I prefer off-site. Your money goes much farther, you get much more, and there is so much more to Orlando then Disney. That said, you can't beat the quality of a Disney resort. This past February we spent two days at the Animal Kingdom lodge and a week at orange Lake. The Disney resort was beautiful, perfectly clean, the pool was incredible, the food, fantastic, lots of things to do and see, and getting to and from the parks was a breeze. The downside, expensive and we had five of us in a small room. We left AKL and went to Orange lake. OL was not the best timeshare I have been to. i would rate the Vistana and the HGVC both as nicer places. Still, for $599 for a two bedroom on President's week how can you go wrong. Plenty of room, lots of pools and things to do. And we get out often to try out other great restaurants and shop and visit other spots. There are so many neat places in Orlando to visit. Citywalk is great, Race rock, the Belz mall, wonderworks, I could go on and on. Disney is great. Nobody does it better but I can't imagine an entire week there. I would hate to see my Credit Card bill the next month.