California travel

Hi there

Can somebody please guide me, we will be driving from San francisco to LA on a rented car and staying 3-4 days in LA and then driving to Las Vegas.

So should we return our car in LA and rent again after 4 days or would we need a car in LA as well. Please let us know.

Thanks a million

You will definitley need a car in LA as the public transportation is very poor.
Enjoy

Having done a similar trip last year I would not go near La and instead I would spend all my time in San Fran and Vegas.

There is nothing really to see or do in LA and its a pretty dull place with alot of homesless and begging on most streets.

there are a few things still to do in LA like 6 Flags & Universal Studios.

You dfinitely need a car though. Drive the coast road from SF to LA and stop off in places like Carmel & Monterey. San Jose & Santa Cruz are also great cities/towns

Public transport in LA.... well I have been on it and it can be used but it isn't the most user friendly. The bus stops are easily passed without noticing, and when you do find one you don't always know what bus it is for, finding information on connections is not easy, the spread of buses is pretty thin and I found (particularly Downtown) that the users can be a little intimidating (they weren't lying in Speed - locals only use the bus when they have absolutely no other choice). There is an underground metro network which I haven't tried but it is pretty limited. Also to note, there are several overlapping municipal services run by different companies. Basically the "city" is vast, sprawling, network and it extends over huge distances so the bus network is enormous, visible but not terribly usable. It is easy to have to travel twenty or thirty miles to get somewhere, so bussing places takes quite a bit of time. Also it just isn't pedestrian-friendly at all (a few places aside), street art is placed to be viewed through a windscreen for example. It is possible to navigate and get around on the bus but the hassle is not worth it for a few days. Hang onto the car, and "enjoy" the smoggy traffic if you aren't travelling alone you should be able to use the pool lanes on the free-ways. One thing to note, is that because of the increase in gas prices, the impact of environmentalism, the grinding traffic jams and a slow realisation that not all is right, LA is trying to improve it's [broken link removed]network... just not by the time you get there!!

I would second kkelliher, LA is not a patch on SF (haven't been to Vegas) but if your heart is set on it... stay out of Downtown (don't mind the advertising literature - unless you like the unedifying vision of rampant poverty, drug addiction, homelessness, etc right next to extreme wealth). Santa Monica and Venice Beach are worth a view. The museum district on the Golden Mile is worth looking at. Rodeo drive is worth walking down, Beverly Hills and the tour of the stars houses, Hollywood Boulevard in parts. Enough for a few days, enough to say you have seen the place but not my thing.

LA is a waste of time. Most of the drive to SF is to be honest only so-so. It gets good at the Big Sur (near SF). Santa Barbara is gorgeous & I'd recommend a few days there. The Monterey Peninsula is great. There's a picture-perfect place called Carmelle nearby where Clint Eastwoods from.

Piece of advice get yourself a GPS system with the car. It will make your life a lot easier on the highways. No fun on 6 lane highways trying to figure out where your going.
BTW San Francisco has huge amount of homeless people as well.
Monterey is nice and Santa Barbara is nice. Both places worth a stop.

True, totally agree the homeless problem in SF is perhaps even more visible and more ingrained than in LA. I was shocked by it in both places but I felt more vaguely threatened and uncomfortable in LA than in SF. SF is also far, far nicer and the surrounding countryside is beautiful, I second the recommendation for Santa Barbara - very pleasant and pretty place.

thanks a million guys for your help. I will reduce time I will spend in LA (1-2 days) and increase time on the drive and las vegas and I will keep the car all the way now.

Also GPS navigation is a must. My friend who went to usa said that it makes life much more easier. So I will certainly go with that.

SF is fantastic havent been to LA but everyone who has tells me its no-go (as in dangerous), filthy and I have heard numerous stories about being confronted by people with guns murders outside hostels, etc.

Hi Ramlal,

I've just returned from something similar. We flew to vegas stayed in a hotel on the strip, would def do this, stayed for three nights, plenty time. Then we flew to San Diego and stayed in Pacific Beach, gorgeous place. Went to Sea World etc. We then rented a car with National, this company gave us the best deal, we also got a GPS(life saver) if you are driving in LA get one of these. We spent 2 nights/3days in LA we stayed in santa monica lovely here don't stay downtown. Hotel will organise Hollywood hills trip, we then drove to Universal studios ourselves and that night went to Santa Barbara, lovely place wish we stayed longer. We then took the coast raod to Carmel through the Big Sur- Carmel is very quiet but gorgeous- places shut down at eight restaurants half nine, so if you are looking for a mad place don't come here. Although we found a lovely bar serving food late- Brophys. From here do the 17mile drive through Pebble beach golf course.
We then headed for Napa and Sonoma(wine country- lovely up there) we stayed there for one night and came back down to San Fran- stay in Union square and book Alcatraz trip before ye head over. You will have a ball- enjoy

We did this trip two years ago but flew into LA and drove along coast to San F (foggy all the way in July) we stayed 2 days in Santa Monica across the road from the beach (a Travel Inn hotel - passable) we stayed two nights in Pismo beach in hotel on the beach for half the cost really beautiful. We drove to Las Vegas from San Francisco with just one night stop over in Motel on way. When in Vegas dont forget to drive out to Grand Cannon we did that in one day - really worth it. We then drove to San Diago for last three days really beautiful - dont forget a day trip over the Mexico border - we did this trip in just over two weeks with plenty of time in everywhere we visited. The roads are so good there that you just eat up the miles in no time. Enjoy I envy you

To be honest LA is not great. Stay 2-3 days max; I stayed in Hollywood for 3 days 3 years ago; novelty wore off after about a half day. Universal Studios is a must if you are in the city. Oh definitely keep the car for LA, as other posters have mentioned, the city is huge and the public transport system is poor; very car orientated.

Far better spending more of your valuable time in San Francisco, Las Vegas or one of the many stunning National Parks e.g. Yosemite or Death Valley.

Hi

while driving down pacific coast highway, you should consider stopping at Hearst Castle. It was one of the highlights of my trip. LA is worth going to even if only to drive on one of the 9 lanes wide freeways.

LA without a car is not the impossibility everyone says, especially if you're only there for a few days and are centrally located. Shelling out for a hop-on, hop-off bus tour will let you see plenty of the more touristy points of interest and kept me more than busy for a day. Spent another great day cycling around Santa Monica/ Venice/ Marina Del Rey.
The city is so huge, it only makes sense to treat it as a series of seperate locations, to be taken one at a time. The metro is fairly skeletal, but is absolutely fine if it happens to go where you want. Making connections across two or more lines ends up taking quite a long time though.
I think the key to getting anything out of LA is planning. If you go there expecting to be able to explore it on a wing and a prayer, you'll be lost, car or no car. It's definitely worth the bit of effort!