Will the real vertical drop please stand up.

[4aprice]

Personally, I'm totally happy to ski 1000' of vertical at a time. Unless you are running world cup downhills, vertical is a totally useless statistic.

I agree with you 100% Geoff. I could care less what the vertical is. If the snow is good and the terrain is interesting I'm a happy camper. Give me 200 ft VD, a fun line of bumps, and a rope tow and I could have a fantastic day.

Alex

Lake Hopatcong, NJ

 

[crank]

So what you guys are saying here is....size matters?

 

[deadheadskier]

the size of the hill doesn't matter, but apparently what the mountain marketers say of their size does.

you know, I've never had a Big Mac look like the poster on the wall

 

[SIKSKIER]

I'm not a fan of my Cannon Tramway but there are very few areas that have the 2100 vert of one lift combined with almost no flat area and finish with 900 vert of steeps.

 

[ceo]

True, but you aren't getting to the tram without poling unless you drop into a tuck from halfway up Avalanche. ("You say that like it's a bad thing.") Then again, that's because the bottom of Avie is at roughly the same elevation as the tram base, so the vertical still counts.

I don't miss the days before they put in the new access trail to the tram, when you had to walk across the parking lot and up a flight of stairs to get to the thing.

 

[Smellytele]

True, but you aren't getting to the tram without poling unless you drop into a tuck from halfway up Avalanche. ("You say that like it's a bad thing.") Then again, that's because the bottom of Avie is at roughly the same elevation as the tram base, so the vertical still counts.

I don't miss the days before they put in the new access trail to the tram, when you had to walk across the parking lot and up a flight of stairs to get to the thing.

Cut over to Banshee and to the glades or ski down Kinsman glade or Tramline (I know these 2 aren't in play too often but)

 

[riverc0il]

And Steve you are just as polemical on this site as the last one! SB has the most consistent vert of any place in the northeast. And while there is a bit of a green run-out to Jay, most of it is quite consistent. I'll take a brief run-out rather than all that ice in NH any day!

Ha! I had to look Polemical up. Your comment on NH being iced was quite polemical as well. I do have my strong opinions. But I think this one is more fact than opinion.

Mountains with more consistent vertical than Sugarbush might include Smuggs, Stowe, Cannon, Wildcat, Loon, Burke, Sunday River, Attitash, etc.. At Mount Ellen, everything below the North Ridge chair is flat (not a short flat either) and at Lincoln Peak you either need to Valley House Traverse or Lower Downspout/Lower Jester/Gondolier or Castlerock Runout to get back to the base area unless you are on the Lynx side of things.

Jay has Kokomo, perhaps the worst run out in New England excepting East Bowl at Burke, as well as Taxi/Queens coming to the Tram from the other direction. And the entire length of the Metro Quad. The Angle's Wiggle and Lower Can Am areas are pretty flat on Stateside as well. I love Jay and had a pass there for three seasons. Despite my love for the mountain, I do think it is one of the worst run out offenders in New England.

 

[ceo]

Cut over to Banshee and to the glades or ski down Kinsman glade or Tramline (I know these 2 aren't in play too often but)

I keep forgetting they put in that glade between Banshee and the tram base. Haven't yet made it there on a day when Kinsman or Tramline were open. :-(

 

[riverc0il]

I keep forgetting they put in that glade between Banshee and the tram base. Haven't yet made it there on a day when Kinsman or Tramline were open. :-(

Also last season, they cut a steep trail that dumps you out from the furthest south of the Banshee slopes directly at the bridge. Conditions looked like they can be pretty hairy at times... since it is steep and narrow, the traffic hammers the snow quite hard. But essentially that offers a guaranteed pole free way to the base without using the Banshee Glade.

 

[tipsdown]

Okay thanks. I kinda figured that. I also noticed that most if not all of the east hadn't been verified, can anyone else verify other eastern resorts who's true verts are not what is currently on the site. Just curious, places like Saddleback I don't think will hold up while places in NH (Loon, Cannon, WV) will pretty much all hold up.

When you say hold up what do you mean? SB has 2000 of contineous vert, and apparently there's additional 300ish ft. of vert they plan to develop down the hill as lift infrastructure improves....To me that doesn't really define true vert eaither. I've always considered true vert to be contineous vertical of blue terrain or greater.

 

[Mapnut]

I don't believe Saddleback should go any lower; it just gets flatter and flatter. The 300 feet below the lodge is already really flat, about a 1:8 pitch. That said, I don't believe bona fide novice terrain, like the bottom of Sugarbush North, should be excluded from skiable vertical drop. We're not all experts. And after all the bottom of Sugarloaf (above the base lodge) is all green, similar in pitch and length to Sugarbush North.

 

[St. Bear]

That said, I don't believe bona fide novice terrain, like the bottom of Sugarbush North, should be excluded from skiable vertical drop. We're not all experts. And after all the bottom of Sugarloaf (above the base lodge) is all green, similar in pitch and length to Sugarbush North.

What about places like Burke where the novice area has it's own seperate lift?

I'd be curious what the vertical is for the summit chair, because that's all I'd be skiing.

 

[WJenness]

What about places like Burke where the novice area has it's own seperate lift?

I'd be curious what the vertical is for the summit chair, because that's all I'd be skiing.

Skilifts.org has the Willoughby chair at 1,559' Vert.

-w

 

[tipsdown]

I don't believe Saddleback should go any lower; it just gets flatter and flatter. The 300 feet below the lodge is already really flat, about a 1:8 pitch. That said, I don't believe bona fide novice terrain, like the bottom of Sugarbush North, should be excluded from skiable vertical drop. We're not all experts. And after all the bottom of Sugarloaf (above the base lodge) is all green, similar in pitch and length to Sugarbush North.

You're right about the current terrain below the lodge but there's more pitch where other lifts are planned in the future. If you've driven down to Saddleback Lake, you'd know what I mean (a rd in the summer to the lake follows a similar path to where future trails are planned). Skiers right of this existing terrain has more pitch and is comparable to the bona fide novice terrain you're referencing.

 

[deadheadskier]

Just checked out the Saddleback website to a view a trail map. I was somewhat surprised to see that the map only showed the current developed terrain. Forever they have had a half dozen dotted red lines for lifts in future expansion plans.

 

[jaywbigred]

I think this is an interesting concept but your legs can always differentiate between the mountains with more and less vertical.

Days I have skied a full day at ( Sugarbush, Jay, Cannon, Loaf or Wildcat) and I am toast at the end of the day.

Days at (Mt Snow, Killington, Okemo, Sunday River) Not so much.

Just my experience.

Ski more bumps.

 

[tipsdown]

Just checked out the Saddleback website to a view a trail map. I was somewhat surprised to see that the map only showed the current developed terrain. Forever they have had a half dozen dotted red lines for lifts in future expansion plans.

I think that ended when Warren Cook was brought it. Some of the future lifts made sense. Some didn't. I think he wanted to re-evaluate the lift infrastructure....

 

[from_the_NEK]

Skilifts.org has the Willoughby chair at 1,559' Vert.

-w

I figure based on topos and a couple DEM sources that the top of the lift is almost right at 3200 feet and the bottom at 1670 give or take 5 feet in either direction. This puts the vert at ~1530 for the main mountain serving Willoughby Quad.
The top of the Sherburne HSQ is at 1780 and the base at 1200 (again give or take 5 ft either way) giving the lower mtn a 580' vert.

3200 - 1200 = 2000' total vert. I'm not sure what they were measuring to come up with the 2011' figure that popped up a couple of years ago (maybe they are erring on the + side of my 5 ft elevation deviation ). The true summit is at 3267 feet. The full contiunous vert is easily skiable with no traversing if you take Upper/Lower Willoughby off the summit and bear left onto Binney Lane (under the Sherburne Quad). It just takes two lifts to get you back to the top. There is a fun intermediate terrain park on the lower mtn that is a fun time to hit at least once if you are into that sort of entertainment.