NCL vs. Princess to Alaska

[Shutterlady]

I was considering trying NCL round trip from Seattle to Alaska in June/2006. I have only been on one cruise before, on the Regal to Alaska and fell in love with the Regal Princess. I'm trying to find a cruise that I can afford a balcony this time, and NCL has some appealling prices. Around $300 per person less for a balcony room. Can anyone tell me how the two cruise lines compare. I only have one opinion, and that is that Princess was awesome. Thanks in advance.

[cruisequeen10]

I would prefer going with Princess. In May of this year I was on the NCL Star and what a ship. She is so gorgeous. It looks regal, from the main lobby to the Versailles dining room. This is a toss up on which ship to take. I think I would have to go with the one that has the best itinerary and pricing. In other words, NCL.

[gambit57]

Other than their Hawaii based cruises, I hear good things about them. Pretty hard to go wrong on a cruise. Just check the reviews on the food and service. Otherwise, Alaska's so beatiful, you really won't notice much else. That state can make any cruise feel a notch higher than it might be at other destinations.

[mr green]

You get what you pay for on NCL, I am afraid that I have gone with them too many times. Go Princess. john

[Druke I]

I'll grant that NCL has some attractive prices - but they have a couple of ships that certainly do not meet my expectations - Norwegian Dream and Norwegian Wind. Don't know if they are scheduled for Alaska or not.

 

Great ships before they were stretched - but not so hot after. Very chopped deck plans.

 

Were it me, I would stick with Princess, preferably either Coral class or Sun class.

[whale-watcher]

I have heard that there are no on-board naturalists on NCL, and I really would have missed that in Alaska. We cruised on the Coral last year, and it was wonderful.

[dwelsh]

"You get what you pay for on NCL, I am afraid that I have gone with them too many times. Go Princess."

 

So true!!!!

 

There is a stark difference between the two lines. Read the reviews on various cruise line web sites, including CC and you make up your mind.

[dosi]

We have sailed both and each line has pros and cons. However, our last cruise in May was on the NCL Star to Alaska. This was our nicest cruise ever. We loved the food and the staff were flawless. If it is the Star you are considering I would definitely do it!! That ship is just beautiful. And we did pick up some rangers from the forest service who cruised glacier bay and narrated for us the entire time. Really didn't add much to our enjoyment, but I guess some folks like that sort of thing. I would have no hestitation sailing on the NCL Star again and we are considering the NCL Jewel for next year. :)

[Coral]

Does the Seattle NCL cruise include Glacier Bay? If so, I would probably choose it (even being a huge Princess fan).

[dosi]

Does the Seattle NCL cruise include Glacier Bay? If so, I would probably choose it (even being a huge Princess fan).

 

 

I did a quick look and it seems that the NCL Star sails r/t out of Seattle next year to Alaska and the cruise does include Glacier Bay. We went in early May (the first Alaska trip for the NCL Star this year) and found that the weather was lovely and the folks in the ports more than happy to see us. Lots of busy wildlife was around too!!

[johnql]

If it's one of NCL's newer ships (Star or Spirit), I wouldn't hesitate to go with NCL. If it's the Dream, I wouldn't do it.

 

I'm surprised that no one has brought up the biggest difference between NCL and Princess - NCL's Freestyle cruising. If the OP has a strong preference for traditional dining, he's out of luck with NCL. Likewise, if the OP very much prefers the tradition of formal night, he might be disappointed with the "resort casual" dress code on NCL. They do offer an optional formal night, but the percentage of cruisers who are formally dressed may only be 20-40% of the ship.

 

On the flip side of the coin, if the OP's positive experience on the Regal Princess included enjoying Anytime Dining, then NCL's Freestyle dining may not be a big deal.

[Turnip]

I was in the same situation this summer. We had previous only cruised Princess and really enjoyed it. But we wanted a change of pace and was interested in exploring a new cruise line. We will not do traditional dining so Princess or NCL are our only options for cruise lines.

 

I did a lot of researc on CC and chose to go on the NCL Star out of Seattle, which is one of the newer NCL ships and beautiful-and I saved about $400 (I also saved money by flying R/T out of Seattle vs. Vancouver) There are some NCL ships that were not built for the freestyle concept which do not get good reviews on the NCL Boards so it is important to do research about which NCL ships are better than others.

 

I did a review which compared Princess to my NCL Star Alaska at the following link:

http://boards.cruisecritic.com/showthread.php?t=215523

 

Some of the comparisons we made were:

-There is no traditional dining on NCL although you do have the option of sitting with others in the restaurant. Freestyle dining is pretty much like personal choice dining.

-We felt that food in the dining rooms/buffet was better on Princess

-NCL Star had many more alternative restaurant options (2 of which are non pay options)

-Service was more personal on Princess. Staff is more reserved on NCL (not rude, just more reserved)

-NCL was much less formal in our opinion which we liked for Alaska. There was only one formal night and maybe 40% of people were dressed. Generally people were dressed less formally throughout the cruise. This really came in handy for Alaska where you had to pack.

 

After the cruise, my husband and I said we would rate our Princess cruises 8 out of 10, and our NCL Star Alaska Cruise 7 out of 10. We very much enjoyed both cruises and it was interesting to go on another cruise line.

[Coral]

I did a quick look and it seems that the NCL Star sails r/t out of Seattle next year to Alaska and the cruise does include Glacier Bay.

 

If you have to sail out of Seattle - I probably would go NCL. I have seen the exterior of the ships and they are pretty ships. I am not a fan of the 7 night/Princess Seattle cruises to Alaska. The times in port just don't impress me (and with out Glacier Bay).

[Shutterlady]

The ship I was looking at was the Norwegian Sun. It did all the ports I did on the Regal, Skagway, Juneau and Ketchikan. But it did Sawyer Glacier and Prince Rupert. I think I read on the NCL message boards that this will be the first year for the Sun to sail out of Seattle. I think in the past it has always sailed out of Vancouver.

[johnql]

The ship I was looking at was the Norwegian Sun.

I've never sailed on the Sun, but I've read many positive reports of her on the NCL board. You might want to start a thread there if you have any specific questions concerning the Sun.

[Sailaway...Sailaway]

I was just on the NCL Star to Alaska and I had a completely different view of the ship. I was rather disappointed after sailing on the beautiful Star and Sun Princess. I didn't think the NCL Star could hold a candle to those two ships. I was sooooo disappointed in their Market Cafe Lido Buffet...not only in decor, but their food was BAD!!! Absolutely no comparison to Princess' Horizon Court. And, the main theater seats on NCL Star were the most uncomfortable I have ever sat my tush on! NO leg room and the seats felt like they were literally falling forward and down to the floor! I love the outdoor fresh water pools on Princess over the one on NCL Star. The decor is gorgeous on Star Princess in particular. I liked the service, the food, the entertainment...you name it---ALL on Princess! Okay, the Versaille dining room was nicer looking than the ones on Princess. I'll grant you that. Can't say great things about the service we had, though.

 

No more NCL for me unless it's FREE and even then if a Princess ship was sailing the same day I might be inclined to sail that one! :D

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I would prefer going with Princess. In May of this year I was on the NCL Star and what a ship. She is so gorgeous. It looks regal, from the main lobby to the Versailles dining room. This is a toss up on which ship to take. I think I would have to go with the one that has the best itinerary and pricing. In other words, NCL.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Sailaway...Sailaway]

The highlight of our Alaska cruise on the NCL Star Glacier Bay itinerary was to be Glacier Bay, of course. We had to skip it. One of the azipods was malfunctioniong (not the first or even second time the Star had had this problem)...and since they have a contract with the National Park Service, we couldn't sail through Glacier Bay because an oil leak was detected. Oh, well. Ship happens. :rolleyes:

 

 

 

You get what you pay for on NCL, I am afraid that I have gone with them too many times. Go Princess. john

[Sailaway...Sailaway]

Well, this is exactly why my in-laws chose the NCL Star--Glacier Bay. I really wanted to sail on the Sapphire Princess, but they do Tracy Arm. Well, imagine our disappointment when we had to skip Glacier Bay because of a bum azipod. :( Heck, if we had sailed on the Sapphire, at least we might have seen SOME glaciers.

 

Does the Seattle NCL cruise include Glacier Bay? If so, I would probably choose it (even being a huge Princess fan).

[johnql]

And, the main theater seats on NCL Star were the most uncomfortable I have ever sat my tush on! NO leg room and the seats felt like they were literally falling forward and down to the floor!

Wow! You must have been sitting in a different part of the theater than me. I felt that the Star's theater seating was the best that I have encountered on a cruise ship. The seats were plush and there was plenty of leg room. Couldn't have been more comfortable.

[Coral]

Well, this is exactly why my in-laws chose the NCL Star--Glacier Bay. I really wanted to sail on the Sapphire Princess, but they do Tracy Arm. Well, imagine our disappointment when we had to skip Glacier Bay because of a bum azipod. :( Heck, if we had sailed on the Sapphire, at least we might have seen SOME glaciers.

 

I know how you feel. We sailed on the Radiance to Alaska and there was just one glacier day (Hubbard) and we missed it due to excessive ice in the water. I went to Alaska and the only glaicer I saw was Mendenhall.

 

Now I do one ways with both Glacier Bay and College Fiords.

 

BTW - I did Tracy Arm via small boat this year (40 passenger boat) and we also didn't see the glaciers at the end due to excessive ice in the water. Oh well - thankfully I had GB and CF to look at.

[JennCandi]

We are going on the Sapphire to Alaska in Sept, but only because the NCL Sun was sold out already. We've traveled on the Sun in the Caribbean and loved it. Haven't traveled on Princess yet, but did RCCL in June and we were very disappointed. We hated the traditional dinning. Looking forward to Sapphire experience and hope it lives up to NCL Sun.

[Sailaway...Sailaway]

Hmmmm....I tried a LOT of seats in that theater. All with no leg room and those strange seats that seemed to tilt forward, pouring me out. One of the employess walking around even admitted that the NCL Star was originally built for the Asian market, hence the design of the seating. I wasn't the only one with knees almost up to my chest. I'm only 5'4"½, too. You should have seen my family of tall men! Yikes.

 

 

 

Wow! You must have been sitting in a different part of the theater than me. I felt that the Star's theater seating was the best that I have encountered on a cruise ship. The seats were plush and there was plenty of leg room. Couldn't have been more comfortable.

[johnql]

Hmmmm....I tried a LOT of seats in that theater. All with no leg room and those strange seats that seemed to tilt forward, pouring me out. One of the employess walking around even admitted that the NCL Star was originally built for the Asian market, hence the design of the seating. I wasn't the only one with knees almost up to my chest. I'm only 5'4"½, too. You should have seen my family of tall men! Yikes.

We definitely have radically different recollections of the theater. I specifically remember sitting down and saying to my traveling companion, "These seats are great! There's enough leg room here for someone well over 6 feet tall." I remember that because my best friend (not my traveling companion) is 6'2" and whenever we go to a movie, he always has to sit on the aisle so he can turn his legs at an angle into the aisle for more legroom. My immediate reaction in the Stardust Theater was that my friend would have absolutely no problem with legroom there. In addition, I found the seats quite comfortable; however, I concede that comfortable is much more subjective than ample legroom.

 

Just to be sure, we ARE talking about the Stardust Theater, where all the main production shows are performed?

[Sailaway...Sailaway]

Yep, the Stardust Theater. :eek: You're right...we sure did have different reactions to the seating. Like your best friend at the movie theaters, I had to make sure I secured an aisle seat so I could turn my legs out. I've had surgery on both knees many years ago and I still can't sit with them bent for too long. Gee, I looked over at my father-in-law who is 6'2" and his knees looked squished. Same with my husband and brothers-in-law. And, you didn't notice when you first sat down how the seat (the part you sit on) felt like it was tilting forward. I checked underneath and it was literally sloping down toward the floor. And, the cushy, velour material just didn't feel substantial. Nor did they feel well-supported. Mind you, I am NOT a big person! I can't imagine how it felt for someone "of a certain size".

 

My ideal theater seats are firmer with a higher backrest and a bottom seat that is level and not tilting forward. Also, made out of a more durable material similar to car seats. None of that cushiony, velour stuff.

 

One of the reasons I liked the Spinnaker lounge was the comfortable, swivel seating and leg room. You could also move the chairs around a bit to adjust them to a good comfort level.

 

 

We definitely have radically different recollections of the theater. I specifically remember sitting down and saying to my traveling companion, "These seats are great! There's enough leg room here for someone well over 6 feet tall." I remember that because my best friend (not my traveling companion) is 6'2" and whenever we go to a movie, he always has to sit on the aisle so he can turn his legs at an angle into the aisle for more legroom. My immediate reaction in the Stardust Theater was that my friend would have absolutely no problem with legroom there. In addition, I found the seats quite comfortable; however, I concede that comfortable is much more subjective than ample legroom.

 

Just to be sure, we ARE talking about the Stardust Theater, where all the main production shows are performed?

[johnql]

I don't know what to say. I've been on both NCL's Star and Dawn. The Stardust Theaters on both ships are identical, so I know I'm not dreaming since I've had the same experience twice. While seated, there was enough legroom for someone to squeeze by without my having to stand up. To me, that's fairly roomy. I don't remember the seats tilting forward either.

 

I am puzzled by the differences in our experiences.