[ddoll]

I'm going to go against the flow and suggest that you may be more comfortable with the extra space when traveling with a group. Staying off site when you have older kids really isn't an inconvenience. My boys always loved the ability to stretch out and get away from each other at the end of the day.

[PeterPansPixie]

I have done both and I will only go with on site from now on, especially if the rates are comparable. There is no replacing the Disney magic and the conveniece of never having to drive anywhere yourself and EMH make on site the only option for me.

[mmoore]

On-site. So convenient.

[beatman23]

Cost/benefit analysis time:

On Site: No need for a car, no parking fee, EMH, Resort perks, no parking fees, DDP(would you use it?), THE MAGIC, letting the kids do things that they couldn't off site, no hassle of traffic, break in the day at hotel easier to pull off. I am sure I am missing some things......

Off Site: Food costs could be lower, more space in the rooms (but you aren't there to spend time in the rooms), freedom of having a car

For my family ON SITE. For your faimily, maybe DVC renting of points. I think you would find that VERY good.

[whitba]

We did an off-site not long ago, 4 families, BIG house with pool. We did save on food but you add the expense of the car, and for me the travel time just to get to WDW drove me nuts. Bad enough trying to get teens moving in the morning but then to have to drive, and if you hit a traffic jam! ... never again.

For us the travel time on WDW transport is all part of the vacation, downtime for DH as well.

[A Goofy Family]

I vote for onsite, mainly for the EMH! Plus, if someone from your party wants to go back to the room for a rest, or go back earlier (at the end of the day) than the rest of the family it's so much easier to catch a bus back to the resort.

[cowanfamily]

On-site, for sure. Disney isnt Disney to me without staying on-site - it is convenient for middle of the day trips back to the room, the food-courts, the DDP can't be beat, the refillable mugs, and POP is so much fun!!!

[Pam&Rich]

On site. We have done this so out teens at the time could go out and about on their own. WDW transportation ROCKS if the teens want son free time. No excuses about getting back late.

[asp8tis]

I'd definitely choose on-site accomodations. The convenience and perks like transportation and EMH are absolutely worth it.

[Southern Belle]

I usually prefer on-site...so much better!

[Lexie]

Onsite is the easiest and more relaxed way in my opinion. But, if you are looking @ price you can score some pretty cheap hotel/condos in Orlando. We got a 4star hotel thru hotwire for $48nt. a couple months ago. We were not going to Disney and figured we would give hotwire a try, it was really nice!

[MissDisney]

Honestly, I have to offer a differing opinion on this (and please eveyone, I am not trying to offend anyone!) I see ddoll and I see eye-to-eye on this!

I would not like to stay at an All-Star or Pop in two connecting rooms instead of in one of the magnificent off-site 2-bedroom villas. The luxury of the villas is just too irresistible to pass up. Two bedrooms, two bathrooms, a full-sized kitchen, a full-sized living room, a laundry room, a full-sized dining room, three televisions, excellent facilities, beautiful grounds, bus service to WDW, even an in-room jacuzzi. All this for the same price? Who can pass it up?

Being onsite is convenient. But I would never choose an All-Star or Pop if I could get the lavish villa offsite for the same price. No way. The villa communities (Vistana Resort, Marriott Sabal Palms, Marriott Royal Palms, Marriott Cypress Harbour, etc...) are only a 5- to 10-minute drive to WDW. Tops. And they have bus service to TTC as well. It is not less convenient to get onsite. And once you are onsite, you travel around like everyone else does. And at the end of the night, you go home to a gigantic, well-appointed home.

In my view, two rooms at Pop is just two bedrooms and two baths. That is a whole lot less space than a full-sized home. To me, a vacation to Disney is NOT relaxing or fun if I feel cramped. I need to feel pampered in order to really enjoy myself, and a nice large space to spread out is true pampering.

**** If you had said that there was a price difference or that your kids love the Pop atmosphere, I would of course say go ahead and stay at Pop. I would never eschew Pop for a higher-priced option. But the prices for a villa compares very favorably with the price for two rooms at Pop. I believe we have had 2-br villas for as low as $139 night.

[dancing4disney]

I am a fan of offsite. Our family of 5 is much happier in a Villa where we can all have their own rooms. My two boys (14, 12) don't get along with each other so it is worth it. My daughter 15, enjoys a little quiet time. I have always found that renting the house was cheaper than getting two rooms onsite. We also like having our own pool. Even when you add the car rental and parking it is still cheaper. (less than $200 a night) The last place we rented was at an ideal location and we were at the park within 20 minutes. We also saved a ton of money on food. We just couldn't do the DDP as it would cost us almost $200 a day. We could still eat at the parks on occassion and wouldn't spend more than $500 for 10 days staying offsite. I would love to be able to stay onsite but we just couldn't afford it with all of us. I will be taking my daughter for her 16th birthday and will stay onsite for that trip since there will only be two of us. I do want to experience the "onsite" magic.
The perks of being able to do laundry in you own place is great. With luggage restrictions on many flights it is nice to be able to wash clothes regularly and easily. We don't have to pack as much.

[bribren]

With the boys, on site. Charge up their cell, give 'em some room keys and throw then on a bus when ever they get squirrelly.

[jwakja]

With those age kids, if you don't stay on site and take advanage of the extra magic hours then you will regret it the REST OF YOUR LIFE!