BootsnAll Travel Community

I know, I know, it's not a question with a concrete answer, I'm just looking for pros/cons from people that have travelled both. Both hold a lot of appeal to me for different reasons, but on a one year RTW trip I don't know that I'll have the energy and willpower for both.

I'll back up a bit and share my vague solo RTW plan, with the idea being to ease into it:

2 months Australia
2 months SE Asia (biased towards Thailand and Malaysia)
2 months India or China
6 months Europe (probably focused on France, Italy, and Spain, with maybe a few weeks in both Ireland and Scandinavia)

I should be able to afford the Europe leg (moving my dollars into Euros as fast as I can, ugh), although I'll have no issue with cutting it back if I want to spend more time in Asia.

So, again, any thoughts on India vs. China?

Spend 4 months on Europe and do both India & China. But if you really have to pick one, India.

jamileblog.blogspot.com

That's certainly a possibility. I'll have to see how I fare in SE Asia before I decide.

I'd just time it with the seasons. And if you're going to India through in more time and explore the rest of the sub-continent.

Well I have travelled to neither however if I had to choose I would choose India. Perhaps you could do 1 month in each of 6 weeks in India and then just the basic tourist sights of China - with the Olympics being in Beijing

I've been to both, and I would say if you HAD to chose, India. China is great, but India is incredible. And I've been to China 3 times and India only once. If I had to put them in order, I'd say go to China first and then India. India and China are on the same level of travel challenge once you factor in the lack of communication in China and the insanity of India. I think I had a better time relating to people in India and got more out of it.

PC