North or South?

bluebutton32 · Jun 14th, 2007, 10:34

I've been doing research on what I would like to see the most in India and can't decide where I should focus my time. My plan is to volunteer in Chennai for a month and spend the next two months traveling. I am torn between the beaches and the mountains. I really would like to experience as much of the nature as I can while I'm there - the plants and animals that are unique to the region as well as the scenery and landscapes. I want to have a pretty relaxed trip but want to fit as much in as I can in the time I have. Is two months enough time to see some of both the north and the south, or should I focus my time in one or the other? If so, which one is more diverse or interesting?

Thanks for any tips!

shashank.aggarwal · Jun 14th, 2007, 10:46

A lot would depend on the time of year you decide to visit. Even though winters would be the best time, however some places in Himalayas would be out of range, and some places in the coatal ares would be 'too touristed'..

rahul__rahul__ · Jun 14th, 2007, 10:47

two months is plenty of time to see areas in both south and north india..

north india is more diverse culturally, ranging from Ladakh to the rest of the Himalayas to the plains..

but if you like want to stick to one region, then south has mountains also. there are plenty of hill stations in south india..such as in the nilgiri mountains..
http://www.hill-stations-india.com/s...hill-stations/ theres a link for south indian hill stations..though north indian himalayan ones are higher and more beautiful in my opinion.

Jun 14th, 2007, 10:34	#1
bluebutton32 Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: USA Posts: 9	North or South? I've been doing research on what I would like to see the most in India and can't decide where I should focus my time. My plan is to volunteer in Chennai for a month and spend the next two months traveling. I am torn between the beaches and the mountains. I really would like to experience as much of the nature as I can while I'm there - the plants and animals that are unique to the region as well as the scenery and landscapes. I want to have a pretty relaxed trip but want to fit as much in as I can in the time I have. Is two months enough time to see some of both the north and the south, or should I focus my time in one or the other? If so, which one is more diverse or interesting? Thanks for any tips!

Jun 14th, 2007, 10:46	#2
shashank.aggarwal The Fortunate One Join Date: May 2007 Location: Road Posts: 6,820	A lot would depend on the time of year you decide to visit. Even though winters would be the best time, however some places in Himalayas would be out of range, and some places in the coatal ares would be 'too touristed'.. __________________ Spineless Travelogue - Around India

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
North Goa vs. South Goa	dirani	Goa	26	Mar 17th, 2006 00:13
North v's South. Where to go?	deisegirl	India Travel Itinerary Advice	5	Nov 16th, 2005 18:40
North then South or South then North ?	pix	India Travel Itinerary Advice	5	Oct 26th, 2005 17:58
Help! South then North or North then South	shot charlie	India Travel Itinerary Advice	2	Mar 20th, 2005 21:25
north or south?	nonPlus	Rajasthan	1	Dec 27th, 2001 09:56

Jun 14th, 2007, 10:47	#3
rahul__rahul__ राहुल Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Lexington, Kentucky Posts: 166	two months is plenty of time to see areas in both south and north india.. north india is more diverse culturally, ranging from Ladakh to the rest of the Himalayas to the plains.. but if you like want to stick to one region, then south has mountains also. there are plenty of hill stations in south india..such as in the nilgiri mountains.. http://www.hill-stations-india.com/s...hill-stations/ theres a link for south indian hill stations..though north indian himalayan ones are higher and more beautiful in my opinion.