Alaska vs Norwegian Fjords

Alaska vs Norwegian Fjords -- what are the pros and cons of each? We can't decide which way to go!

i haven't been to alaska, but here are some photos of my visit to geirangerfjord in norway: http://family.webshots.com/album/560861663BoHOQP

We've been to both, more than once. Both locations are wonderful!!! If you want to see glaciers, Alaska is your choice - unless your cruise is heading to the FAR north part of Norway (i.e. Spitsbergen). The fjords of Norway are lush and green, with a more 'intimate' feeling. Alaska has mountains with ice and snow. We couldn't pick one over the other. :D

We have also been both places, more to Norway though. If I had a decision to make between the two, I would choose Norway without a moment's hesitation. I love the fjords and the whole country! Now you've got me thinking...........

I love the fjords and the whole country! Now you've got me thinking...........

Esther E, your comment made me think of a fact some CC'ers may not know. Norway consistently tops the UN's "best countries in which to live" list, far ahead of the U.S. and Canada. I need to visit to discover more myself.

(BTW, I subscribed to this thread before I posted, because I find this topic so interesting.)

I've been to Alaska 3 times, Norway once, and we're going to Norway again next April.

The only "con" to Norway is the distance you have to travel to get there.

They're both lovely...and quite different. Norway is "up close and personal" -- you see the mountains right outside your window, close enough to feel like you can touch them. If you travel up and through the fjords, you'll see homes, farms, orchards, beautiful small towns all through them.

Alaska is vast..wide open spaces. Distance is deceptive. You'll see a tiny "dot" out on the horizon, miles and miles away, and be told it's an elk, or moose. You'll see a glacier and not have a sense of just how huge it is..until you notice the tiny kayak with two people in it, up along side the glacier..and it looks like a child's toy.

Norway is less crowded with tourists than Alaska..at least when we were there this April. There isn't the mad rush to town, swamped with thousands of others just off their ships, but a more muted tourist experience.

We love both, but right now are leaning towards Norawy..probably because we're planning our cruise.. :) but I really can't think of any "cons" to either trip..except the distance..

Alaska Pluses:

Wildlife

Glaciers (most Norwegian cruises don't go to the glaciers there)

Alaska minuses: can be crowded

very little "culture" in port stops

Norwegian Pluses:

Seldom crowded

Best Fjords (others are Chile and New Zealand)

Lots of history (Oslo and Bergen)

Norwegian minuses:

Norway is very expensive .. cup of coffee is >$5 US .. no refills

ab0si sums it up very well, IMO.

Solve your own problem - do both, in different years if need be.

Why choose? Do both if you can. They are as different as your imagination allows, and as similar as any shared experience can be. "Culture", as mentioned above, is very subjective; Alaska coastal towns are rich with the cultural heritage of migratory peoples dating back longer than recorded history, even ice ages. Norway as well has a wonderful and rich heritage of peoples who've long known the clockworks of winter and summer, the ebb and flow of wind and sea.

Don't choose, if you can help it; do both! And remember, there are fjordlands in New Zealand, Chile and Argentina, Russia, Canada, and other places as well.

We sailed for 14 days on the Ryndam in Alaska in 2009 and I absolutely LOVED it. Onboard we met others who said "if you like Alaska, you'll LOVE Norway!".

In July 2011 we're doing a 22 day B2B on the Eurodam that takes us to 10 countries, Norway included. So we'll get to find out which we prefer! :cool: :D

I've been to Alaska 5 times, and Norway about twice that number.

They are both similar in that there are mountains coming from the sea, and that it can be cool/cold and rainy, or warm/hot and sunny. There's no predicting. The sense of being enclosed by the mountains is more pronounced in Norway.

I very much agree with ab0si's list of pros and cons. Travel to either is brutal from the US east coast, and for each you will need to arrive at least one day before your cruise.

You can't go wrong with either choice.

We like them both too. There is definetly more wildlife in Alaska, including a far greater chance of seeing whales as well as something more exotic like a bear. I think Norway has the edge on scenery and you can have a true midnight sun experience since they go above the Arctic Circle.

I have never been to Alaska, but I liked Norway very much. the fjords were beautiful. Also, Bergen was a very interesting Medieval city.

I've been to Alaska 3 times, Norway once, and we're going to Norway again next April.

 

The only "con" to Norway is the distance you have to travel to get there.

 

They're both lovely...and quite different. Norway is "up close and personal" -- you see the mountains right outside your window, close enough to feel like you can touch them. If you travel up and through the fjords, you'll see homes, farms, orchards, beautiful small towns all through them.

 

Alaska is vast..wide open spaces. Distance is deceptive. You'll see a tiny "dot" out on the horizon, miles and miles away, and be told it's an elk, or moose. You'll see a glacier and not have a sense of just how huge it is..until you notice the tiny kayak with two people in it, up along side the glacier..and it looks like a child's toy.

 

Norway is less crowded with tourists than Alaska..at least when we were there this April. There isn't the mad rush to town, swamped with thousands of others just off their ships, but a more muted tourist experience.

 

We love both, but right now are leaning towards Norawy..probably because we're planning our cruise.. :) but I really can't think of any "cons" to either trip..except the distance..

Beautiful description. Now I want to go.

I am a 50% Norwegian and would love to go there someday. Do you all go by HAL?