Saddleback - WOW!

[Tin Woodsman]

All good points.

What would be a game changer for them would be a lift on the back side into those bowls that get all the snow blowing off of the summit ridge. It's an ESE aspect but so is Castlerock. Being high elevation, high latitude and getting a lot of blow in matters - exposure isn't a concern. It's also worth noting that the longest sustained vert is on that side of the mountain as well. Not sure if it's feasible given the AMC agreement though.

 

[ski_resort_observer]

2 new groomers this year (one a winchcat) will hopefully help in the grooming department. Andy has it right.. SB skis much MUCH smaller than sugarloaf despite 2k of vert, it also gets absolutely hammered by wind out of the NW making the top 200 feet or so of vert survival skiing most days.

my guess would be a HSQ to replace the rangeley double for next year, and maybe an expansion of the lodge then call it quits for awhile. They have already dumped an insane amount of money into the mountain especially considering its a family owned place.

Saddleback has the potential to be an awesome resort but they have some problems they have to overcome. Rangely is still a snowmobile town and I wonder if this would be an obstacle for the upscale out of state guests they are working hard to attract. Course, the other is remote location. On the positive it's views are some the most spectacular in New England.

The new condos look really nice , the new base lodge is topnotch, didn't check out their health club. When I was there I met 3 couples from Boston doing the real estate condo tour thing. There was only one staff person in the lodge and we had a nice chat on how condo sales were going.

BTW, 300' of the Loaf's vert is below the base area from a chair going down into the Loaf's massive condo developements so skiable terrain is really 2500'

 

[tipsdown]

All good points.

What would be a game changer for them would be a lift on the back side into those bowls that get all the snow blowing off of the summit ridge. It's an ESE aspect but so is Castlerock. Being high elevation, high latitude and getting a lot of blow in matters - exposure isn't a concern. It's also worth noting that the longest sustained vert is on that side of the mountain as well. Not sure if it's feasible given the AMC agreement though.

I agree that installing a lift on the backside would be a game changer...However, it's not likely. Although I know Warren Cook is exploring the option of skiing the backside to some degree. It would more likely be a set up like Sugarloaf where you can get a shot of 500-600' ft and then wrap back around to the front. Looking at the topo map, that looks to be steeper than anything any other mountain is offering up….

I think a more likely scenario of installing a top-bottom lift in the West Bowl could be a game-changer..It would be 1300-1400 ft. of vertical but most of that vertical looks like expert terrain and there is no run-out. As previously mentioned 1300 of sustained expert terrain is about as much as your going to get in the East..

And I do agree Saddleback would ski even bigger if it had a top-bottom lift installed somewhere on the front…There may be a small amount of run-out but there's areas where blue-ish terrain exists as low as 2400 ft. elevation…That would be a solid shot of close to 1700 ft. vert..

 

[tipsdown]

That makes it a lot clearer. I've never skied there so am just trying to surmise what I can from looking at the trail map. I wasn't thinking in terms of the real estate angle, which probably is needed to make the whole thing work financially.

Does the mountain offer possibilities to create some really long black runs? I think there is enough sprawl available in New England, but not as much for continuous vertical. The more unique stuff they could offer, the more traffic they might pull from other resorts.

For example, could the America trail off the Kennebago quad feed into the proposed west bowl for some long trails? Or maybe something above Muleskinner to run out much further down the mountain where the new lifts would go?

There doesn't appear to be much room for a lot more long black runs (exception: see previous post on West Bowl), but as they expand it's more likely that they will extend the upper mountain trails into "upper" and "lower" portions. This would allow for 1k vt. of Black/Double Black and another 400-600 ft. vert. of blue terrain. This is more in line with what a lot of the other big 2+k mountains in the East do....

 

[riverc0il]

There doesn't appear to be much room for a lot more long black runs

Quite the opposite, a lift to the top of Muleskinner could open up an entire new pod of expert terrain to the tune of five or six trails plus glades in between. There is a lot of real estate in that neck of the woods. And as much as their map would have you think that the entire area from Muleskinner back towards the trails is skiable, that is very much not the case unless they sent every citizen in Rangely up there with a power saw this summer.

 

[EPB]

Weren't there plans a while back for a base area to summit lift? Im pretty sure they cut a line and everything. Why were those plans abandoned? Wind? That would be able to open up almost 2000 vert if it were possible.

 

[Tin Woodsman]

Weren't there plans a while back for a base area to summit lift? Im pretty sure they cut a line and everything. Why were those plans abandoned? Wind? That would be able to open up almost 2000 vert if it were possible.

I don't know, but if you look closely at pictures of the mountain, you can see that at some point, Tight Line was extended much further down the mountain but has now grown in. Maybe that's what you're talking about? It would certainly be a natural place for it.

 

[bousquet19]

Great SB Thread

I know Saddleback (and several other high peaks and lakes in western Maine) only during the summer months. My last visit to Saddleback itself was a hike more than 30 years ago, but I tramped the Bigelow peaks a few years back.

It's been great to read this SB thread because I've long wanted to ski this region. Friends and I will be there in March (finally!) for 5 days of skiing -- 2 at SB, 2 at SL and 1 wild-card up-for-grabs day. We all want to get to Saddleback before too many people discover it ... and before one or more of us is unable to hit the slopes.

I read the environmental assessment for SB's development plans several years ago and appreciate the negotiations with the AMC, etc., that resulted in the present agreement. 'Dont want to hijack this thread but when March draws closer I'll ask for advice on SB's best black runs for a bunch of blue-black skiers.

Thinking snow (and saw some today here in Virginia),
Woody

 

[EPB]

I don't know, but if you look closely at pictures of the mountain, you can see that at some point, Tight Line was extended much further down the mountain but has now grown in. Maybe that's what you're talking about? It would certainly be a natural place for it.

Here's a link to the map with the plans on it. I'm assuming the liftline was cut and the bottom half grew back in:

http://www.nelsap.org/skihistory/saddleback7374tm.jpg

 

[AndyEich]

I agree that installing a lift on the backside would be a game changer...Looking at the topo map, that looks to be steeper than anything any other mountain is offering up?.

I think a more likely scenario of installing a top-bottom lift in the West Bowl could be a game-changer..It would be 1300-1400 ft. of vertical but most of that vertical looks like expert terrain and there is no run-out...

And I do agree Saddleback would ski even bigger if it had a top-bottom lift installed somewhere on the front?There may be a small amount of run-out but there's areas where blue-ish terrain exists as low as 2400 ft. elevation?That would be a solid shot of close to 1700 ft. vert..

Again, most things I read about Saddleback are exaggerated a couple hundred feet.

The backside seems too steep to be skiable in most spots.

West Bowl starts out beginner and becomes expert around 3700'. At 3100' and below it lightens up to easy black/hard blue--rating probably depends how cliffy it is. There is only 600, maybe 700' that is as steep as their current expert pod.

And there is just no way I can figure a 2k top-to-bottom lift (saw that in some other posts). The area below the expert pod becomes a runout much higher than the terrain to the west. I think you'd have to cap a lift along that line at 1500' vertical or the runout would be just brutal.

Again, I love the place, but it is a nice old school mountain--very respectable, but not the future beast that some claim.
________
LIVE SEX

 

[Tin Woodsman]

Again, most things I read about Saddleback are exaggerated a couple hundred feet.

The backside seems too steep to be skiable in most spots.

West Bowl starts out beginner and becomes expert around 3700'. At 3100' and below it lightens up to easy black/hard blue--rating probably depends how cliffy it is. There is only 600, maybe 700' that is as steep as their current expert pod.

And there is just no way I can figure a 2k top-to-bottom lift (saw that in some other posts). The area below the expert pod becomes a runout much higher than the terrain to the west. I think you'd have to cap a lift along that line at 1500' vertical or the runout would be just brutal.

Again, I love the place, but it is a nice old school mountain--very respectable, but not the future beast that some claim.

You're getting caught up in headline statistics and not crediting the reality that aside from a small handful of places (Stowe, MRG, SBN, Loaf, Wildcat?), no one in the East has sustained verticals of 2000'. Much more important is the vertical in a given lift pod.

 

[UVSHTSTRM]

Again, most things I read about Saddleback are exaggerated a couple hundred feet.

The backside seems too steep to be skiable in most spots.

West Bowl starts out beginner and becomes expert around 3700'. At 3100' and below it lightens up to easy black/hard blue--rating probably depends how cliffy it is. There is only 600, maybe 700' that is as steep as their current expert pod.

And there is just no way I can figure a 2k top-to-bottom lift (saw that in some other posts). The area below the expert pod becomes a runout much higher than the terrain to the west. I think you'd have to cap a lift along that line at 1500' vertical or the runout would be just brutal.

Again, I love the place, but it is a nice old school mountain--very respectable, but not the future beast that some claim.

Hmmmmm, well if Killington can claim to be the "Beast" (so dumb), why can't Saddleback be that someday......simply basing it on expert vertical that you seem to be so hung up on. I mean Killington has really nothing in the way of 2000k, 1500k and maybe, just maybe 1000k of expert vertical........And what mountain (I know there probably are couple) doesn't have several hundred vertical feet of runout?

 

[riverc0il]

Again, I love the place, but it is a nice old school mountain--very respectable, but not the future beast that some claim.

I don't think any one is claiming that Saddleback will actually become a dominant ski resort. It will certainly improve its skier visits substantially. But if you look at the plans, if they were to follow through on every part of the expansion, the place could theoretically give Sunday River a run for its money in terms of scale. Doubt its going to happen but the plans seem geared in that direction.

 

[tipsdown]

I don't think any one is claiming that Saddleback will actually become a dominant ski resort. It will certainly improve its skier visits substantially. But if you look at the plans, if they were to follow through on every part of the expansion, the place could theoretically give Sunday River a run for its money in terms of scale. Doubt its going to happen but the plans seem geared in that direction.

I think we're nitpicking a bit but they could install a lift that loads further to the East and terminates up around Muleskinner that easily exceeds 1500ft. Probably closer to 1600-1700 ft. with little run-out..

To put things in perspective, Sugarloaf which has the longest sustained vertical in the East, has no blue terrain below 2200 ft. elevation. Saddleback has no blue terrain below 2400 ft. elevation. With a difference of about 100 ft. in lift elevation between the 2, Sugarloaf may have another 300 ft. of real vertical over Saddleback. That's not a big difference, especially given SL's reputation for huge vertical. It just proves that Lift Pod vertical is much more important that top-bottom vertical…..

I agree with rivercOil, I don't think there mission is to become Beast of the East, although, in terms scale, there's no doubt they have the goods to do it...

 

[kingdom-tele]

I think some of you need to go to Le Massif to find out what sustained vertical means, its the east - no one has more than 2K of consistent pitch - go to alaska

 

[deadheadskier]

I think we're nitpicking a bit but they could install a lift that loads further to the East and terminates up around Muleskinner that easily exceeds 1500ft. Probably closer to 1600-1700 ft. with little run-out..

To put things in perspective, Sugarloaf which has the longest sustained vertical in the East, has no blue terrain below 2200 ft. elevation. Saddleback has no blue terrain below 2400 ft. elevation. With a difference of about 100 ft. in lift elevation between the 2, Sugarloaf may have another 300 ft. of real vertical over Saddleback. That's not a big difference, especially given SL's reputation for huge vertical. It just proves that Lift Pod vertical is much more important that top-bottom vertical…..

I agree with rivercOil, I don't think there mission is to become Beast of the East, although, in terms scale, there's no doubt they have the goods to do it...

Whiteface has the longest sustained vertical in the East.

Saddleback does have great trail pods and it can be left at that. Skiing off the summit at Saddleback gives you 1000 vert tops down to Kennabago. Skiing of the Rangeley double gives you about the same. Due to the contours of the mountain, the run out from the Kennabago back to the Rangeley is basically flat.

Skiing off the summit of Sugarloaf, from Timberline, not the true summit, probably gives you at least 1800 if not more feet of decent vertical.

Having a discussion comparing vertical between Sugarloaf and Saddleback is rather pointless. I'm taking nothing away from Saddleback, it is a great mountain. I just don't ever see it currently or with future development falling in the conversation of the mountains in the east that have excellent long sustained vertical.

 

[UVSHTSTRM]

I think some of you need to go to Le Massif to find out what sustained vertical means, its the east - no one has more than 2K of consistent pitch - go to alaska

Agreed, that's what I have been saying in regards to expert vertical.

Also Le Massif is on the short list of places to visit in the east.

 

[bigbog]

.........depends how cliffy it is.....

the magic word...LOL

 

[tipsdown]

Whiteface has the longest sustained vertical in the East.

Saddleback does have great trail pods and it can be left at that. Skiing off the summit at Saddleback gives you 1000 vert tops down to Kennabago. Skiing of the Rangeley double gives you about the same. Due to the contours of the mountain, the run out from the Kennabago back to the Rangeley is basically flat.

Skiing off the summit of Sugarloaf, from Timberline, not the true summit, probably gives you at least 1800 if not more feet of decent vertical.

Having a discussion comparing vertical between Sugarloaf and Saddleback is rather pointless. I'm taking nothing away from Saddleback, it is a great mountain. I just don't ever see it currently or with future development falling in the conversation of the mountains in the east that have excellent long sustained vertical.

I agree the pitch is not consistent anywhere on the mountain for 1600-1700 vertical ft. But to me it is pitch worth skiing according to my terrain calculator for real vertical which is blue terrain or >. A lift that services terrain somewhere below the nubble (below Mulekskinner) to the summit near the top of Muleskinner would accomplish that. The top half of the trails would be Advanced/Expert, the bottom half would be intermediate. They could do the same on the West Side near Megalloway area and get similar vertical off that trail pod if they chose to go in that direction. It is gentler and would mostly service blue terrain. Those would be good long runs that would make Saddleback ski bigger without a doubt…

 

[deadheadskier]

I agree the pitch is not consistent anywhere on the mountain for 1600-1700 vertical ft. But to me it is pitch worth skiing according to my terrain calculator for real vertical which is blue terrain or >. A lift that services terrain somewhere below the nubble (below Mulekskinner) to the summit near the top of Muleskinner would accomplish that. The top half of the trails would be Advanced/Expert, the bottom half would be intermediate. They could do the same on the West Side near Megalloway area and get similar vertical off that trail pod if they chose to go in that direction. It is gentler and would mostly service blue terrain. Those would be good long runs that would make Saddleback ski bigger without a doubt…

I'm just busting stones. You, like their marketing department, tends to inflate the place to a high degree. Don't get me wrong, it is a great mountain and it's cool that you are very passionate about the place, but you make the place out sometimes to be the Jackson Hole of the East with your continuous pom pom waving.

Great place and I'm happy to see the investments being made.