U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-05-2010, 10:38 AM
 
Location: Bothell, Washington
2,704 posts, read 4,676,952 times
Reputation: 3691

Advertisements

The thing is the Appalachians are not nearly as big looking, either. For example, out here in Washington the Cascade Mountains are not nearly as tall as the Rockies- with many peaks only being 6,000-8,000 feet. However they look equally as dramatic as the Rockies because they are rising that high from basically sea level. However the Appalachians don't have that look- much of that range just looks like small rolling hills in comparison. Not sure of the height, though, of the peaks or even the base that they rise from.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-05-2010, 10:55 AM
 
726 posts, read 1,871,547 times
Reputation: 413
Hiking in the east can be more physically challenging? that's amusing. which mountains in the west have you climbed?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-05-2010, 11:32 AM
 
Location: New Hampshire
2,257 posts, read 6,977,516 times
Reputation: 4062
The original map is a little off - it includes areas of NY, NJ, PA, and OH that are either hilly or simply flat, but excludes the Berkshires in western MA, the Monadnock Region of NH, and the area around Mt. Katahdin, the highest peak in Maine.

This list of the 129 most prominent mountains in the U.S. is also interesting: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of..._United_States

All of the mountains are in the West with the exception of Mt. Washington in New Hampshire and Mt. Mitchell in North Carolina, which are the 59th and 62nd most prominent mountains in the country, respectively.

Last edited by Verseau; 08-05-2010 at 11:42 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-05-2010, 12:09 PM
 
Location: Boston
1,082 posts, read 2,492,836 times
Reputation: 908
Quote:
Originally Posted by choosing78 View Post
Hiking in the east can be more physically challenging? that's amusing. which mountains in the west have you climbed?
I said hiking, not climbing. There is a difference. Hiking in the west means gentle, well graded slopes and switchbacks. Hiking in the east means scrambling over boulders and heading straight up the face. I will grant you, though, that true mountain climbing is not really a meaningful term for eastern mountains. No ropes required.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-05-2010, 01:44 PM
 
224 posts, read 506,855 times
Reputation: 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by HenryAlan View Post
I said hiking, not climbing. There is a difference. Hiking in the west means gentle, well graded slopes and switchbacks. Hiking in the east means scrambling over boulders and heading straight up the face. I will grant you, though, that true mountain climbing is not really a meaningful term for eastern mountains. No ropes required.
Sounds like you have never hiked the west coast, but good try. Where did you gather that the west is gentle, well graded slopes? The mountains in the west cover thousands upon thousands of square miles vs the relatively small, mountains in the east. I would love to hear your west coast hiking stories.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-05-2010, 02:29 PM
 
Location: Boston
1,082 posts, read 2,492,836 times
Reputation: 908
Quote:
Originally Posted by topgear View Post
Sounds like you have never hiked the west coast, but good try. Where did you gather that the west is gentle, well graded slopes? The mountains in the west cover thousands upon thousands of square miles vs the relatively small, mountains in the east. I would love to hear your west coast hiking stories.
You know so much about me. I grew up in California, spent a great deal of time hiking in the San Gabriels, a bit less time hiking in the Sierra Nevada. I'll ask you a similar question regarding the East coast. Have you ever hiked there? If your answer is no, then kindly shut up. If it is yes, then perhaps we can discuss this in more detail, but for now, I'll simply say that the mass of the mountain and the overall range doesn't have much to do with the nature of the trail. If you are any kind of hiker at all, then you know that to be true.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-05-2010, 03:17 PM
 
Location: 304
5,093 posts, read 6,867,788 times
Reputation: 1697
The appalachians are very very dence

they are all crampt because millions of years of erosion and plate shifts caused the once high peaks to mellow down, but be very cluttered. That's if you believe in that kind of thing
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-05-2010, 04:52 PM
 
224 posts, read 506,855 times
Reputation: 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by HenryAlan View Post
You know so much about me. I grew up in California, spent a great deal of time hiking in the San Gabriels, a bit less time hiking in the Sierra Nevada. I'll ask you a similar question regarding the East coast. Have you ever hiked there? If your answer is no, then kindly shut up. If it is yes, then perhaps we can discuss this in more detail, but for now, I'll simply say that the mass of the mountain and the overall range doesn't have much to do with the nature of the trail. If you are any kind of hiker at all, then you know that to be true.
My point is the Sierras are absolutely massive, and the trail network is measured in thousands of miles. How could have you made an assessment that is anywhere near accurate? You still have not provided any prime examples to support your inital statement so the discussion has ended. Enjoy the your east coast hiking. I hike daily, and frankly don't see what I am missing by not hiking in the south or the north east, nothing that is not easily surpassed here.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-05-2010, 05:04 PM
 
4,811 posts, read 8,821,173 times
Reputation: 2764
I like this map. It really shows how mountainous the west is! Many people believe New Mexico, Arizona, and California are flat. That is definetly not the case! Thank you for showing us this picture!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-05-2010, 05:37 PM
 
Location: Pasadena
7,412 posts, read 8,250,806 times
Reputation: 1802
I made fun of a poster on another thread who claimed there are mountains in Minnesota and after looking at the mountain range map I eat my words But then when I look at the elevation map the mountains in Minnesota don't even show up
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top