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.
Yeah I bet no one in Seattle partakes in skiing during winter, you know with it being an hour away and all.... I'm sure Seattleites are really jealous of the down hill skiing options around Minneapolis too.
I never mentioned downhill, did I? And I thought we were talking about MPLS and Seattle, not surrounding environs. After all, the thread is titled "which has a worse winter - Minneapolis or Seattle". The key words there being "Minneapolis" and "Seattle".
But if you want to go down that route, MPLS has FAR better downhill skiing than Seattle does. Why, you ask? Because MPLS gets plenty of snow. And unless you like "skiing" in mud and sopping wet grass, Seattle offers nothing in winter. Well, I guess you could try and "ski" downhill in Seattle during one of their notorious ice storms, but that wouldnt be much fun would it?
I never mentioned downhill, did I? And I thought we were talking about MPLS and Seattle, not surrounding environs. After all, the thread is titled "which has a worse winter - Minneapolis or Seattle". The key words there being "Minneapolis" and "Seattle".
But if you want to go down that route, MPLS has FAR better downhill skiing than Seattle does. Why, you ask? Because MPLS gets plenty of snow. And unless you like "skiing" in mud and sopping wet grass, Seattle offers nothing in winter. Well, I guess you could try and "ski" downhill in Seattle during one of their notorious ice storms, but that wouldnt be much fun would it?
Doesn't really matter if it's downhill or cross country.
It actually offers far better skiing within an hour or two than anything you can find in Minneapolis. FAR BETTER with much deeper snow too.
Does Minneapolis have something better than this within an hour? It's bizarre you imply that somehow people in Seattle can't or don't partake in winter sports like skiing as well with stuff like this nearby.
In Seattle it's 47 degrees and raining every single day this week. I don't think there is a more miserable forecast than 40 something degree rain. Personally I would prefer not to have to drive an hour or more. I love getting out of work and hopping on a snowmobile and after school we used to play hockey every single day til dark. There is at least some enjoyment to come out of cold snowy weather but Seattle's weather isn't enjoyable at all.
In Seattle it's 47 degrees and raining every single day this week. I don't think there is a more miserable forecast than 40 something degree rain. Personally I would prefer not to have to drive an hour or more. I love getting out of work and hopping on a snowmobile and after school we used to play hockey every single day til dark. There is at least some enjoyment to come out of cold snowy weather but Seattle's weather isn't enjoyable at all.
Constant rain sucks, but the nice thing about Seattle winters (that most people don't actually realize) is that there are many stretches of dry, cloudy (or even sunny) weather throughout. With temps over 40.
I always noticed only about 3-4 individual weeks of constant shi**y rain, but other than that, it was smooth sailing.
How often do you downhill (with emphasis on "hill") ski after work during the week?
Me? I was on ski racing teams through junior high and high school, and before that I'd ski on weekends as part of a local ski group. So, to answer your question, I did it all of the time. Not everybody does this, but I did, and it wasn't difficult to do (the hill was 15 minutes from my home near the center of the metro).
The one, and only, argument about skiing in the Twin Cities is that it's accessible to everybody in the metro area within a 30 minute drive (for the most part). So it's fairly easy to ski as part of a school team, club, or just casually after work (which I'd do if I lived there and had extra $$). I'm sure you can do this in Seattle as well, but it may not be quite as easy, but undoubtedly, much more fun (a mountain vs. a hill). Nobody is denying that a mountain is a more ideal ski setting than a small hill. At least, I'm not.
The silver lining to the constant cold is easy access to lots of winter sports. That's the only argument I'm trying to make here when it comes to the two cities' winters, for now.
Me? I was on ski racing teams through junior high and high school, and before that I'd ski on weekends as part of a local ski group. So, to answer your question, I did it all of the time. Not everybody does this, but I did, and it wasn't difficult to do (the hill was 15 minutes from my home near the center of the metro).
The one, and only, argument about skiing in the Twin Cities is that it's accessible to everybody in the metro area within a 30 minute drive (for the most part). So it's fairly easy to ski as part of a school team, club, or just casually after work (which I'd do if I lived there and had extra $$). I'm sure you can do this in Seattle as well, but it may not be quite as easy, but undoubtedly, much more fun (a mountain vs. a hill). Nobody is denying that a mountain is a more ideal ski setting than a small hill. At least, I'm not.
The silver lining to the constant cold is easy access to lots of winter sports. That's the only argument I'm trying to make here when it comes to the two cities' winters, for now.
That's pretty cool and I do get your argument. The ice rinks in people's backyards that someone else mentioned is pretty interesting as well. I just thought it was ridiculous another poster was implying that people in Seattle do the same sports year round and don't participate in winter sports like skiing.
I voted Seattle as having the worse winter. I can't stand the cloudy rainy winter of the PNW. I lived in Chicago and faced some brutal winter but that was way more pleasant than my days in Vancouver. I walked on Lincoln avenue in Chicago at -4F on several occasions.
I have lived in both Seattle and Minneapolis more than anywhere else. I'm curious which has a worse winter in the eyes of others. Both are great, comparable cities that have the probably have the most notoriously worst winters for major US metropolitan areas.
Minneapolis winters: snow 6 months of the year lots of times, deathly cold, frequent subzero temperatures, but a decent amount of sunshine.
Seattle winters: Chilly, almost always overcast, usually drizzling, 6+ months of the year.
Which notorious winter do you think is worse?
I'd love to hear from people who have lived in these cities as well as the opinions of others from elsewhere!
Feel free to speak your mind as well about why you choose one or the other.
Minneapolis by far.
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.
And I thought we were talking about MPLS and Seattle, not surrounding environs. After all, the thread is titled "which has a worse winter - Minneapolis or Seattle". The key words there being "Minneapolis" and "Seattle".
