Having done both SF - LV and SF-LA I would go with the latter. SF-LV is a minimum 9 hour drive with few/short stops with little to recommend it besides a side stop in Yosemite or Lake Tahoe. Unless you love to gamble LV holds very little charm IMO.LA-SF is only about 5 hours if you take I-5 but traveling 101 or Highway 1 will add both time and interest to the drive. Carmel, Monterey, Big Sur, San Simeon, Santa Barbara, Madonna Inn, and other sites make the longer drive worth the effort. In addition LA has a lot of fun places to visit [Long Beach Harbor, Disneyland, the Studios, Getty Museum, LA County Museum of Art] though you will have to spend a lot of time on the Freeways getting from place to place. SF is compact and has great transportation so once you reach the City, park the car and explore without it. [North Beach, Chinatown, Yerba Buena Gardens, Golden Gate Park, Cable Cars, Nob Hill, Pacific Heights, Eureka Valley,] so much to see!
Yes, Grand Granyon should be after Vegas. LA is pretty big. It takes about 5-7 hours to get there, and then from LA to Vegas is about 3-4 hours, then you should go to Hoover Dam (less than a hour away.), Grand Canyon is about 5 hour from Vegas. When you come home from Vegas to SF, it will takes 8-9.5 hours only.Seriously, I think it s better to go from SF, Yosemite, LA, VEgas and Hoover Dam.. Yosemite should be really pretty in the Winter.Or you can go SF, LA, VEgas, Hoover Dam and then Yosemite back to SF
Big sur is a must to see, it is most beautiful coast scenic drive in US, and visit Hearst Castle too( biggest mansion in US)
i hope you are going to red rock while in LV.