Short city break - Manchester or London?

[FrenchPear]

I am going for a three night stay somewhere. Flying to either Gatwick or Manchester. Booking a decent hotel. The idea is to have some down time, eat, have a few drinks, stroll around. Solo trip for myself.

Never been to either city, any recommendations? If London, what area is good without being over the top expensive?

I'd appreciate any advice.

I'm going to through a curve ball and say that if you just want to unwind and you're going to be flying anyway why not go somewhere where it will be warm, like Palma, Majorca? There's lots of good value city breaks to there with Jet2. You can pick a hotel in the beautiful old town or down by the Marina both of which have great restaurants and shopping. The city centre is compact and beautiful to wander round. Really safe too.

Manchester is a great city, and very walkable, very easy to get around,

I’d stay near St Peter’s Sq, the Midland or Raddison Edwardian, or the Kimpton just down Oxford Rd.

Some other places not mentioned yet;

Whitworth gallery
Victoria baths
Pankhurst centre
Elizabeth Gaskell house
Both football clubs have stadium tours if you’re a football fan, plus there’s the National football museum

Absolutely tonnes of live music venues, from very small up to the new Coop live - which you can also get to on the tram if you wanted to see anything.

If you fancy getting some fresh air get out to Heaton Park, you can get the tram there really easily. You can just tap in and out on the trams, they’re very easy to use.

I second Gotham hotel - it's fabulous. My other hotel recommendation would be King Street Townhouse, which has a rooftop outdoor infinity pool from which you can telephone for drinks to be delivered to you. Watch the city go dark at night from the pool while sipping a glass of wine - it's terrific.

Both hotels do a great afternoon tea as well.

If you're flying into Manchester, there's a train direct from the airport into the city - it takes about 25 minutes.

I’m Mancunian and it has really improved and unrecognisable now to 10 years ago - it’s had a huge amount of regeneration and money pumped into it however:

I’ve done most of those things above and they honestly are not patch on what there is to do in London.

I’ve never been to the Jewish museum but the others are very meh, and the war museum, Salford museum and Mosley st art gallery are really quite rubbish imo. The war museum is very depressing as is Salford quays. I grew up there and honestly it’s just not good - the Lowry centre is grim and the Lowry theatre shows really inferior shows. And there are literally two other theatres in Manchester. London there’s loads and every type of show.

Honestly Op - go to London - you’ll have no end of super interesting things to do.

The Victoria and Albert museum, the British museum, the Tates…no comparison. And loads of shows to choose from. Just walking around London and the parks is a treat, get the tube to Hampstead heath and go to kenmore house. Primrose Hill, Notting Hill, Camden.

Honestly - there’s no comparison.

Honestly - there’s no comparison.

Absolutely and I say that as someone who's lived in both cities. London is up there with Sydney, Manhattan, Paris and many more.

OP, if you decide on London, then book yourself a hotel in south London (Premier Inn or similar) and near a tube station because that will make your break much easier or if you can afford it, somewhere in Victoria / Pimlico.

I live in Manchester now and has been for a couple of decades but my formative years were in London. Especially if you have never been to London, there's absolutely no comparison between Manchester and London, London all the way.

I agree, it’s a shit hole. Piccadilly Gardens is full of drug addicts and the rest of the city centre is just grim and depressing.

the Lowry theatre shows really inferior shows... London there’s loads and every type of show.

What absolute bollocks! Lowry hosts national tours and many of the shows are also in London. Eg, Operation Mincemeat which has been on in London for a few years actually started out at the Lowry in 2017 (and is on tour there next month).

Im not disagreeing that London has many more theatres and thus more variety but it's a nonsense to say that those same London shows are "really inferior" when they tour.

Maybe I have only seen the crap ones! I honestly have seen some really rubbish shows there. The last one was Murder on the Orient Express - I’m a massive Marple fan but I left before the end. It was laughably amateurish. Also saw a production of Wicked there that was pretty rubbish. In fact I’ve been to the Lowry about 10’times and can’t remember one really good show Ive seen there. They are just not of the same calibre - the west end shows have much bigger budgets to be fair. I don’t actually like the Lowry theatre itself either - it feels dated and has weird acoustics.

I’m sure there’s been some ok stuff, maybe I’ve been unlucky but in the West End you’re pretty much guaranteed a fabulous show imo.

It isn’t common that the same production tours after being in the west end (or off-west end) - if it does the cast has changed to c-list actors, which doesn’t appeal to me. Budgets are obviously a huge factor.

I agree with @pottymouth40 that the Lowry offers poor stuff (from what I’ve experienced), The Royal Exchange is a bit better.

The last one was Murder on the Orient Express - I’m a massive Marple fan

I hope you weren't expecting Miss Marple to be in it 😂 To be fair I didn't see that one because I didn't think it would be great.

I’ve been to the Lowry about 10’times and can’t remember one really good show Ive seen there

I go several times a year for over 20 years and my experiences range from ok to astounding. I also spend a lot of time on a theatre forum with devotees who see vast quantities of London plays and shows whose experiences cover the good, the bad and the ugly. When you and I go to London we'll have chosen the stand-out show that's worth travelling for, we wouldn't make that effort for something average. That's skewed your perception, I think.

I recently saw Dear England at the Lowry (after seeing the NT Live cinema screening) & both were phenomenal

my son has worked on a show at Royal Exchange & it too was great.

Yes I was last there end of November for an event.

I live 12 miles from Manchester. The only reason we go there is for the Lego store. We call it the ugly, dirty, smelly city. It stinks of weed in various places and I wouldn’t want to be anywhere near Piccadilly gardens after around 7pm. It feels menacing walking round there. I had to phone in the police just before Christmas due to a fight breaking out. There’s some beautiful architecture if you look for it and if you like museums. I’d love to visit London more often. Fortnum and Mason, Hyde Park, all the history and culture. Manchester is a dump.

Start off by having a short break in Manchester OP, then plan a long break to London for future.
There are lots of threads on London on here, with with masses of fantastic recommendations and tips for visitors to London.

I’ve lived in both Manchester and London and visit both often.

would pick London over Manchester, better vibe, more to see and do, cleaner, feels safer, easier to get around - all the stuff pps have mentioned.

but I’d chose Liverpool over both if you can fly there instead! Amazing city, there’s loads of threads on here about what to do in Liverpool.

I’ve you’ve never been to London I really think you should take this opportunity and go. Don’t be overwhelmed. So much to see and do.

I live near Manchester, it doesn't compare to London. London is a world class city with loads to do, Manchester is tiny in comparison. Unless you have a particular interest in Manchester ie it's music, history or football then I wouldn't choose it over London.

I definitely wouldn't go to Manchester, it's so grim! Market Street is like the 7th circle of hell and the level of homelessness is tragic, tent cities round the town hall etc. There's nothing to so except wander round soulless shops and avoid the drunken fights. Plus, I've found there's a fair chance of the tram being stuck for ages because there's some march or protest or something in the way.

London is a million times better. Or, as PPs have said, fabulous Liverpool which is 35 minutes away by train from Manchester Victoria.

Manchester. Manchester’s great!

I think when time is tight its better to do smaller places so Manchester would be my advice, it will be quicker to get through the airport, quicker from airport to hotel and smaller to walk around so you'll be able to feel you've done it justice.

Thanks again everyone.

London definitely needs to be visited at some point.

For now, I'm toying with Manchester and Liverpool. I've always wanted to see both. For the dates I'm looking at, Manchester is quite expensive, I think there must be football on.

What is it that appeals to you about Manchester?

Basically the flights work for me and it's a smaller city. I don't have much of a gameplan, I'm not overly into shopping, I like museums, coffee shops, pubs, people watching, ambling around, eating. So I'd imagine Manchester and Liverpool would fit that bill.

Plus any North Eastern people I've met have been lovely! 😊

Manchester and Liverpool are in the Northwest! 😂 Just so you know.