We noticed that you're using an unsupported browser. The TripAdvisor website may not display properly.We support the following browsers:
Windows: Internet Explorer, Mozilla Firefox, Google Chrome. Mac: Safari.

On site vs. Off site Walt Disney World

Which Orlando hotels are on sale?
dd/mm/yyyy dd/mm/yyyy
See hotels
Level Contributor
47 posts
57 reviews
Save Topic
On site vs. Off site Walt Disney World

We are having such issues deciding on where to stay for our upcoming WDW trip this September. It will be my husband, my 3 year old daughter, and myself (I will be 7 months pregnant). We were set to stay on

property -- thinking Contemporary b/c of the monorail.But then we got the "Unofficial Guide to WDW 2009" -- and the times they are quoting to get

to the different parks is much longer than we expected. 11 mins to Epcot? 17 mins to AK? Then,

there are listed times for Coronado, are 4-6 mins

for everything. There are off site hotels that list all the parks as under 10 mins. Does that make sense? I'm so confused. We were thinking with the free dining plan offer it should be better to stay onsite but i'm not so sure anymore!!

pa
Level Contributor
54,010 posts
Save Reply
1. Re: On site vs. Off site Walt Disney World

The Free Dining Promo is one of the Best Deals Disney has. I have been going end of September for years, great time to go and eating for Free is Wonderful

If Disney Parks is your Destination, you can't go wrong with staying on site. The Monorail Resorts are Lovely but the Transportation from all the Other Resorts to all the Parks works quite well, IMO so staying at any of them is just fine. Disney is 47 square Miles, it takes a little bit to get from any one place to the next. Wilderness Lodge is just a quick Boat ride from the Magic Kingdom, might think of that one, it is also less $ then the 3 Monorail Resorts. It's a very beautiful relaxing Resort :)

Just a note, when off site Hotels say 10 minutes to Disney, they can just mean to the entrance. If you stay off site, keep in mund when going to the Magic Kingdom, you will have to Park at the Tickey and Transportation Center and then take the Monorail or Ferry over to the Park. That adds quite a bit of time

Here are a few sites with great details and info

www.wdwinfo.com http://allears.net

england
Level Contributor
4,901 posts
54 reviews
Save Reply
2. Re: On site vs. Off site Walt Disney World

No when off site say ten mins it does not mean ten mins into the actual park. Most transfers tend to be to the transportation centre, you then have to get on the monorail or buses elsewhere. 11mins to epcot sounds about right but it is easy, you get on monorail to the transportation centre then on another to epcot, its a good ride that doesnt feel that long. The colorado may say 4-6mins for each park but you still have to wait for the bus and they may run every 20-30mins so you could still take half an hour. If you have a youngster and are pregnant yourself then I would think that the contempory is a good location for you. You will probably spend most of your time in magic kingdom therefore you are on the doorstep. If you can get the free dining plan aswell stay at the contempory resort.

You will not spend ten minutes getting to the park if you stay off site.

Chickamauga, Georgia
Destination Expert
for Orlando, Walt Disney World
Level Contributor
39,749 posts
90 reviews
Save Reply
3. Re: On site vs. Off site Walt Disney World

Let me stress what Partypa said about off-site hotels. When they say "only minutes from Disney" they can truthfully say so, but they mean "from the edge of Disney property at large" when the Disney property is 47 sq. miles large.

There's no question you can't find closer accomodations than on site resorts, and if you have a vehicle to drive yourself from one place to another, your travel time can be even more minimal since you won't have to wait on busses.

The "nearest" off site locations are in Lake Buena Vista near Downtown Disney, but even from there, it's probably a 10 to 15 minute drive to the nearest of theme parks. From the nearest Kissimmee locations, it's 15 to 25 minutes to the theme parks, just depending on where you are headed.

Doncaster, S Yorks
Level Contributor
10,270 posts
4 reviews
Save Reply
4. Re: On site vs. Off site Walt Disney World

It depends a lot on your own personal financial circumstance, and preferences.

Disney accommodation is considerably more expensive than an equivalent hotel / villa off site .

Free dining and the 7 for price of 4 changes this equation a bit. but there is still some very nice places to be had for less money than Disney.

Some of Disney's barrack block rooms are not that big , And I have had $25 motel equally as good and spacious. I expect you will be driving from home rather than flying in you condition so driving to a park from off site will not be a problem and my be just as quick as using some of Disney's transport.

I would not worry about the traveling time to parks which ever option you chose.

denver, co
Level Contributor
1,148 posts
4 reviews
Save Reply
5. Re: On site vs. Off site Walt Disney World

You will love staying on site and getting the free dining. You will be amazed at the great food at fun restaurants that you will eat at for free! For example, you can easily spend $100 at a sit down dinner for the 3 of you for what you would get for free on the dining plan. Plus a counter service and a snack. Why not take the food for free from Disney!

As far as time to different parks, if you look at a map, and think of DisneyWorld as being twice the square mileage of Manhattan, You can see that depending on which part of the World you stay in, it will take time to get to a park that is on the other side, no matter if you drive or take the bus.

All the resorts are great, just pick the one that fits your budget and is closest to the park you want to spend the most time at. For your family, I would think it would be the Magic Kingdom.

Destination Expert
for Orlando, Walt Disney World
Level Contributor
19,889 posts
19 reviews
Save Reply
6. Re: On site vs. Off site Walt Disney World

The Contemporary is great for the MK but it does take a bit of time to get anywhere else.I am not a huge fan of staying onsite because Disney hotels are overpriced and do not give good value for your money ...except when you are traveling with a small child and more so when you are pregnant.It really is more convenient and great to be able to go back to the hotel and have a nap and/or a swim quickly and easily. But the Downtown Disney hotels are a good choice too-the Doubletree will give you more room to spread out and a mini kitchen. The Poly is a bit more kid friendly than the Contemporary if you want a monorail hotel

Washington, DC
Level Contributor
1,715 posts
70 reviews
Save Reply
7. Re: On site vs. Off site Walt Disney World

Absolutely stay on site - especially with a young child and your pregnancy. I think the Contemporary or a monorail resort is perfect for you, since you will probably spend much of your time at the Magic Kingdom, and can get to and from the park so quickly and easily. From any of the monorail resorts, you will have easy access to a variety of character meals, which will be great with a small child.

As others have said, the off-site hotels "10-minutes" to Disney listings are really misleading, since they refer to the vast Disney property, not any particular park. Even then, you'd have to deal with parking and walking (or taking a tram, boat, or monorail) to the park entrance - rather than being taken by Disney transportation to within a few yards of the entrance. My sister (who lives in Orlando) once drove to the MK to meet me, and it took her 45 minutes from the time she reached the MK parking lot until she got to the park entrance!

Definitely stay on site!

UK
Destination Expert
for Florida
Level Contributor
46,622 posts
22 reviews
Save Reply
8. Re: On site vs. Off site Walt Disney World

I agree. It isn't possible to get closer to anything than at a Disney Hotel. And as for all the Disney hotles, apart from the ones with boat access, the monorail resorts can be the most convenient (except maybe those out the back door of Epcot ie the Beach Club etc).

To, the onsite and off site debate used to be one for large families, but now they do a some rooms for larger families- and the high prices.

I am a firm offsite person, but did attempt to find an onsite hotel recently for one night in June. Even with the special discount codes i get for FL residents, I couldn't find a room at any of the monorail resorts or beach Club for under $350 a night. If you can get a room cheaper- I'd go for it. And of course at that time there is the free dining and that is a great promotion.

Washington, DC
Level Contributor
1,715 posts
70 reviews
Save Reply
9. Re: On site vs. Off site Walt Disney World

amanax:

I suggest you try the Swan and Dolphin. Just picking a random Friday night in June, I found rooms at the Dolphin starting at $169 per night, even without trying AAA or Florida resident discounts. The Swan and Dolphin are almost as convenient to Epcot as the Beach Club - just a few minutes more walk - and even more convenient to the Studios.

Doncaster, S Yorks
Level Contributor
10,270 posts
4 reviews
Save Reply
10. Re: On site vs. Off site Walt Disney World

But to add to that you can get a nice 3 bed town house villa or 2 bed condo with its own kitchen on a resort site from $100 a night. Thats $69 cheaper then the above price for one room..