Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
NYC really isn't a very cold city, period. I'm sorry, but when you're averaging in the mid-40's for highs during most of winter, that's basically what Seattle averages, and nobody calls Seattle a "cold" city. I'm not sure how NYC EVER got mixed up as a cold U.S. city, personally......unless things were much different only a few decades ago.
NYC really isn't a very cold city, period. I'm sorry, but when you're averaging in the mid-40's for highs during most of winter, that's basically what Seattle averages, and nobody calls Seattle a "cold" city. I'm not sure how NYC EVER got mixed up as a cold U.S. city, personally......unless things were much different only a few decades ago.
Have you ever actually lived in NYC?
Its windy in the city in winter, and snow storms. The last 10 years, wintertime in NYC has blown epically.
Firstly, where are you coming up with these numbers of 47 and 53 again?
Its an example.
Why not dig deeper and show us some actual comparisons for winter time with daily temperatures between both cities? Raw data, instead of just allowing "well NYC has x amount of days over 50 and Chicago doesnt so Chicago is colder, etc."
I disagree with grapico on the average bit. Its as flawed a statistic as solely using days above/below a certain temperature, per the example I have been using.
If the actual average between the two in one winter was only 8 degrees yet NYC registered more days above a certain cut-off temperature point and Chicago didnt, well of course NYC appears much more pleasant but in actuality, whats the average differential? The cut-off is misleading.
IE: NYC has say 20 days over 50 in winter and Chicago has 3, what appears better? NYC, but in actuality Chicago was mostly upper 40s...
Chicago can be 47 all winter and NYC can be 53, but NYC registers over 50 the whole time so it appears warmer when really theyre both close to 50.
Why not dig deeper and show us some actual comparisons for winter time with daily temperatures between both cities? Raw data, instead of just allowing "well NYC has x amount of days over 50 and Chicago doesnt so Chicago is colder, etc."
I disagree with grapico on the average bit. Its as flawed a statistic as solely using days above/below a certain temperature, per the example I have been using.
If the actual average between the two in one winter was only 8 degrees yet NYC registered more days above a certain cut-off temperature point and Chicago didnt, well of course NYC appears much more pleasant but in actuality, whats the average differential? The cut-off is misleading.
IE: NYC has say 20 days over 50 in winter and Chicago has 3, what appears better? NYC, but in actuality Chicago was mostly upper 40s...
Chicago can be 47 all winter and NYC can be 53, but NYC registers over 50 the whole time so it appears warmer when really theyre both close to 50.
These are just examples and not real.
I don't think you are understanding averages vs actual. Please re-read my earlier post with a sample 15 days (last post, page 6)...They are NOT both close to 50. Not sure why you aren't grasping this yet...The cities can and DO get to these "averages" by DIFFERENT means. Chicago has SIGNIFICANTLY WILDER TEMPERATURE FLUCTUATIONS. I REPEAT, CHICAGO HAS SIGNIFICANTLY WILDER TEMPERATURE FLUCTUATIONS.
I ALREADY WAS USING ACTUAL DAYS, OMG... I'm not using the "Average" to compute the freaking numbers. About to pull my hair out here. that was the entire premise of the thread!
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChicagoorSeattle
Have you ever actually lived in NYC?
Its windy in the city in winter, and snow storms. The last 10 years, wintertime in NYC has blown epically.
Not cold?
NYC is like Chicago when it comes to wild differences in snow fall except on a year per year basis, and reversed. Usually NYC being minimal, then gets blasted, and usually Chicago being cold, then bumps into higher warm breaks w/ several arctic dives. Usually, it doesn't really snow much in NYC, then every few years will get blasted. This happens if the jet stream stays too low and it is slammed with a noreaster snow event or two. Chicago gets quite a bit smaller snow storms on average, yet gets them more often. DC is in a similar path, usually hardly any snow whatsoever there, then every 4-5 years will get blasted by a noreaster. If it's only 6 inches of snow total for the year in NYC, DC might only have 2, or not even an inch.
Sometimes NYC will only get like 3-5 inches of snow a year.
Since 1980, NYC has recorded under 15" of snow 14 times, almost every other year. Chicago has NEVER been under 15" of snow since 1980, and only under 20" one time, last winter, by 1/2 an inch.
Conversely, Chicago gets a singular 15" event rather rarely, NYC will get them more often, but when that is not happening, snow is minimal in comparison.
What's bringing the numbers up despite almost an every other year under 15", over the past 30 years, NYC has the bigger singular yearly snow fall over Chicago at a whopping 75", almost 5 years of snow in one winter... and almost as many 50" snow fall years, b/c when it gets hit, it gets slammed.
I moved from LA to Austin... Here is what I've learned.
LA's 80 is equal to Austin's 90
LA's 65 is equal to Austin's 50
Its very hard to explain but really anything over 80 in LA is very uncomfortable. Anything under 65 is uncomfortable. In Austin we've had days above 88 which are great, I wore shorts when it was 50.
I think you have to understand temperatures are different in different locations. I personally cant explain how but it is definitely true. I was on a flight where the temp in LA was 65 when we landed and the temp in Austin was 65 when we took off, people got off the plane and instantly said they needed to get a jacket. Folks from Austin thought it was 50 degrees in LA.
I think you have to understand temperatures are different in different locations. I personally cant explain how but it is definitely true. I was on a flight where the temp in LA was 65 when we landed and the temp in Austin was 65 when we took off, people got off the plane and instantly said they needed to get a jacket. Folks from Austin thought it was 50 degrees in LA.
Btw this Buzzfeed list is more accurate than the OP's. It links to an interactive map to look up the cities that the article didn't bother to talk about.
I moved from LA to Austin... Here is what I've learned.
LA's 80 is equal to Austin's 90
LA's 65 is equal to Austin's 50
Its very hard to explain but really anything over 80 in LA is very uncomfortable. Anything under 65 is uncomfortable. In Austin we've had days above 88 which are great, I wore shorts when it was 50.
I think you have to understand temperatures are different in different locations. I personally cant explain how but it is definitely true. I was on a flight where the temp in LA was 65 when we landed and the temp in Austin was 65 when we took off, people got off the plane and instantly said they needed to get a jacket. Folks from Austin thought it was 50 degrees in LA.
We were in Ft Worth for years. You are just adjusting to extremes. LA is so mild all the time that when it hits over 80 people 'think' its really hot. Fly from Austins 88 to an 80 degree day in LA in the same day, theres no contest.
Its not a major city, but Albuquerque has 300 days of sunshine...
Coming from the Midwest, Albuquerque is like climate heaven. High desert climate with many days of very low humidity (single digits), 300 sunny days, short cool winter, Summer temps seldom top 100 (just barely and 3 times a year).
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
