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.
The Smokies... well, they are pretty big, not as big as the Black Mountains, though. I absolutely love the "feel" of the Smokies, though, very mysterious, feels like you are very deep in the woods (because you probably are!), and when you summit that big peak and can see for a hundred miles all around you, it's pretty surreal. I don't make it to the Smokies for my hiking as often as I do to the Blue Ridge around Asheville and the Black Mountains, just because they are farther away. One thing about the Smokies is that they are, like pretty much all of Southern Appalachia, tree-covered, so it's a more, I dunno, mysterious feeling because you are on a mountain but you are also in the woods. Just feels very powerful being out there. Also, as far as being wild, I have seen more black bears in the Smoky Mountains than pretty much anywhere else I've ever been.
Now, my other favorite part of the Appalachians is the White Mountains in New Hampshire. They have some very high peaks, such as Mount Washington and the rest of the Presidential Range, and the weather there is true mountain weather. Extremely intense, extremely unpredictable, and extremely awe-inspiring. The highest directly measured surface wind speed ever in both the Northern and Western Hemispheres was on the summit of Mount Washington, at 231 mph, so that should give you an idea of the power of those mountains. Also, a windchill value of -103˚F was recorded on the summit, and the highest temperature EVER recorded there was 72˚F. So yeah, very intense weather. Mount Washington itself isn't THAT remote because there are some buildings on the summit, such as the weather observatory, but it is still something that every hiker/mountain-lover should do in their lifetime. Pretty much anywhere in the White Mountains is a great place to be if you love mountains, raw natural beauty, and intense conditions. Mount Washington is the highest in NH at 6,288 feet, the highest in the Northeast as well. Also, if you're in the White Mountains, make sure you see Tuckerman's Ravine, which is right there by Mount Washington. It is a special place, and lots of people like to ski it because you can go ski on Memorial Day... if you are brave! With 45˚ inclines, I wouldn't do it!
And then there are the wonderful, beautiful Green Mountains of Vermont. They are the smallest of the three I've talked about here, but don't let that fool you. They are amazing mountains, and everyone who loves mountains should visit them as well. They have the distinction of also being a prime ski destination, if that's your thing. Vermont, overall, is just an unbelievable place, and there are those on this forum who know how much I love it. It is mostly rural, almost entirely mountainous, and just breathtakingly beautiful in every way. They have everything from roaring rivers to mountains to rolling, pastoral farmland and everything in between. The mountains there have a rather mysterious feel to them as well, because there just isn't as much information out there about the Green Mountains as there is about, for instance, the Adirondacks. The Adirondacks are beautiful, sure, but even though the Green Mountains are smaller, they are where I would rather be.
But to sum up this ridiculously long post, the Smokies are just as wonderful and wild and large as anywhere else on the East Coast. The wildlife there is very cool and diverse, the scenery is nothing short of phenomenal, and the hiking is great. What more can a man ask for?
Also, if I may ask, you say you live in Virginia, but your location says "Southeast of the Northwest Territories". Did you formerly live near the NWT, or is that kind of a general joke? The NWT is huge, but way smaller than it used to be ever since they annexed Nunavut.
Mount Leconte in the Smokles may be the biggest mountain in the whole Appalachian system due to vertical relief. The elevation of Gatlinburg, TN is a little over 2000 feet above sea level. This nearby mountain, from its base to its summit has an elevation change of around 4500 feet. The mountain is impressive. It's over 6500 above sea level. Mitchell, Grandfather, Rogers, and others pale in comparison.
This makes the Smokies unique.
Out west, that's a different story. I can't wait to see those 14'ers. They're not nearly as hiker-friendly, though, and it's very difficult to get out and explore them. You are very likely to get caught in a freak blizzard or some crazy windstorm. The mountains here are much better for exploring and hiking and just general use. Out west, they're more just for looking at. You aren't going to summit the Grand Tetons, for example.
I realize this is an old thread, but I wanted to point out that thousands of people climb those mountains out west every year. Many are nothing more than a hike, including 14ers. While the Grand Teton (that's a singular peak, not plural) involves climbing rather than hiking, there are many peaks in the Teton Range that can be summited with mere hiking. In Colorado, there are probably at least 20 of the 53 14ers that are decidedly non-technical in addition to hundreds of peaks below 14,000 feet. I wouldn't characterize the mountains out west as "just for looking at."
To other posters: There is certainly more to analyzing how large a mountain "feels" than simply looking at the elevation. For example, Mt. Rainier is a "mere" 14er. It is about the same height as many mountains in Colorado. However, it is in another league in terms of feel. It has a glacier, and there's about 9,000 feet between base camp and the summit. That is something no Colorado 14er can match. Rainier provides the closest thing the lower 48 states have to the Himalaya, whereas there are roads to the top of some other 14ers.
Every mountain range has its own personality. I grew up in MA and spent a lot of time in NH and Vermont, and I've driven on routes 93 and 89 in blizzards to go skiing. Those days are gone.
Fast forwarding ahead to 2015, for the past 4 months I've been in Macon County NC, and I'm lucky to have such a great view from the villa I'm renting. Even on a rainy day, I open the blinds and say "Wow." For example, the other morning it was very foggy. The fog started to lift and I saw the Nantahala National Forest in the distance emerging through the mist. It was like watching time lapse photography. People might laugh at me for writing this, but even a drive from Walmart on route 64W lifts my spirits.
I don't think it should be a competition. The USA is a beautiful country with beaches, mountains, waterfalls, snow, sand, bustling cities and enchanting forests.
Mount Leconte in the Smokles may be the biggest mountain in the whole Appalachian system due to vertical relief. The elevation of Gatlinburg, TN is a little over 2000 feet above sea level. This nearby mountain, from its base to its summit has an elevation change of around 4500 feet. The mountain is impressive. It's over 6500 above sea level. Mitchell, Grandfather, Rogers, and others pale in comparison.
This makes the Smokies unique.
LeConte is a prominent feature that looms over much of east TN. It is a serious mountain, and the view from the top of it is amazing. One of the best hikes in the eastern half of the US. The Smoky mountains from the TN side are a bit like the Appalachians answer for Colorado's front range. I know if your from out west you see "just hills" and we don't have 14ers etc. However the mountain looms 5500 feet over the average elevation of the Tennessee valley below, and that is a significant elevation gain. Pikes peak rises to 14k yes, but the flat high plains that run up to it are already at 6500 feet so it rises 7500. Two thousand feet more than LeConte, but not enough more to discount it as folks from out there often do.
As far as comparing the Smokies to the APpalachian ranges up north goes, the mountains do tend to be a bit larger down here, and over a larger area. I guess the only comparable place up there is in New Hampshire in the Presidential Range.
For those saying that the mountains in the east don't even compare to the mountains in the east are being a little bit narrow sighted. The mountains out west are at a higher elevation so they are more often snow covered and above the alpine line. But while their total hight is taller they are often have a much higher base elevation, so in terms of base to summit the east and west are actually quite comparable, with the exception of mount Rainer which is the same hight base to summit as Everest. In Appalachia you can get similar views to the Rockies on much more historic mountains, both anthropologically and geologically, without having to worry about altitude sickness. I always prefer a hike on the east coast than the west coast
The smokies and the eastern mountains aren't as awe inspiring as the 14ers out west but they do have their own unique vibe which is easy to appreciate. They feel much more intimate than the behemoth snow covered peaks of the Rockies. You can hike the highest peak in the east (Mt Mitchell) in roughly 3 hours one way. Try climbing Mt Rainier in that time.
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.
