Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
 [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)
View Poll Results: Which is better?
New York City suburbs 57 49.14%
Chicagoland 59 50.86%
Voters: 116. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 02-18-2009, 07:52 PM
 
1,437 posts, read 3,072,807 times
Reputation: 257

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve-o View Post
You cant hike a mountain in NYC either. And who cares if its the ocean or not? Lake Michigan beaches are just as nice as anything Ive been to on the ocean, minus Florida and South Carolina. Dont you laugh either, Ill have to bust out pics. And besides, I prefer fresh water anyways.

And yes, in NYC you can drive a few hours to the hills, but so can we. WI has some incredibly beautiful hills, as does NW IL.
lol lol Are "mountians" now considered "hills" to you? Are people skiing down "hills" now? The Midwest is a 'pancake' compared to the Northeast and New England states. I'm starting to wonder how much time you've spent in the East?

Chicago's lakefront is very nice, I've already defended it. Especially how it has 18 miles paved and a ton of activities to do there. And it's right on the doorstep of the city. But, comparing oceanfront and lakefront is really comparing apples to oranges. Lake Michigan doesn't have the mystic of the Atlantic Ocean, no 'Great Lake' does. This ain't a 'left handed' compliment about Chicago's lakefront either, just a fact.

 
Old 02-18-2009, 07:56 PM
 
48 posts, read 103,360 times
Reputation: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by pittsteelerfan View Post
lol lol Are "mountians" now considered "hills" to you? Are people skiing down "hills" now? The Midwest is a 'pancake' compared to the Northeast and New England states. I'm starting to wonder how much time you've spent in the East?

Chicago's lakefront is very nice, I've already defended it. Especially how it has 18 miles paved and a ton of activities to do there. And it's right on the doorstep of the city. But, comparing oceanfront and lakefront is really comparing apples to oranges. Lake Michigan doesn't have the mystic of the Atlantic Ocean, no 'Great Lake' does. This ain't a 'left handed' compliment about Chicago's lakefront either, just a fact.
Dude they are hills i live in colorado those are hills in new york. what is there highest hill 2,000 feet in colorado it is about 14000 feet and plus wisconsins hills are just like new yorks.
 
Old 02-18-2009, 07:56 PM
 
1,437 posts, read 3,072,807 times
Reputation: 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by chitown Den. View Post
What mountains are in the new york metro. Those thins you call mountian in new york are called hills. What do they get to a evelation of a whole 1,000 feet thats like a big hill. I live in CO, and those things you call mountians are definitely not mountians. Plus in chicago you can go to wisconson and find the same size hills that you see in New York.
Nobody's tring to compare anything in the Poconos, Catskills, or New England states with the mountian ranges out west. But Vermont and New Hampshire I believe have some pretty decent size mountians. New York's Lake Placid hosted the 'Winter Olympics' before, I believe it was the 1980' games.
 
Old 02-18-2009, 08:00 PM
 
48 posts, read 103,360 times
Reputation: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by pittsteelerfan View Post
Nobody's tring to compare anything in the Poconos, Catskills, or New England states with the mountian ranges out west. But Vermont and New Hampshire I believe have some pretty decent size mountians. New York's Lake Placid hosted the 'Winter Olympics' before, I believe it was the 1980' games.
well lake placid is not in new york metro. Northern illinios and and southern wisconsin (chicagoland) has the same type size hills of southern ct and soutern ny.
 
Old 02-18-2009, 08:02 PM
 
Location: Chicago - mudhole in the prairie...
1,624 posts, read 3,291,217 times
Reputation: 262
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve-o View Post
You cant hike a mountain in NYC either. And who cares if its the ocean or not? Lake Michigan beaches are just as nice as anything Ive been to on the ocean, minus Florida and South Carolina. Dont you laugh either, Ill have to bust out pics. And besides, I prefer fresh water anyways.

And yes, in NYC you can drive a few hours to the hills, but so can we. WI has some incredibly beautiful hills, as does NW IL.
Steve-o.

Have you seen Jones Beach? Hills? From New York you do not drive to the hilss, you drive to the mountains.
 
Old 02-18-2009, 08:03 PM
 
1,437 posts, read 3,072,807 times
Reputation: 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by chitown Den. View Post
Dude they are hills i live in colorado those are hills in new york. what is there highest hill 2,000 feet in colorado it is about 14000 feet and plus wisconsins hills are just like new yorks.
The highest elevation of Lake Placid is just under 5,000 ft. The highest level the lift takes you is about 4,400 ft. I consider that more than a "hill".
 
Old 02-18-2009, 08:04 PM
 
Location: Chicago - mudhole in the prairie...
1,624 posts, read 3,291,217 times
Reputation: 262
Quote:
Originally Posted by chitown Den. View Post
well lake placid is not in new york metro. Northern illinios and and southern wisconsin (chicagoland) has the same type size hills of southern ct and soutern ny.
Southern Wisconsin is Chicagoland? That's a good one What about Nevada?

Of course the mountains are not in the NY metro but we are talking about where you can drive to...

There are absolutely no interesting places that you can drive to from Chicago. Philly is just one hour away from New York.
 
Old 02-18-2009, 08:06 PM
 
48 posts, read 103,360 times
Reputation: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by pittsteelerfan View Post
The highest elevation of Lake Placid is just under 5,000 ft. The highest level the lift takes you is about 4,400 ft. I consider that more than a "hill".
I am not talking about lake placid i am talking about the hills of the chicagoland and the new york metro area. They are about the same.
 
Old 02-18-2009, 08:10 PM
 
Location: Chicago - mudhole in the prairie...
1,624 posts, read 3,291,217 times
Reputation: 262
Quote:
Originally Posted by chitown Den. View Post
I am not talking about lake placid i am talking about the hills of the chicagoland and the new york metro area. They are about the same.
How about two hour from Chicago and New York? Still the same?
 
Old 02-18-2009, 08:11 PM
 
1,437 posts, read 3,072,807 times
Reputation: 257
Where would you rather spent a 'weekend getaway', in some quaint NE town, or WI ? I think most of us, who've ACTUALLY been to both, can answer this question without hesitation, NE! Chicago's isolation is one of it's biggest drawbacks, you really have to jump on a plane to get anywhere for a 'weekend getaway'.
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.


Closed Thread


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. > City vs. City
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:50 AM.

© 2005-2024, 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