Compare and review AmaWaterways vs Viking

...

How was you experience with Viking on the Elegant Elbe? ...

Wonderful. However Elbe river is very unpredictable: while we had a perfect weather and no low water issues in March this year, a year ago the same cruise was just cancelled due to the snow and docking locations closure.

...

In July we sailed with Avalon and yes we were docked in an out of the way location in Budapest but were given a night time sail after dinner to see all of the lights of Budapest, what a great treat that was, something I NEVER saw viking do. Also the location of the Viking dock in Budapest was busy, guests were overlooked by everyone at night on the Chain Bridge. ...

About the location: it might be busy but it is very convenient. I could only found this "taxi" map but it is very self describing:

"A" is where Viking is usually docked.

"2", "4" - Ama.

Easy to see which one is closer to Parliament, Castle district, Opera etc... In fact "A" is in a walking distance from all major attractions. At the same time with Ama we had to take a tram/subway.

Wonderful. However Elbe river is very unpredictable: while we had a perfect weather and no low water issues in March this year, a year ago the same cruise was just cancelled due to the snow and docking locations closure.

 

 

About the location: it might be busy but it is very convenient. I could only found this "taxi" map but it is very self describing:

"A" is where Viking is usually docked.

"2", "4" - Ama.

Easy to see which one is closer to Parliament, Castle district, Opera etc... In fact "A" is in a walking distance from all major attractions. At the same time with Ama we had to take a tram/subway.

We were at the V1 location for our cruise. Never felt like it was too busy or that people were looking at us from the bridge.

Lots of passion on this thread!

Comparisons between lines from cruisers who have actually sailed on both lines are especially valuable and worthwhile.

Lots of passion on this thread!

 

Comparisons between lines from cruisers who have actually sailed on both lines are especially valuable and worthwhile.

I totally agree with that!

No, if I do, it'll turn into a cruise/ship review which is not the purpose of my post. Ship name does matter either since all 3 AMA ships have the same design.

But do not get me wrong: I am not complaining. I am comparing: feel the difference :)

In fact we had a very good cruise and will cruise with AMA again if they offer competitive pricing. The problem is IMO they are highly overpriced comparing to Viking.

It is indeed a comparison of your impression of one AMA ship, not, as you claim, a comparison of the three you name in your original post. Yes they are the same design, so the comparison of ship category has credence. But how can you assume that everything else you've chosen to add is valid across all three AMA ships? Since you did not just compare the ship design, layout etc., it is more like a review of your personal experience in the other categories. I've sailed a couple of the same class RCI ships and they were as different as night and day in food, service, tours, upkeep, staffing, etc.

I think so called "AMA lovers" are frustrated that you are making such broad statements, that vastly differ from their own experiences, without even being willing to identify the ship or itinerary. That information would give more credence to your comparison. Have you done the same itinerary on both your recent AMA and a past Viking?

To others who are not happy with the responses from those who have not sailed both AMA and Viking, one does not need to have experienced both lines to address a perceived inaccuracy of information about one.

I would be open to sailing with other river cruise lines in the future, including Viking, however, cost is not my first priority, itinerary and customer service are.

It is indeed a comparison of your impression of one AMA ship, not, as you claim, a comparison of the three you name in your original post. Yes they are the same design, so the comparison of ship category has credence. But how can you assume that everything else you've chosen to add is valid across all three AMA ships? Since you did not just compare the ship design, layout etc., it is more like a review of your personal experience in the other categories. I've sailed a couple of the same class RCI ships and they were as different as night and day in food, service, tours, upkeep, staffing, etc.

I think so called "AMA lovers" are frustrated that you are making such broad statements, that vastly differ from their own experiences, without even being willing to identify the ship or itinerary. That information would give more credence to your comparison. Have you done the same itinerary on both your recent AMA and a past Viking?

To others who are not happy with the responses from those who have not sailed both AMA and Viking, one does not need to have experienced both lines to address a perceived inaccuracy of information about one.

I would be open to sailing with other river cruise lines in the future, including Viking, however, cost is not my first priority, itinerary and customer service are.

Well stated and I agree.

While some things, like food, are subjective, others are not. As an example, I find it odd that no one else has had AMA charge for water on included tours. I certainly have not and I have been on three cruises with AMA, each with multiple tours.

And this: "AMA does not offer bridge/engine/kitchen tours at all." This has been offered on our AMA cruises and we have participated. The CM announced the times for the tours and there was a sign up sheet at front desk. To say AMA does not offer them AT ALL is inaccurate.

...

And this: "AMA does not offer bridge/engine/kitchen tours at all." This has been offered on our AMA cruises and we have participated. The CM announced the times for the tours and there was a sign up sheet at front desk. To say AMA does not offer them AT ALL is inaccurate.

Assuming you had this tour just means the lack of organisation on AMA. Maybe CM announced it somewhere. I've never heard it and nothing was published in AMA Dailies about it.

Id Est,

Thanks for your comparison. Most cruise companies offer a great experience, so folks tend to stay with the first company they try. So any comparison by someone who's sailed with different lines is valuable.

I'll be sailing Vantage next year after 3 Viking cruises, and will probably be posting a similar comparison. I'll be prepared for all the flak!!

FuelScience

Id Est,

 

Most cruise companies offer a great experience, so folks tend to stay with the first company they try.

 

That was not the case with us at all. After 4 trips with another line we tried AMA and have never looked back.

You are making very broad statements about AMA based on one cruise, which doesn't seem to have been representative of other AMA cruises.

At least the OP is making judgements based on an actual experience versus those who make many judgements about cruise lines with no actual experience on a particular Cruiseline. I, for one, value the opinions and comparisons of those with experience on the lines being compared. Don't you?

I think we all should agree to disagree as to what makes a "review" credible and useful.

A review of a trip without even providing the name and itinerary is not valuable IMO, nor is one with sweeping generalizations.

YMMV

I think we all should agree to disagree as to what makes a "review" credible and useful.

 

A review of a trip without even providing the name and itinerary is not valuable IMO, nor is one with sweeping generalizations.

 

YMMV

Would you agree that making generalizations about a particular cruiseline without ever having been on one is quite probably even more suspect? Although I'll agree that we are all entitled to our opinions and biases, first-hand knowledge and experience of the cruise lines being compared should be more highly regarded when compared to an opinion of one who has cruised on only one of the lines.

^^ [Continued from previous post]

For instance, my opinion about AMA cruises - which I've never sailed on, would be less useful than the OP's because they have. Even more useful in a comparison, is from someone who has experience with both lines under comparison.

Would you agree that making generalizations about a particular cruiseline without ever having been on one is quite probably even more suspect? Although I'll agree that we are all entitled to our opinions and biases, first-hand knowledge and experience of the cruise lines being compared should be more highly regarded when compared to an opinion of one who has cruised on only one of the lines.

Who we each value as credible, on this as well as on other forums, is a matter of personal judgement.

As an example, I would not look to someone who enjoys GCT for an opinion or comparison, as I would never consider a cruise with that line. I have seen their boats in port and they are not for me. There are other lines on that list as well, including Viking.

That does not mean that they are not a great fit for others, but I don't have to cruise on one to know that they will not suit me.

Who we each value as credible, on this as well as on other forums, is a matter of personal judgement.

 

As an example, I would not look to someone who enjoys GCT for an opinion or comparison, as I would never consider a cruise with that line. I have seen their boats in port and they are not for me. There are other lines on that list as well, including Viking.

 

That does not mean that they are not a great fit for others, but I don't have to cruise on one to know that they will not suit me.

Agree that one does not need to have first hand knowledge or experience to form an opinion. After all, we all have opinions on just about everything. However, when comparing opinions, those that have actual experience to base their opinion on would be considered more useful than those having no experience - only an opinion. Having experience on both sides of a comparison is even more useful.

Assuming you had this tour just means the lack of organisation on AMA. Maybe CM announced it somewhere. I've never heard it and nothing was published in AMA Dailies about it.

The Captain, Chef and Hotel Manager all enter into whether a ship offers these tours on a specific cruise.

That was not the case with us at all. After 4 trips with another line we tried AMA and have never looked back.

Have you posted a comparison to the board describing your impressions of AMA and the other line you cruised with? The impressions of cruisers like you with experience on more than one line are invaluable for those of us who have only cruised with one line.

As I mentioned in my other post, I'll be cruising with Vantage next year after three Viking cruises, and I plan to post my impressions of the two lines much like id est did.

If you haven't posted, please consider doing so.

Thanks,

FuelScience

P.S. Please excuse me for ending a sentence with a preposition!! My old high school English teacher would skin me!!

Have you posted a comparison to the board describing your impressions of AMA and the other line you cruised with? The impressions of cruisers like you with experience on more than one line are invaluable for those of us who have only cruised with one line.

Dupe posting, deleting.

Have you posted a comparison to the board describing your impressions of AMA and the other line you cruised with? The impressions of cruisers like you with experience on more than one line are invaluable for those of us who have only cruised with one line.

I always answer posts that ask specific questions or request specific comparisons; I have written very detailed reviews of all of my river cruises.

To create a new post or review just to compare two lines generically does not make sense to me. Every experience was unique and my preference is to compose and post a detailed review of that specific experience, rather than lump them all together to try and compare one line to another.

As on the ocean ships, there can be significant differences between boats on the same line IMO and IME. IMO, the devil is in the details.

Agree that one does not need to have first hand knowledge or experience to form an opinion. After all, we all have opinions on just about everything. However, when comparing opinions, those that have actual experience to base their opinion on would be considered more useful than those having no experience - only an opinion. Having experience on both sides of a comparison is even more useful.

Well stated! An opinion based on cosmetics and reviews written by others (without personal experience) does not hold the same value as an opinion by a person with first hand experience.

I value comments and reviews posted by CC folks. When I read reviews, I read the negative ones first - to see if the complaints are things that would seriously bother us, be a slight irritation, or perhaps not bother us at all. We are all different and a line that someone else has never been on and would not even consider might be the very one someone else finds to be a perfect fit.

Well stated! An opinion based on cosmetics and reviews written by others (without personal experience) does not hold the same value as an opinion by a person with first hand experience.

 

We can agree to disagree on that opinion. :)

Agree that one does not need to have first hand knowledge or experience to form an opinion. After all, we all have opinions on just about everything. However, when comparing opinions, those that have actual experience to base their opinion on would be considered more useful than those having no experience - only an opinion. Having experience on both sides of a comparison is even more useful.

With this logic, the OP has had only experience on one (refusing to identify) of the three AMA ships named in the original post, making assumptions that his opinion applies to all three. Also, declining to answer if the itinerary was a repeat of one sailed on Viking, if not, how can the port and tour experiences be 'compared" without having experience on both sides? I see few posts here expressing opinions of Viking from those who have not sailed them, but rather posts attempting to present personal experiences with AMA - not the same as a comparison at all.

With this logic, the OP has had only experience on one (refusing to identify) of the three AMA ships named in the original post, making assumptions that his opinion applies to all three. Also, declining to answer if the itinerary was a repeat of one sailed on Viking, if not, how can the port and tour experiences be 'compared" without having experience on both sides? I see few posts here expressing opinions of Viking from those who have not sailed them, but rather posts attempting to present personal experiences with AMA - not the same as a comparison at all.

I don't know about that. There are more than a couple regular posters on this board that "bad mouth" river cruise lines they never used. You can find at least one example of this type post right in this thread.

... experience on one (refusing to identify) of the three AMA ships named in the original post, making assumptions that his opinion applies to all three. Also, declining to answer if the itinerary was a repeat of one sailed on Viking, if not, how can the port and tour experiences be 'compared" without having experience on both sides?...

I do not really see your point? Yes, there is a 0.1% chance shuttle buses to the Vienna city center are provided on let's say AMAReina and not on AMASonata. And unlike AMASonata tour stuff on AMAReina do wear jackets with AMA sigh. Or in Budapest AMAPrima is docked next to Viking while AMAReina - in the Budapest cruise port.

If you read my review you may notice I was trying to avoid specific differences as much as I could. Never posted something like: "We did not like the cruise director" or "the service in the dining room was awful/perfect" because it is very subjective and is not related to the comparison between different river lines.

I don't know about that. There are more than a couple regular posters on this board that "bad mouth" river cruise lines they never used. You can find at least one example of this type post right in this thread.

River cruises are not one size fits all.

Determining that a line is not for me does not require experiencing the line. Having seen cabin sizes and style of many river cruise ships over the years provides me with a very good sense of how lines differ.

I know I am not interested in GCT, CruisEurope or Vantage because they are too basic for my taste.

I know I am not interested in Viking as, after touring several of their old and new boats over the years, their boats feel very generic and IKEA like. They are ugly on the outside. Their new longships have too many passengers aboard versus the same size ships on other lines and their standard cabins are too small. Also, their pricing and payment structure and reputation for customer service in times of high and low water is an issue for me. For others like the OP, Viking is their line of choice.

I am not interested in Tauck because we do not care about all of the inclusions that are built into their price.

I dislike the flamboyant decor on Uniworld but would perhaps consider one of the new ships for a future cruise, if price was right and itinerary of interest.

A-Rosa is a line I have been following as they created their boats for a younger demographic and that interests me. I think they have some kinks to work out.

Since river cruises are a significant investment in time and money, our choice is to spend both on an experience we feel good about.