U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Arizona
 [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)
 
Old 08-02-2010, 01:24 PM
 
48 posts, read 147,595 times
Reputation: 34

Advertisements

Here's a comparison that I only noticed recently. The San Francisco Peaks from a distance are reminiscent of the Presidential Range in NH. It's true that the forests and surrounding countryside are wildly different, but perhaps the isolated nature of the ranges and their domination by a large peak contributes to a vaguely similar appearance. To extend the comparison further, they both have very similar prominence values: Humphreys' prominence is 6,039 and Washington's is 6,138. They both have about 1,500 feet of above-treeline exposure.

Humphreys Peak:



Mount Washington:



Humphreys Peak:



Mount Washington:

Last edited by Lucania; 08-02-2010 at 01:51 PM..
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-02-2010, 01:37 PM
 
1,170 posts, read 4,955,157 times
Reputation: 745
Humphreys Peak (no apostrophe) at 12,637 feet is twice as high as Mt Washington's peak of 6,288 ft.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-02-2010, 01:53 PM
 
Location: Lake Coeur D’Alene
5,203 posts, read 7,724,384 times
Reputation: 5476
Quote:
Originally Posted by AzDreamer View Post
Humphreys Peak (no apostrophe) at 12,637 feet is twice as high as Mt Washington's peak of 6,288 ft.
Lucania noted that Humphrey's and Mt. Washington have the same "prominence" not the same height.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-02-2010, 01:57 PM
 
48 posts, read 147,595 times
Reputation: 34
Thanks for the tip about the apostrophes, I went through and corrected it.

In terms of elevation, you're of course correct. I was pointing out that the prominence values, though, are comparable.

Here's how to picture it: if you look at a topo map, the base of the San Francisco Peaks sits roughly at 7000 to 8000, depending on where you start. That's where it starts to get visibly steep anyway. Thus, the visual height is the difference, or about 4600-5600 feet. If you perform the same exercise for the Presidential range, you find that the base ranges from 1000-2000 feet in elevation. Thus, the peak has an apparent height (as opposed to pure elevation) of 4200-5200 feet. When looking at the two ranges from a distance, their appearance is rather similar.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-03-2010, 05:36 PM
 
Location: Phoenix
5,358 posts, read 7,349,652 times
Reputation: 6611
Cool. They do look similar. The San Francisco Mtns are part of an ancient volcano. Is the Presidential Range also?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-03-2010, 05:50 PM
 
619 posts, read 1,630,594 times
Reputation: 253
I wonder which are recieves more snow. I know Mount washington is known for its wicked weather but so is Humphreys. From what i know the upper areas on the San Fran Peaks have gotten an average of 280-400in of snow each year. What is Mount Washingtons average snowfall.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-03-2010, 08:22 PM
 
48 posts, read 147,595 times
Reputation: 34
I don't have a background in geology, but wikipedia seems to imply that the Presidential range may have a volcanic background. It mentions that they were formed by magma from the "New England Hotspot" about 100m years ago. I had never actually looked that up, but it's interesting to read.

According to NOAA, Mount Washington seems to average about 260 inches of snow per year:

Snowfall - Average Total In Inches

That's quite a bit, but not as much as the big western peaks. I think that mount washington tends to get alot of its precipitation in the forms of freezing fog, ice, etc. It's also known for ferocious winds.

I've climbed Washington, but only been up to about 11,000 feet or so on Humphreys. Has anybody here summited both?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-03-2010, 09:34 PM
 
619 posts, read 1,630,594 times
Reputation: 253
Wow so Humphreys Gets more snow. Thats cool. Ik that at around 10,500 feet they average 260in according to Arizona Snowbowl. I actually was looking at pics on HAz or hikearizona.com and they showed pics of this last winter at humphreys and this one guy dug up 10feet of snowpack in late March.
Rate this post positively 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:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

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 > Arizona
View detailed profiles of:

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2021, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top