Sequoia lodge or Explorers

[beanie1]

We are a family of three 2 adults one son of 3 we have previously stayed at Holiday Inn but fancy a change and have better deals for the above hotels.

From what I can see the benefits of staying on site is its close to park, you can walk to park avoid bun fight of shuttles and you get more disney experience.

Cons are you have to book breakfast time slot and rooms sound a bit tired.

Things that draw me to the explorers are tea making facilities in rooms the pool and kids play area.

Have annual passes so therefore get EMH anyone stayed at both where would you prefer to stay?

 

[Bolanette87]

We are a family of three 2 adults one son of 3 we have previously stayed at Holiday Inn but fancy a change and have better deals for the above hotels.

From what I can see the benefits of staying on site is its close to park, you can walk to park avoid bun fight of shuttles and you get more disney experience.

Cons are you have to book breakfast time slot and rooms sound a bit tired.

Things that draw me to the explorers are tea making facilities in rooms the pool and kids play area.

Have annual passes so therefore get EMH anyone stayed at both where would you prefer to stay?

I haven't stayed at both, but have stayed at the Sequoia, and I have to say that we didn't find it 'tired'. We found it a lovely hotel, and the breakfast slots aren't tying- You can pretty much turn up whenever....

Hope you have a fabby time whatever you decide on!

Bob xoxoxox

 

[Ware Bears]

I've only stayed at the Explorers but considering the age of your son I'd go for the Sequoia as it's closer. Last October our room at the Explorers was looking a little "tired" and they also allocate breakfast time slots although I've never been held to them.

 

[ukstitch]

Whenever we've stayed in the Sequoia, we've never really had to book our breakfast slot. We've ha to take a card, but they've accepted it at any time after the one printed, so we tend to just take as early a time as possible \

Personally I'd opt for the sequoia, mainly because being on site is a really nice luxury as it allows you to wander through the village, do your shopping and then wander back to the hotel at any time.

having said that, we stay in the Davy Crockett and I don't find it too much of an issue being offsite, although this is mainly because we consist of 3 adults and 1 child whild the DCR caters quite nicely for

 

[DLPdaft]

Out of the 2, I've only stayed at the Explorers.

But would agree with the breakfast slot issue at SL - just turn up when you like - you are not tied to that time slot at all. I've had 8.15 slots before at both the Santa Fe and Cheyenne, turned up at 7.30, no problem at all and we practically had the restaurant to ourselves .

If price is comparable, or its not really an issue, I'd say SL.

Elaine

 

[miffy7]

and sequoia has Good morning fantasyland anyway.

 

[sarahc]

I'd go for Sequoia. We used to stay offsite and have stayed at Holiday Inn, Marriott and Explorer's which was a good hotel with a great pool (bit chilly though!) and some good play areas which including soft play and a pirate ship.
However, you can't beat the magic of a Disney hotel. Never thought I'd say that but it's true and DD5 absolutely loved it. She thought the characters being in the hotel was just the best! As others have said, they aren't strict with times but we always went for early slots anyway which were much quieter.

 

[Tillybud]

we stayed at the Explorers last year and we only used the pool twice, it was closed at one point due to some vomitting bug which was supposedly linked to too much chlorine or something like that. My hubby took full advantage of the kettle and although the room was nice for me it just took too long to get to the park, if prices are similar I'd definitely choose to stay nearer to the Park

 

[cap'njack.]

I'd always stay 'in the magic' unless the price was so competative to make it better staying off-site.

I just prefer a 10 minute walk over any other way of getting in, although the one stop on the RER is appealing.

 

[cookie334]

I agree with what the others have said, I'd stay in the magic everytime. It's not that much more expensive and if you're travelling to Disney every day 1 - you wont spend much time in the hotel anyway and 2 - it's a lot less hassle to walk or shuttle to the parks with a lo in tow.

Just my opinion but then I wouldn't ever stay off site anyway lol

 

[stonfiesta]

Personally i would never stay offsite. the SL is a superb hotel, nice theming and very cosy. As for the breakfast passes when we stayed at the SL last time we were 2 minutes late for our time slot and we had to join another queue while the people who had the proper timeslot were basically seated straight away.

 

[squizz]

If you are going in the winter months, there is no place better than the Sequoia Lodge. Cosying up in front of the fire in the bar with a lovely drink.
The only place that rivalled it was if you got a front facing central room when the HNY, but from what I understand they are now all suites, might be mistaken though. Stayed there when the Ice Rink was up, and could stand in your room looking out the window at the ice skating and lake.

Saying this, I've never stayed offsite. But to me the convienience outways the cost of being in a DLRP hotel.