Southern Sweden and Norway or just Sweden?

We're planning a trip to Sweden this summer and trying to decide between mainly doing southern Sweden or also including parts of southern Norway. We'll have two weeks and we are mostly interested in being in nature and not as much in cities. Has anyone visited both areas and could offer some advice regarding whether you'd stick to one country or could they both be combined?

impossibledreamer said:

We're planning a trip to Sweden this summer and trying to decide between mainly doing southern Sweden or also including parts of southern Norway. We'll have two weeks and we are mostly interested in being in nature and not as much in cities. Has anyone visited both areas and could offer some advice regarding whether you'd stick to one country or could they both be combined?

Click to expand...

Personally, Southern Norway.

WelshGas said:

Personally, Southern Norway.

Click to expand...

We started off with Sweden because we're familiar with a campervan rental agency that has locations there, but maybe I'll look into alternatives in Norway. I also assumed that Sweden would be less crowded than Norway in August.

In 2017 we stayed in two places at the western end of the Swedish/Norwegian border.

Stromstad in Sweden and Seljord in Norway. I’m happy to recommend both places. But Sweden is noticeably cheaper than Norway.

It’s all lovely but we found North Sweden is full of trees….. I mean really really full of trees! To such an extent that we felt the best thing about it was how fast and clear the roads were so we could drive through without too much delay
Here is a taster for you if you wish, from my blog in 2014

impossibledreamer said:

We're planning a trip to Sweden this summer and trying to decide between mainly doing southern Sweden or also including parts of southern Norway. We'll have two weeks and we are mostly interested in being in nature and not as much in cities. Has anyone visited both areas and could offer some advice regarding whether you'd stick to one country or could they both be combined?

Click to expand...

Stay in southern Sweden. There’s plenty of places to explore and things to do. Southern Norway will be another two weeks…

chockswahay said:

It’s all lovely but we found North Sweden is full of trees….. I mean really really full of trees! To such an extent that we felt the best thing about it was how fast and clear the roads were so we could drive through without too much delay
Here is a taster for you if you wish, from my blog in 2014

13 June E61 TREES! and a long road.....

A personal view of Norway , Sweden and Denmark as we travel through them in our camper van

wolfydoesscandawegia.blogspot.com

Click to expand...

Concur regarding further north in Sweden, boring woodland landscape.
In 2015 we sailed Copenhagen to Oslo, north to the fjords then across to Lillehammer and into Sweden. Once out of the trees, the scenery was awesome south and onto the west coast to Gothenburg then ferry to Aarhus in Denmark. I would recommend staying in southern Sweden for the 2 weeks.
Regrettably, the three week adventure was pre Vin Rouge so unable to comment re site venues.
Whatever your decision, enjoy, stay safe.

Thanks for the advice everyone. I've realized I still need to do a lot of research to figure out what would be best for this trip, but I think I'm leaning towards separating the trips and maybe doing Sweden this summer and Norway for the next.

Sweden and Norway are soOO close to each other, but at the same time soOO different in how the landscape is. I’m born and raised in Sweden, but I’m now living in Norway for the last 13 years (I’m 44 years old)(now dual citizenship). I’ve driven road-trips in both countries numerous times, north south and every corner. Sweden are pretty flat compared to Norway, roads allow higher speeds and you can drive quite long in a day. Norway is completely different. There are mountains, fjords, ferries and tunnels. It’s challenging to build roads and traveling by car is really more time consuming. In Sweden you can drive up to the north in 24 hours, but in Norway the journey takes at least to days. I live in Oslo area, but if I go to the north of Norway, the fastest route is thru Sweden and then into Norway again..

Why choose! Starting south of Malmö (tip of Skanör) following the west coast. Helsingborg, Mölle/Kullen, Torekov, Mellbystrand (drive & camp on the beach!), Lots of local food producers here! Then Gothenburg, Öckerö, Marstrand, Lysekil, Strömstad. Then into Norway, following E18 & E39 to Stavanger and Bergen with stops at Preikestolen etc. Then inland towards Jostedalsbreen (glacier) and Olden, Loen (great camping sites) then mandatory trip to Geiranger. Return through Lillehammer and Oslo. Just consider that Norway has a very high cost level vs Sweden. Food, beer & wine might be worth stocking up in Sweden. Fuel is the other way around... Denmark has lower price and less diluted diesel (better mileage).

impossibledreamer said:

We're planning a trip to Sweden this summer and trying to decide between mainly doing southern Sweden or also including parts of southern Norway. We'll have two weeks and we are mostly interested in being in nature and not as much in cities. Has anyone visited both areas and could offer some advice regarding whether you'd stick to one country or could they both be combined?

Click to expand...

We love both countries and have visited many times (and even lived there). Our most recent trips were in 2018 and 2021. If you have never been, then 2 weeks is ok, but perhaps a bit short to do both. Assuming you're travelling from Heidelberg, as your profile suggests, I would initially suggest you stick to visiting southern sweden. Nature there is lovely and there's a lot to do if you like walking/hiking, lakes, rivers, forests, etc. I'm sure you will enjoy yourself very well. I's take the puttgarden-rodby crossing and then Helsingor - Helsingbor. Maybe move up the coast a bit and circle back.

Norway, I would say is more interesting because it's more wild and more diverse. Especially if you must stick to the south due to time restrictions. Keep in mind you'll travel about 60km/h on average, so the distances you'll be able to travel will be less then you might expect. If you have 2 weeks, it's good to keep that in mind. You could consider driving up to Hirtshals and taking the ferry to Kristiansand and circle back through Sweden. Depends on how much you are up for a road trip.

Another good option would to just do the south of Norway. If nature is what you're going for, it might be more interesting and 2 weeks is a good length to see a lot of things.

South Sweden and south Norway are a really big piece of land if you have only 2 weeks (minus 2 days of driving). I would stay in south Sweden and can recommend an anti clockwise tour including Ystad, kalmar, following the gota kanal to goteborg. If you have time, visit the coast and finnskogen area above goteborg.

impossibledreamer said:

We're planning a trip to Sweden this summer and trying to decide between mainly doing southern Sweden or also including parts of southern Norway. We'll have two weeks and we are mostly interested in being in nature and not as much in cities. Has anyone visited both areas and could offer some advice regarding whether you'd stick to one country or could they both be combined?

Click to expand...

Do southern Norway on the west coast. It's fantastic. Sweden came a very poor second by comparison. You can take a high speed ferry from the northern tip of Denmark

I just wanted to thank everyone again for their comments and suggestions. I think we've decided to stick to southern Sweden this trip, as there does seem to be some really pretty places for camping, fishing, hiking. Norway looks amazing but in the end I think we'd want more than 2 weeks there so we'll probably put that on our list for a longer trip next year.