PCT vs AT

[Jester2000]

I didn't read the above posts so this might be a dupe...

I have not hiked either trail, but one thing to consider pre-trip conditioning. For the PCT you just need to get into "flat" cardio shape. Sure a few stairs/hills wouldn't hurt, but it isn't as necessary as the trail is fairly flat for 300+ miles and you sort of ease into the hills. Whereas the AT starts with hills on day one and doesn't really give you a break until VA. So, if you want of finish a trail in 90 days, I think it would be far easier to physically prepare for the PCT than the AT.

One other thing I about finishing the PCT vs the AT (Nobo). I really think AT is at an advantage due to social support and the "big rewards" are at the end of the trail. Whereas the PCT has social support thru CA at which point many drop out. And to make maters worst, most of "the best" parts (Sierras) of the PCT are completed by the time the social support wanes, which can make it difficult to finish.

Have fun whatever you do....

I don't know that I agree with much of this, tho' I suppose it's a matter of opinion. There were plenty of hard climbs at the beginning of the PCT -- the desert isn't flat, and it's not what a lot of people picture as desert (it's a high desert environment, and you are in the mountains or working your way up canyons much of the time). And I found that hiking when the footbed is sand is difficult and time-consuming.

The PCT has fewer people attempting thru-hikes, but they start in a more compressed time-frame and they have a higher completion rate. Only two people I knew dropped out after CA, and one of them wasn't thru-hiking.

And for those few who did quit, they missed some of the most spectacular parts of the trail. While the Sierra is a remarkable area, there are plenty of "big rewards" (as you call them) farther north -- the Three Sisters Wilderness, Crater Lake, Mount Jefferson, Mt. Hood, the AYCE breakfast buffet on the side of Mt. Hood, Goat Rocks Wilderness, and Glacier Peak -- and that's just off the top of my head.

[neighbor dave]

I don't know that I agree with much of this, tho' I suppose it's a matter of opinion. There were plenty of hard climbs at the beginning of the PCT -- the desert isn't flat, and it's not what a lot of people picture as desert (it's a high desert environment, and you are in the mountains or working your way up canyons much of the time). And I found that hiking when the footbed is sand is difficult and time-consuming.

The PCT has fewer people attempting thru-hikes, but they start in a more compressed time-frame and they have a higher completion rate. Only two people I knew dropped out after CA, and one of them wasn't thru-hiking.

And for those few who did quit, they missed some of the most spectacular parts of the trail. While the Sierra is a remarkable area, there are plenty of "big rewards" (as you call them) farther north -- the Three Sisters Wilderness, Crater Lake, Mount Jefferson, Mt. Hood, the AYCE breakfast buffet on the side of Mt. Hood, Goat Rocks Wilderness, and Glacier Peak -- and that's just off the top of my head.

i agree with jester

[yappy]

I agree with Neighbor..

[Nean]

I agree with Yappy,

[A-Train]

I agree with Neighbor..

I agree with Yappy. I was gonna write basically what Jester did the other day and then erased it for some reason.

While PCT miles are easier to come by than the AT, the whole package with the heat, lack of water, elevation, and the simple fact that one will make themselv es hike more miles a day than on the AT make one just as tired at the end of each day, if not more. Just because I hiked between 25-30 miles/day in Oregon doesn't mean it wasn't difficult and tiring, even when we have a tendency to say it's "easy" afterwards.

And definately, Washington is phenomenal, as are parts of OR. Not the Sierras, but pretty darn awesome.

[tlbj6142]

Let me word my post a bit differently as a question...

If you wanted to hike either trail in 90 days, which trail would be easier to prepare for, and hike, the first 400+ miles? PCT @ 29.4 MPD or AT @ 24.2 MPD?

And regarding the "good stuff" in the middle issue, I've read in several journals and in a few videos in which it appears as though it is fairly common for PCT hikers to drop some time after the Sierras before entering OR. And I got the idea this was due to a loss of will to continue and/or loneliness (the "pack" is thin so it doesn't take but a loss or two to become alone). I contributed this to the fact that a few have mentioned that they have been to the buffet and are full, so what's the point of going again?

But, then, I have to assume the many folks drop off the AT in VA/MD, and it is not like folks are visually spent after seeing the VA ponies and feel there is nothing else to hike for. So, maybe my inference is wrong.

[ShelterLeopard]

The thing about dropping out is that a lot more people start the AT than the PCT (and I don't know the PCT figures exactly, but I am relying on other people's info), so if (for example, don't take these figures for anything) 3000 people try to hike the AT, 300 people might finish. If 300 people set out to do the PCT, probably more like 50 finish. Let me check these figures...

[ShelterLeopard]

Wow- I was wrong, out of the 300 people that try the PCT a year, 60% finish. So about 180. Still less than the AT. And it could be me, but AT hikers seem to be more social- or social in a different way. PCTers are more.....

[Jim Adams]

Let me word my post a bit differently as a question...

If you wanted to hike either trail in 90 days, which trail would be easier to prepare for, and hike, the first 400+ miles? PCT @ 29.4 MPD or AT @ 24.2 MPD?

In my opinion, given those two choices, the PCT hike would be easier however you are just starting and both would be very hard at those paces.

geek

[neighbor dave]

aint it a great world!!
http://www.whiteblaze.net/forum/show...2&postcount=42
http://www.whiteblaze.net/forum/show...8&postcount=43
http://www.whiteblaze.net/forum/show...1&postcount=44
http://www.whiteblaze.net/forum/show...2&postcount=45

[tlbj6142]

In my opinion, given those two choices, the PCT hike would be easier however you are just starting and both would be very hard at those paces.

Those aren't my parameters, they are those of the OP.

[tlbj6142]

aint it a great world!!
http://www.whiteblaze.net/forum/show...2&postcount=42
http://www.whiteblaze.net/forum/show...8&postcount=43
http://www.whiteblaze.net/forum/show...1&postcount=44
http://www.whiteblaze.net/forum/show...2&postcount=45

You think I didn't read them the first time?

[garlic08]

Let me word my post a bit differently as a question...

If you wanted to hike either trail in 90 days, which trail would be easier to prepare for, and hike, the first 400+ miles? PCT @ 29.4 MPD or AT @ 24.2 MPD?

In terms of preparation, my opinion would be the AT. It's probably a good idea to have some desert and snow hiking experience before tackling the PCT, especially at that pace. You really need to fine-tune your water requirements, for instance. With only a little desert experience before my PCT hike (one 100-mile desert crossing in the Chihuahua), I carried way too much water on the PCT. By the time I got to the dry stretches in OR, I was able to carry about half the water I was in CA. The extra weight hurt and slowed me down in So CA. And at a 90-day pace, you'd be leaving MEX later (assuming NOBO), so it'll be even hotter and drier. And snow--again at that pace, you'll be doing two passes per day in the Sierra, so you'd be on the frozen snow in the morning and postholing badly in the pm--not good for a beginner.

In contrast, I don't think you need much experience at all to have a good AT hike. It's so easy to bail out in bad weather or when you get hot/cold/hungry/thirsty/tired/lonely.

I hiked the PCT first and made just under 19 mpd. I hiked the AT later and made just over 20 mpd. I don't understand all those who say the AT is harder. Resupply and water on the AT were, for me, nearly a non-issue, but I hiked in a wet year.

Good luck in your plans and your hike.

[tlbj6142]

I don't understand all those who say the AT is harder.

Mags addressed this above.

Though, I think, "they" equate "harder" just with the physical aspects of hiking. "They" ignore logistics climate, etc. IOW, the PCT has X average elevation gain per mile, where has the AT has nearly 1.3X. Therefore the AT is "harder". I'm too lazy to look-up X. Maybe 1.3X is 204ft/mile??

[garlic08]

Mags addressed this above.

Though, I think, "they" equate "harder" just with the physical aspects of hiking. "They" ignore logistics climate, etc. IOW, the PCT has X average elevation gain per mile, where has the AT has nearly 1.3X. Therefore the AT is "harder". I'm too lazy to look-up X. Maybe 1.3X is 204ft/mile??

That's absolutely right.

I'm too lazy to look it up, too, but I remember these numbers: AT--220 vertical feet per mile (could be 204), PCT--more like 120 or 130. So as I remember, it's nearly double the average rate. (The CDT is around 160, I think.)

The bottom line for me as how I felt at the end of my average 20 mile AT day--it was a lot better than I felt at the end of my average 19 mile PCT day. As you said, elevation change isn't nearly the whole story. And it all depends on the hiker--some are better in hills, some are better at fast speeds across desert terrain, some make great time across snowfields, some like towns, some like wilderness....

[yappy]

I agree with Nean and A train..haha.. hey Nean, are you on the AT sobo ?

[Dogwood]

Jester got that right. I agree with his assessment.

[Jester2000]

Wow- I was wrong, out of the 300 people that try the PCT a year, 60% finish. So about 180. Still less than the AT. And it could be me, but AT hikers seem to be more social- or social in a different way. PCTers are more.....

The other important aspect to think about when considering numbers on the two trails is the compressed time frame and weather-window importance on the PCT. If you say that 300 people will complete the AT, you need to consider that they will finish in June, July, August, September, and the first couple of weeks in October (for NOBOs). Meanwhile, almost all of those PCT hikers will finish within 6 weeks of one another. It's probably safe to say that if you want to be alone, it's easier to do so on the PCT, but that doesn't mean there's no one around. And the people I was around were pretty darn social, mainly because I am a magnet for crazy people.

On the other hand, if you're doing either trail in 90 days, it's not like you're going to be seeing anyone for too long.

If you wanted to hike either trail in 90 days, which trail would be easier to prepare for, and hike, the first 400+ miles? PCT @ 29.4 MPD or AT @ 24.2 MPD?

I think it would be equally difficult to prepare for either, but that's probably because I'm just not a strong enough hiker to do that sort of thing. I will say that in the first 400 miles or so of the PCT my decisions regarding when to stop for the day were influenced by the trail and logistical details far more often than when I was on the AT. I think that at that pace I would be exhausted on either trail (and I do think my body would be more beaten up on the AT), but on the AT at the end of my 24.2 miles I would probably be relatively close to water and close to a good camping spot. On the PCT at the end of my 29.4 mile day I might be on the side of a steeply sloping mountain with no water for 15 miles in either direction (this very thing was the cause of my first -- and accidental -- 30 mile day).

Garlic08's comments about multiple Sierra passes in a day point to the same idea -- that how far you go in a day on the PCT is often influenced by things other than how your body feels.

Because I don't hike at that pace, I honestly can't say for sure which would be easier to do. For me either would be so tremendously difficult that determining degrees of difficulty becomes almost impossible. But that's because I'm both a wuss and easily confused.

[puddingboy]

correct me if im wrong but dosent the AT goe to the tops of mountains, while the PCT goes around them or on the slopes.

[Jester2000]

correct me if im wrong but dosent the AT goe to the tops of mountains, while the PCT goes around them or on the slopes.

Generally speaking, this is true. I often noted that if you were on the AT looking north, you could often tell where you were going to go by looking for the highest thing around, and that the opposite was true on the PCT. Often this is because many of the mountains near the PCT would be technical climbs.

But even that kind of distorts the true nature of things -- the highest point on the PCT is a pass that, while it is the lowest thing around, also happens to be over 13,000 feet and takes a fair amount of climbing to get to.