Just trying to figure out where to spend a couple of months after my Thai tourist visa expires.

Cambodia? Vietnam? What would be your pick?

Laos

Bali is better

Vietnam is more diverse in both climate and geography. It has high mountains which are cool and wet, beach resorts , historic towns and Halong bay. Cambodia has Angkor and nice beach resorts too. For scenery and climate options Vietnam wins hands down , both are relatively cheap. Cambodia is nearer and therefore easier to get to, don't even have to fly. If it was me I would go Vietnam more places to visit, and cooler weather in the north.

5 hours ago, scubascuba3 said:

Bali is better

Mind to share why Bali is better in your opinion.

Vietnam...dirt cheap hotels in places like nha trang with beautiful beaches.....good beer at giveaway prices, decent french inspired food.....lots of pretty gals (but don't expect Thailand style bars)...hanoi, halong bay, hoi an, dalat, da nang, etc

 

ride train from saigon to hanoi and get off in variety of places for few days each...

 

.cambodia has a few good spots but frankly a lot of it is a semi hell hole in my opinion....i would pick laos over cambodia if that is the choice..

If me for a couple of months holiday I'd prefer Vietnam. Of course it all depends on what one is looking for. If scenery and interesting places then as LittleBear57 has already outlined, Nam for sure. If on the other hand one was looking for action, bars, mongering, then Cambodia, in particular PP, has the edge on Nam.

I'm currently in Vietnam and I like it. The biggest catch is that they still haven't brought back the 3-month tourist visa which I'd have preferred - you can currently only get a 30-day eVisa (or enter visa exempt for 15 days if your passport country qualifies).

12 hours ago, Baron Samedi said:

Just trying to figure out where to spend a couple of months after my Thai tourist visa expires.

Cambodia? Vietnam? What would be your pick?

One where you can get an appropriate visa for two months would be my bet?

"a couple of months" is plenty, go and visit both, it's not that far.

btw, throw in Laos as well, it's worthy.

My name give me away.

 

So I say split the diff and go overland thru very mellow and unspoilt S.Laos, down through Cambodia, and then take the river route up to Ho Chi Minh City.

 

But to answer the question, I like Cambodia more to due the people being more friendly and less ripoff-ish. Also, the Vietnamese dining options of soup and spring rolls get old after a while.

 

Yes, yes, dullsville pendants, I am humorously exaggerating a bit here. No need to rush forward with your stern remonstrations about having had a nice piece of fish in Na Trang.

 

I loved Hanoi and Hue, but Vietnam is the only SEA country that I didn't visit at least 3 times. Final verdict: Just not Buddhist enough.

3 hours ago, MrAscii said:

Mind to share why Bali is better in your opinion.

I enjoyed travelling around, hired a jeep, 7 days, scuba diving, rafting, climbed mount Batur. Even Kuta bar scene good for a couple days. Ubud was my favourite place. Vietnam and Cambodia both ok, but Bali was a place i could of stayed longer. Been 3 times. Also 3 day boat trip to Komodo home of the dragons, Flores, great diving

Agreed, and Bali is more than just Ubud and Kuta. You could kill easily a month there.

 

In Ubud, the classical dance performances and costumes are superb. I had to go 3 times to get the hang of them, tho. You need some patience until the clingy-clangy music kicks in -which was very influential on the composer, Steve Reich.

I enjoy all three countries (I've included Laos as per the suggestions of the other posters) so it will come down to what you are looking for specifically and enjoy most. 

Cambodia - people are the best and make the experience great regardless of location, bit of its Wild West character remains so not for tenderfeet, Angkor is the #1 single tourist attraction in Southeast Asia. Beaches are okay, not great. Party scene #1 from lowest of the low to high-end glitter, girls galore if that's your thang, great seafood, good smoke but becoming expensive though. 

Vietnam - people are generally unfriendly and aggressive although hard-working and literate, easy to stay and keep out of trouble, lots to see and do but relentless hustle and bustle, and hustlers, great beaches, mediocre food, okay smoke that's difficult to find.

Laos - nice people who are friendly, language more similar to Thai so if you have that easy to get around, cheap and great food and beer, spectacular nature, great smoke that is the cheapest around.

At the end of the day, you can't really go too far wrong in any of these places.

Imo 

Laos nice but boring. Thailand lite.

Cambodia wild West <deleted>hole for the most part but can be fun

Vietnam. Beautiful country but if you won't be travelling round to see it there's not much in it.

I'd go the route Laos lover suggests you could cross the border near Mukdahan and travel through all 3. If flying go straight to vietnam

Or to put it another way I can easily spend 2 weeks in Vietnam I couldn't spend 2 weeks in Laos or Cambodia 

The road trip option sounds great.

Might just do that when the time comes.

Thanks for your many replies, gents !

????????????

Only been to Vietnam.

 

I've ruled out Cambodia - at least for now - as I don't want to be in a country with reportedly bad/dangerous medical care/hospitals.

 

Vietnam is a nice place.

One of the big negatives there is noise.

Ubud is beautiful but I didn’t like all the tree-stapled ads for genuine yoga taught by a German.

Cambodia for sure. Not a fan of Vietnam, at all. Been there 3 times in 20 years, both in the north and the south. Both as a single man and then with my woman. While the south was OK, I did not find the people in the north to be all that pleasant. No need to ever return. Heavy hearted souls. No thanks. 

Luang Prabang, Vietianne, Siem Reap.

 

2 weeks in each. Move less see more.

22 minutes ago, Sparktrader said:

Luang Prabang, Vietianne, Siem Reap.

 

2 weeks in each. Move less see more.

2 weeks in Vientianne is a loooooong time, for some ????

22 minutes ago, Sparktrader said:

Luang Prabang, Vietianne, Siem Reap.

 

2 weeks in each. Move less see more.

2 weeks in Vientianne is a loooooong time, for some ????

22 hours ago, Baron Samedi said:

a couple of months

A month in each?

4 hours ago, spidermike007 said:

I did not find the people in the north to be all that pleasant

They're full of the joys of communism.  You can detect a real grey soviet misery.

10 hours ago, Caldera said:

I'm currently in Vietnam and I like it. The biggest catch is that they still haven't brought back the 3-month tourist visa which I'd have preferred - you can currently only get a 30-day eVisa (or enter visa exempt for 15 days if your passport country qualifies).

After 11 years traveling Asia, Vietnam has become my favourite, friendly educated people, a diverse geography, the east coast has the cleanest air in SEA, by far the most beautiful woman, reasonable cost of living. 

10 hours ago, Northstar1 said:

After 11 years traveling Asia, Vietnam has become my favourite, friendly educated people, a diverse geography, the east coast has the cleanest air in SEA, by far the most beautiful woman, reasonable cost of living. 

Lots of honeys in Khon Kaen. More here than any Thai city per capita. Nurse training centre.

16 hours ago, starky said:

2 weeks in Vientianne is a loooooong time, for some ????

You gotta really lovvve that nice croissant for breakfast. I spent ten days there for my preservation project, with friends -and something to actually do, it was def on the long side.

 

2 weeks in Siem Reap would have you examining every last brick at Angkor Wat from all six sides.

 

However, I did do a month in Luang Prubang and could have easily done a second one.

26 minutes ago, LaosLover said:

You gotta really lovvve that nice croissant for breakfast. I spent ten days there for my preservation project, with friends -and something to actually do, it was def on the long side.

 

2 weeks in Siem Reap would have you examining every last brick at Angkor Wat from all six sides.

 

However, I did do a month in Luang Prubang and could have easily done a second one.

The best! Well Vientiane only an hour from my place so I'm there quite frequently. At least once a year we head down through Mukdahan with the car and go yhrough that way.That might contribute to why I couldn't do months there? Haven't spent much time in Luang Prubang. On that suggestion sounds like I need another visit. For the most part I reckon about 2 weeks in Lao pulls me up. 100% agree about Siem Reap. 

As per my name, I have happily done 2 weeks+ just in North Laos, Ponsevan too, and the south.

 

But you'd need some kind of ethnological reason to do that. The fruit shake options really thin out 5 miles outside of either of the big towns. If I lived in Issan, Vientiane would def be my getaway of choice.

On 9/1/2022 at 5:24 AM, MrAscii said:

Mind to share why Bali is better in your opinion.

I also love Bali and go often from Thailand. But be careful, the rainy season from Nov/ Dec  to April,/Mai is crazy.  It’s opposite to Thai seasons. Much more culture than Thailand, beautiful people, lots of nice places tho Kuta area is a mess , too many tourists , traffic etc.  And hot weather !!