The "Sugarbush Thread"

[cdskier]

That's what I recall. So the average age is between 21 and 25 years roughly. Granted though A LOT of places are not upgrading their lifts. Age and condition are not an issue if they are running....and the last few years most of them haven't had major issues. During my tenure there NRX and Super Bravo had lots of issues.

Yes, your memory is correct on the age of the lifts. But like I said for NRX, it was rebuilt 2 years ago so the year originally built isn't entirely relevant anymore. Sure the chairs and towers are older...but the "guts" are new (drivetrain, electrics, sensors, etc). Bravo wasn't completely rebuilt, but also had major replacements of key components within the past few years. They had serious issues and did an overhaul of most of their lifts the following summer to ensure (as much as one can at least) that they didn't continue to have problems. I don't know why we keep bringing up problems that have been fixed. If they hadn't done serious lift overhauls, then you'd have very valid arguments. But they did, so those arguments are getting tired. As someone that skies there most weekends, I've been quite happy with lift reliability since the overhauls have been completed. Of course the problem is that since they had so many issues 4 years ago or whatever it was, that now every time a lift is down for 5 minutes we over-analyze it and say "Oh boy, more lift issues at SB!" Do lifts still break once in a while or have wind holds? Sure. But even new lifts are no guarantee that you'd have 0 problems. A resort in the Catskills that I used to ski a lot put in a new lift maybe 10 years ago and had more issues with it the first year or two than the old lift had.

Sunny-D and Village are both ancient but they also aren't key lifts. If I was in charge of the budget I wouldn't be making their replacement a priority either. I would however be making dredging that snow-making pond to full permitted depth a priority though. That is a mistake to have not done already just in case you ever did have water supply/drought issues. Maybe there is a valid reason for not having done it, but otherwise I have a hard time excusing that one.

 

[Jully]

While agree that the overhauls make many of complaints/worries irrelevant, there was talk last summer about how overhauls aren't enough at some point. Specifically talking about HSQs we don't really know what the lifespan these lifts are and while there may not be problems now, the decline is almost certainly going to linear.

Its not an immediate problem, but that is my concern when it comes to discussions about lift age, especially HSQs. Bretton Woods, K, Sugarloaf, Sunday River, WV, and many others have workhorse HSQs installed in the early - mid 90s or earlier and their lifespan isn't really known. Its not a problem exclusive to Sugarbush at all, but when comparing it to Stowe (part of the reason I don't compare anything Stowe) or just talking about issues in general it comes up.

 

[thetrailboss]

Yes, your memory is correct on the age of the lifts. But like I said for NRX, it was rebuilt 2 years ago so the year originally built isn't entirely relevant anymore. Sure the chairs and towers are older...but the "guts" are new (drivetrain, electrics, sensors, etc). Bravo wasn't completely rebuilt, but also had major replacements of key components within the past few years. They had serious issues and did an overhaul of most of their lifts the following summer to ensure (as much as one can at least) that they didn't continue to have problems. I don't know why we keep bringing up problems that have been fixed. If they hadn't done serious lift overhauls, then you'd have very valid arguments. But they did, so those arguments are getting tired. As someone that skies there most weekends, I've been quite happy with lift reliability since the overhauls have been completed. Of course the problem is that since they had so many issues 4 years ago or whatever it was, that now every time a lift is down for 5 minutes we over-analyze it and say "Oh boy, more lift issues at SB!" Do lifts still break once in a while or have wind holds? Sure. But even new lifts are no guarantee that you'd have 0 problems. A resort in the Catskills that I used to ski a lot put in a new lift maybe 10 years ago and had more issues with it the first year or two than the old lift had.

Sunny-D and Village are both ancient but they also aren't key lifts. If I was in charge of the budget I wouldn't be making their replacement a priority either. I would however be making dredging that snow-making pond to full permitted depth a priority though. That is a mistake to have not done already just in case you ever did have water supply/drought issues. Maybe there is a valid reason for not having done it, but otherwise I have a hard time excusing that one.

Interesting. So no more cadence chain for NRX? That was a huge issue that caused them problems. Replacing that would be a HUGE improvement.

And as Jully said the problem is that the lifespan of a HSQ is just not known. And rebuilds do not always remedy all problems extend lifespan. Just look at those Borvigs......

 

[cdskier]

Interesting. So no more cadence chain for NRX? That was a huge issue that caused them problems. Replacing that would be a HUGE improvement.

And as Jully said the problem is that the lifespan of a HSQ is just not known. And rebuilds do not always remedy all problems extend lifespan. Just look at those Borvigs......

Honestly I have no idea about whether the cadence chain was replaced on the NRX during the rebuild by Doppelmayr. I'd like to think any of the components that previously gave them issues were replaced.

And yes, while rebuilds do not necessarily fix everything and extend the life-span of a lift by another 20 years, they certainly can add substantial years to a lift at a significant cost savings vs a brand new lift. Just because we don't fully know the lifespan of a HSQ doesn't mean we should immediately jump to thinking about replacement when it hits 20. Under current leadership Sugarbush seems to be on good financial ground. That's important. Don't forget, it was a small group of private investors that put in millions of their own dollars into the resort. They have a very vested interest in keeping the resort stable without over-extending themselves and I would fully expect that they have a long term plan in mind on when they may need to start to consider replacing lifts that are a critical part of their infrastructure. Based on what I've seen the past couple years, they've made solid decisions with the lifts recently. I won't criticize them on that topic until there's an actual reason to do so. You don't see a ton of other areas rushing to replace all their HSQs once they hit 20 either. I'm going to believe that the people working on these lifts know more about the viability of the lift than you or I do and that management is listening to their input.

 

[tnt1234]

so, ok....will trails be open come new years?

 

[cdskier]

so, ok....will trails be open come new years?

Assuming no major heat wave, sure! How many is a different question. A lot can happen in a month (either good or bad).

At the moment they are blowing snow at the base of LP. The snow report made no mention of any snowmaking targeted for tonight so I'm guessing the temps dropped lower than they thought they would and they are taking advantage while they can.

 

[nhskier1969]

It will be interesting if Win mentions the "water issue" in his weekly blog on sugarbush's website

 

[WWF-VT]

Sunny-D and Village are both ancient but they also aren't key lifts. If I was in charge of the budget I wouldn't be making their replacement a priority either

The Sunny-D is a critical lift for the park and access to beginner terrain at Mt Ellen and is on borrowed time. I suspect that it is on the near term plan for major work or replacement.

 

[tumbler]

Well, maybe it will snow....

That is what they are banking on, it has bailed them out the past few years.

 

[Plowboy]

It will be interesting if Win mentions the "water issue" in his weekly blog on sugarbush's website

https://www.sugarbush.com/blog/wins-word/opening-weekend-operating-plans-and-snowmaking/

 

[cdskier]

https://www.sugarbush.com/blog/wins-word/opening-weekend-operating-plans-and-snowmaking/

Just came here to post that...here's the main part for people that don't want to click the link:

While we have been making snow continuously at Mount Ellen, we have been a bit cautious with our water at Lincoln Peak. The State of Vermont mandates that we only divert water from the Mad River into our snowmaking pond when the river is flowing at or above the February Median Flow, which is 42.9 cubic feet per second (CFS). The purpose of maintaining the river flow at or above the February Median Flow is to protect habitat for fish and other aquatic organisms. At times this fall, the flow has been low as the summer drought dropped the ground water levels below normal. Usually we do not wish for rain, but the forthcoming rain this week will be just what is needed to raise the ground water level, get the Mad River flowing, and allow us to continue to replenish our pond. As temperatures fall Thursday night, our snow guns on both mountains will be firing again, and hopefully augmented by the natural snow in the forecast.

Also of note is that they've pumped a combined 40 million gallons so far this season between snow-making at LP and ME.

 

[JimG.]

Hard core trout heads at it again. Same in the Cats even worse because the NYC reservoirs are in that area.

DEP and DEC keep a tight leash on flow rates.

 

[slatham]

Yikes, a cold and dry winter would be a big problem.

 

[thetrailboss]

Just came here to post that...here's the main part for people that don't want to click the link:



Also of note is that they've pumped a combined 40 million gallons so far this season between snow-making at LP and ME.

Another illustration as to why ME is better for early season operations. But that war was lost in 2007.

 

[cdskier]

Another illustration as to why ME is better for early season operations. But that war was lost in 2007.

How so? I can't remember exact numbers, but I seem to recall that ME's water flow capacity was about half of what LP's was. So ME has been able to keep pumping, but at a lower rate. That doesn't mean they've made more snow at ME. (One post I found on another forum from a couple years ago suggested LP was 4K GPM and ME was 2-2.5K GPM capacity for pumping water). I thought the numbers were higher though from what I saw posted in the Ski MRV forum at one point, but unfortunately that site is still down.

 

[thetrailboss]

How so? I can't remember exact numbers, but I seem to recall that ME's water flow capacity was about half of what LP's was. So ME has been able to keep pumping, but at a lower rate. That doesn't mean they've made more snow at ME. (One post I found on another forum from a couple years ago suggested LP was 4K GPM and ME was 2-2.5K GPM capacity for pumping water). I thought the numbers were higher though from what I saw posted in the Ski MRV forum at one point, but unfortunately that site is still down.

Elevation and exposure are HUGE factors for snow preservation. It is also a better downloading set-up. Finally, wider trails to handle more people. It, again, was designed in 1964 to have late season skiing and a self-contained higher base camp. It was refined in 1991 or so to have early and late season skiing. Only issue: no real estate at the base. That 2 mile drive is so terrible I guess :roll:

I remember when the decision to move late and early season ops to LP that someone placed a realtor's sign at the base of Mount Ellen as a joke.

Yes, I am a Mount Ellen homer. :lol:

 

[sugarbushskier9]

I recall that Stowe back in the 90's was far from perfect and actually was in pretty rough shape. I am pretty sure that AIG put their foot down and told them to get their shit together are else. I highly doubt that AIG/Chartis has an open pocketbook for Stowe to pull money from. They didn't back then, and I don't see why they would now.

Or else what? I think you'd be surprised from what I've read. There was a Ski Magazine article by Joe Cutts a while back about how AIG just wrote Stowe a check each year in the 90's to keep the place open, but now it actually turns a profit because of all the money AIG pumped into the resort. Stowe itself was not financing this, AIG was. What likely happened was that AIG didn't given an ultimatum, but instead said, ok, WE NEED to put some money into this place to make it viable. And they jumped in with both feet.

 

[cdskier]

Elevation and exposure are HUGE factors for snow preservation. It is also a better downloading set-up. Finally, wider trails to handle more people. It, again, was designed in 1964 to have late season skiing and a self-contained higher base camp. It was refined in 1991 or so to have early and late season skiing. Only issue: no real estate at the base. That 2 mile drive is so terrible I guess :roll:

Wider trails can handle more people...but at the same time that means they need more snow to open them. And if the system is half as powerful at ME as the one at LP, that's not a good thing for early season.

If we play the hypothetical "what if" game, let's compare what we would have had on opening day this year.

LP: 2 distinct trails offering 1500 feet of vertical including both a blue and a black (Jester and Organgrinder)
Or
ME: 1 blue trail offering 1000 feet of vertical (Rim Run->Elbow). I believe Lower Rim run would have been ready a few days later for 1.5 blue cruising runs...

Keep in mind that they didn't spend any time blowing on Inverness yet for GMVS. So GMVS is now using those ME upper mountain trails until they get Inverness going.

I'll agree that the "setup" with the lodge, deck, and lifts is better at ME for early/late season. But the rest of the infrastructure isn't and I'd personally rather ski a Jester/OG combo with Ripcord often not far behind compared to any of the summit run snow-making trail combinations at ME that you could offer early season.

Don't get me wrong, I love ME mid-season to avoid the crowds and ski the fun natural trails like Hammerhead, Tumbler, Bravo, Exterminator, and even something like Semi-Tough. Early season though I think LP offers a chance for better terrain variety at the summit to choose from.

 

[tumbler]

ME is fed from a flowing brook that as long as the water fills the pump vault then they can pump water. There is also a pond at the bottom of inverness that adds water capacity. The LP pond can only be filled when the flow is above a certain level so there is a risk of running out of water, which thanks to Win confirming they are very concerned about. The early season set up is much better at ME. It is much less acreage to open Rim Run, Elbow, Looking Good and then put FIS in if temps allow. Also remember ME still uses at lot of the old ratnik and SR7 guns that make better snow in marginal temps.

 

[slatham]

Wider trails can handle more people...but at the same time that means they need more snow to open them. And if the system is half as powerful at ME as the one at LP, that's not a good thing for early season.

If we play the hypothetical "what if" game, let's compare what we would have had on opening day this year.

LP: 2 distinct trails offering 1500 feet of vertical including both a blue and a black (Jester and Organgrinder)
Or
ME: 1 blue trail offering 1000 feet of vertical (Rim Run->Elbow). I believe Lower Rim run would have been ready a few days later for 1.5 blue cruising runs...

Keep in mind that they didn't spend any time blowing on Inverness yet for GMVS. So GMVS is now using those ME upper mountain trails until they get Inverness going.

I'll agree that the "setup" with the lodge, deck, and lifts is better at ME for early/late season. But the rest of the infrastructure isn't and I'd personally rather ski a Jester/OG combo with Ripcord often not far behind compared to any of the summit run snow-making trail combinations at ME that you could offer early season.

Don't get me wrong, I love ME mid-season to avoid the crowds and ski the fun natural trails like Hammerhead, Tumbler, Bravo, Exterminator, and even something like Semi-Tough. Early season though I think LP offers a chance for better terrain variety at the summit to choose from.

There are pro's and con's to both.

But lets be real here - 2 Distinct trails at LP? Not the case. How can you write off the utter shit show that Downspout is on a busy day?

The flip side is until FIS is open ME has Upper Rim Run as the choke point (though Downspout it is NOT).

So what is better, Rim into 2 trails (lower RR and Elbow) or UJ and OG into one trail of DS?

Then there's elevation, where ME beats LP hands down with everything above 3,000'.

But then LP wins on vertical.......

And then there's snowmaking capacity where LP wins (in non-drought years at least)...

And of course a key factor is that they can get TTB at LP quicker than at ME due to both capacity and acreage.

A tie breaker might be that Spillsville will open on natural before Black Diamond, and Ripcord before FIS??

And it they did revert to ME then everyone (though not me) would complain about a dated base lodge, less attractive bar, no high end restaurant, and the brutal commute from the lodging at LP!!!

But in the end its LP and I see no path to ME being the early/late option short of a sale.