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, 05:35 AM
 
Location: Portland, Oregon
1,372 posts, read 2,598,258 times
Reputation: 573

Advertisements

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-05-2010, 05:45 AM
 
Location: 304
5,093 posts, read 6,865,677 times
Reputation: 1697
Very Interesting

If a person didn't know any better, the Appalachian Mountains appear to be a bigger, mountain range. But we know better
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-05-2010, 05:53 AM
 
Location: Underneath the Pecan Tree
15,989 posts, read 30,698,355 times
Reputation: 7281
I'd expect the mountain region for Texas to extend more to the west. It's too small.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-05-2010, 06:52 AM
 
Location: New England & The Maritimes
2,116 posts, read 4,205,280 times
Reputation: 1114
You included parts of upstate NY that are essentially flat. The Berkshires should be on there if the Catskills are, nevermind that area west of the Adirondacks by the st lawrence.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-05-2010, 07:46 AM
 
56,706 posts, read 81,017,273 times
Reputation: 12548
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheWereRabbit View Post
You included parts of upstate NY that are essentially flat. The Berkshires should be on there if the Catskills are, nevermind that area west of the Adirondacks by the st lawrence.
I was thinking about the area that touches the St. Lawrence too. Even the areas close to the Adirondacks to the West are more like foothills around say Lowville/Lewis County.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-05-2010, 08:52 AM
 
Location: Zurich, Switzerland/ Piedmont, CA
32,382 posts, read 55,207,132 times
Reputation: 15477
Here's a map that gives nice detail as far as elevation.

http://www.theodora.com/maps/new9/usa_elevation_map.gif
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-05-2010, 09:00 AM
 
Location: Somewhere in the universe
2,161 posts, read 3,991,210 times
Reputation: 1434
It sometimes surprises me how much smaller the mountains on the east are compared to the west. They are all beautiful, but the western mountains vary in elevation more.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-05-2010, 10:19 AM
 
Location: West Michigan
3,077 posts, read 5,454,707 times
Reputation: 4333
Quote:
It sometimes surprises me how much smaller the mountains on the east are compared to the west. They are all beautiful, but the western mountains vary in elevation more.
I could be way off on this... but I think the Rockies generally rise up from a plateau that is 5,000-6,000 feet above sea level, while the Appalachians rise from land that is 500-1,000 feet above sea level.

So... a peak of 6,000 feet in the Appalachians is actually similar to a peak of 11,000 feet in the Rockies if you are only looking at how high the peak rises from the surrounding valleys.

I'm sure I butchered the explanation, but my point is that comparing elevations isn't totally fair when you're comparing the mountain ranges.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-05-2010, 10:24 AM
 
Location: Boston
1,082 posts, read 2,492,251 times
Reputation: 908
What michigan83 says is correct, but then again, there are some 14,000 foot peaks in both the Rockies and the Siera Nevada. They would translate to about 9,000 feet in the Appalachians, which significantly exceeds the highest peaks in that chain. The main difference I notice is geological. The mountains in the west are more dramatic, as they have not been smoothed out as much as the older eastern mountains. On the other hand, the trails in the East are older, and tend to have been built without much attention to slope. They go straight up and straight down, without switch backing, so often hiking in the East is more physically challenging.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-05-2010, 10:24 AM
 
Location: 3219'03.7"N 10643'55.9"W
8,115 posts, read 17,337,266 times
Reputation: 7287
18Montclair's map serves as to how mountainous the entirety of New Mexico is. The first map doesn't show what type of spine goes down the center of the state, really, all the way to El Paxo Texas.
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