View Full Version : How Many Sub zero nights in a NOBO PCT thru ?
How many sub zero nights a thru hiker of PCT would experience if NOBO starting April 1st and finishing the end of september?
What would be the coldest night temperature(s)?
Appreciate any comment since it helps me to choose the right equipment for the trip.
Zero.
Is this 10 characters yet?
It could happen but very unlikely. I did experience single digits the first week of April three years ago . . . and 6" of snow to boot! The better question tho is wind chill. You could definitely experience a few teens temp days with 35 mph winds, plunging the wind chill below zero.
Really? there is a chance for zero subzero night on PCT? I did not expect that.
It could happen but very unlikely. I did experience single digits the first week of April three years ago . . . and 6" of snow to boot! The better question tho is wind chill. You could definitely experience a few teens temp days with 35 mph winds, plunging the wind chill below zero.
Definitely the wind chill is more important and You are right. I want to know the real cold and not just the digits.
The OP is from Canada. I'm guessing he means nights below 0 Celsius (32 F). In 2009, I think it was around 8 or 9 for me. 1-2 in southern CA and the rest in the Sierras. None of those nights were colder than 24 F (-4) I'd say. I used a 30-degree F (-1 C) bag the whole way.
You mean 0 degrees F, right? There's almost no chance of that. There's plenty chance of a night in the 20s and some chance for a night in the teens and practically every night for 700 miles it'll be windy.
It could happen but very unlikely. I did experience single digits the first week of April three years ago . . . and 6" of snow to boot! The better question tho is wind chill. You could definitely experience a few teens temp days with 35 mph winds, plunging the wind chill below zero.My bad! I missed "PCT" completely. Had the AT on my brain!
what I meant from subzero being a Canadian was celsius when the water starts to freeze. That was why I was surprised to hear zero nights.
I had a few nights below freezing in Southern California after an April 17 start. A couple in the Sierra Neveda but I camped pretty high (over 10,000ft). And then pretty much had below freezing temps for the last 1.5weeks in Northern Washington finishing on Oct.2 with 4 days of snow. But nothing below 20F unless you can't the wind chill.
Seems to me there's a difference between what one particular thru-hiker experienced on their particular trip versus what's "likely" or "possible" in an average year. I hiked in a relatively low snow year (2008), so didn't have too many nights below freezing. I don't know how many; non-zero but not a lot. Note that there was still a lot of snow in Oregon, however; before getting into the Jefferson wilderness there was a sign in a 'resort' to the effect that you're taking your life in your hands going forward, and the few section hikers seen in there were carrying (completely unneeded) ice axes.
And of course it can get down below freezing when finishing up in northern WA state. The latter depends on how fast your hike on average, zero/nero days off, etc, and start date. Those factors also of course impact how cold you are in the Sierras. Hiking 'style' also makes a difference; you can generally "walk high but sleep low" in the Sierras, so that unless in a pretty high snow year you might walk on a lot of snow during the day but camp on dry ground at night in there. But I knew someone who literally spent the night at friggin' Forester Pass.
So my point is that YMMV a lot based on factors that are in some part under your control (pace, start date, time off along the way, per-day hiking mileage goals), and some part not (weather for your particular year, how it impacts the particular areas that year).
My suggestion is to be prepared to survive temps down into, say, the low teens through the Sierras and to be comfortable in temps down somewhere into the 20's. Then ditto in northern WA if you don't manage to finish before, say, mid September (I was good with a 32F rated bag after the Sierras but some folks ahead of me actually had colder temps --- your 'mileage' here really may vary).
Seems to me there's a difference between what one particular thru-hiker experienced on their particular trip versus what's "likely" or "possible" in an average year. I hiked in a relatively low snow year (2008), so didn't have too many nights below freezing. I don't know how many; non-zero but not a lot. Note that there was still a lot of snow in Oregon, however; before getting into the Jefferson wilderness there was a sign in a 'resort' to the effect that you're taking your life in your hands going forward, and the few section hikers seen in there were carrying (completely unneeded) ice axes.
And of course it can get down below freezing when finishing up in northern WA state. The latter depends on how fast your hike on average, zero/nero days off, etc, and start date. Those factors also of course impact how cold you are in the Sierras. Hiking 'style' also makes a difference; you can generally "walk high but sleep low" in the Sierras, so that unless in a pretty high snow year you might walk on a lot of snow during the day but camp on dry ground at night in there. But I knew someone who literally spent the night at friggin' Forester Pass.
So my point is that YMMV a lot based on factors that are in some part under your control (pace, start date, time off along the way, per-day hiking mileage goals), and some part not (weather for your particular year, how it impacts the particular areas that year).
My suggestion is to be prepared to survive temps down into, say, the low teens through the Sierras and to be comfortable in temps down somewhere into the 20's. Then ditto in northern WA if you don't manage to finish before, say, mid September (I was good with a 32F rated bag after the Sierras but some folks ahead of me actually had colder temps --- your 'mileage' here really may vary).
My concern is more about the hot days of dessert than cold nights of high sierra to be honest. I hike with my dog and being from Canada I dont have access to hot weather here to test my dog. Cold weather in Canada as you better know is a norm and I have plenty of time to addapt to cold weather but this july that was the hottest month ever recorded in Canadian history was around 100 maximum. Far less than what I possibly would experience in PCT
royalusa
11-29-2011, 16:21
The following info was posted on the PCT-L list by Paul Bodnar. It reflects the data he collected from his 2010 thru-hike using a laboratory calibrated Kestrel 4000.
Temperature Range (Fahrenheit), followed by the number of days at that temperature.
Low Temp
20-25 (1)
25-30 (1)
30-35 (10)
35-40 (20)
40-45 (33)
45-50 (33)
50-55 (22)
55-60 (22)
>60 (26)
High Temp
40-45 (1)
45-50 (3)
50-55 (4)
55-60 (4)
60-65 (12)
65-70 (9)
70-75 (30)
75-80 (30)
80-85 (30)
85-90 (23)
90-95 (12)
95-100 (3)
The following info was posted on the PCT-L list by Paul Bodnar. It reflects the data he collected from his 2010 thru-hike using a laboratory calibrated Kestrel 4000.
Temperature Range (Fahrenheit), followed by the number of days at that temperature.
Low Temp
20-25 (1)
25-30 (1)
30-35 (10)
35-40 (20)
40-45 (33)
45-50 (33)
50-55 (22)
55-60 (22)
>60 (26)
High Temp
40-45 (1)
45-50 (3)
50-55 (4)
55-60 (4)
60-65 (12)
65-70 (9)
70-75 (30)
75-80 (30)
80-85 (30)
85-90 (23)
90-95 (12)
95-100 (3)
Thank you, thank you. This is the information I can decide on .
Most people think that it's going to be really super hot in So Cal. It's usually very comfortable, sometimes it is hot and often it is very cold. It's very dry in So Cal. What that means is that there could be 20 degrees or more difference between the shade and the sun. 85 in the sun with a harsh sun burning your skin (and probably your dog's feet) but 65 in the shade, cool enough you might put your jacket on. Add the unceasing wind and even temperatures in the 90s are quite comfortably tolerated because the breeze cools you off. Furthermore, the difference between day and night can be as much as 50 or even more degrees, so you can be quite hot in the daytime but rest-assured it will cool off later, sometimes the instant the sun drops behind the mountain as it's setting.
You can find a shady spot to wait out the hot part of the day, or like a lot of people, you might find this totally unnecessary because it's really not that bad. You will probably maximize the early morning and early evening hours for hiking. You also hike from sky-island to sky-island so you are often up in the trees where it's so absolutely painfully perfect you can't even imagine it now. You may also get a late spring storm which could drop snow on you (the late ones seem to be colder sometimes than the ones in the middle of winter). You have to be prepared for everything in So Cal. You will come to understand why so many people want to live here.
Most people think that it's going to be really super hot in So Cal. It's usually very comfortable, sometimes it is hot and often it is very cold. It's very dry in So Cal. What that means is that there could be 20 degrees or more difference between the shade and the sun. 85 in the sun with a harsh sun burning your skin (and probably your dog's feet) but 65 in the shade, cool enough you might put your jacket on. Add the unceasing wind and even temperatures in the 90s are quite comfortably tolerated because the breeze cools you off. Furthermore, the difference between day and night can be as much as 50 or even more degrees, so you can be quite hot in the daytime but rest-assured it will cool off later, sometimes the instant the sun drops behind the mountain as it's setting.
You can find a shady spot to wait out the hot part of the day, or like a lot of people, you might find this totally unnecessary because it's really not that bad. You will probably maximize the early morning and early evening hours for hiking. You also hike from sky-island to sky-island so you are often up in the trees where it's so absolutely painfully perfect you can't even imagine it now. You may also get a late spring storm which could drop snow on you (the late ones seem to be colder sometimes than the ones in the middle of winter). You have to be prepared for everything in So Cal. You will come to understand why so many people want to live here.
There is a reason that most of Iranian live in California and mostly Los Angeles I think.
Sierra is like back home to me. high peaks of Iran are around 14000 to 16000 feet high with quite unpredictable weather even in summers( snow covered 10 months a year).
Kookork, I know you didn't ask for advice on this but I just wanted to talk about your dog.
I would be VERY hesitant to bring a dog on a thru-hike. There are a lot of logistical problems with food, water, restaurants, hotels, etc. And most dogs just aren't in shape to be on the trail, doing 20+ miles a day. Of course there are dogs that have done the PCT or AT. But most of those dogs had already been on TONS of trail miles, practicing long distance days, etc. If this is you and your dog, then great. But otherwise you run the risk of making yourself and your dog very unhappy. I have heard sad tales tired dogs with worn out little feet.
Thank you for your concern. I used to get upset about advsing against bringing dogs to long trails but now I know it is all because of good intentions of posters.
My dog hikes with me frequently and 20 miles per day is a joke for him(not a joke for me though). The last time I trimmed my dog's nail was when he was a puppy 4 years ago. He does not need trimming since a daily run beside my bike keeps his nail short.
I know my dog good enough to not to push him too far. The reality is that I am the first to get tired.
550 miles thru hike of the Bruce Trail was a good indication for me that he is ready for any trail.
Logestic wise carrying a dog is not easy but other than that all I carry for him is one pound of dry food. You should see him when I bring my hiking gear how ecstatic he gets.
Dog on trail is a controversial matter but I hike to enjoy and my dog's company adds to this joy.
what I meant from subzero being a Canadian was celsius when the water starts to freeze. That was why I was surprised to hear zero nights.
That figures, you folks speak two different languages, French and Celsius :D...........and English and Metric............We simple-minded Americans (USA citizens, more exactly) can't keep up. :)
With all the respect that I have for Metric and Non metric standards for different reasons I never would understand the complex logic behind Fahrenhite . Water( that covers 2/3 of the planet earth) is the center in Celsius, that boils in 100 degrees and freezes in zero in celcius world. In fahrenhite world numbers does not add up easily.
Mile has different story. It is not difficult or complicated to understand and use mile vs km but Fahrenhite Vs Celsius is a continuous pain in the neck.
Leanthree
12-07-2011, 03:39
With all the respect that I have for Metric and Non metric standards for different reasons I never would understand the complex logic behind Fahrenhite . Water( that covers 2/3 of the planet earth) is the center in Celsius, that boils in 100 degrees and freezes in zero in celcius world. In fahrenhite world numbers does not add up easily.
Mile has different story. It is not difficult or complicated to understand and use mile vs km but Fahrenhite Vs Celsius is a continuous pain in the neck.
I just went on wikipedia to figure out why F sucks so badly and found the following crackpot method:
According to an article Fahrenheit wrote in 1724, he based his scale on three reference points of temperature.[4] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fahrenheit#cite_note-rank-3) In his initial scale (which is not the final Fahrenheit scale), the zero point is determined by placing the thermometer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermometer) in brine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brine): he used a mixture of ice (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice), water, and ammonium chloride (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ammonium_chloride), a salt, at a 1:1:1 ratio. This is a frigorific mixture (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frigorific_mixture) which stabilizes its temperature automatically: that stable temperature was defined as 0 °F (−17.78 °C). The second point, at 32 degrees, was a mixture of ice and water without the ammonium chloride at a 1:1 ratio. The third point, 96 degrees, was approximately the human body temperature, then called "blood-heat".[6] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fahrenheit#cite_note-TMU-5)
According to a letter Fahrenheit wrote to his friend Herman Boerhaave (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herman_Boerhaave),[7] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fahrenheit#cite_note-6) his scale was built on the work of Ole Rømer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ole_R%C3%B8mer), whom he had met earlier. In Rømer’s scale (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R%C3%B8mer_scale), brine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brine) freezes and melts at 7.5 degrees, body temperature is 22.5, and water boils at 60 degrees. Fahrenheit multiplied each value by four in order to eliminate fractions and increase the granularity (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Granularity) of the scale. He then re-calibrated his scale using the melting point of ice and normal human body temperature (which were at 30 and 90 degrees); he adjusted the scale so that the melting point of ice would be 32 degrees and body temperature 96 degrees, so that 64 intervals would separate the two, allowing him to mark degree lines on his instruments by simply bisecting the interval six times (since 64 is 2 to the sixth power).[6] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fahrenheit#cite_note-TMU-5)[8] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fahrenheit#cite_note-7)
Fahrenheit observed, somewhat inaccurately, that water boils at about 212 degrees using this scale. Later, other scientists decided to redefine the degree slightly to make the freezing point exactly 32°F, and the boiling point exactly 212 °F or 180 degrees higher.[citation needed (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_needed)] It is for this reason that normal human body temperature (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normal_human_body_temperature) is approximately 98° (oral temperature) on the revised scale (whereas it was 90° on Fahrenheit's multiplication of Rømer, and 96° on his original scale).
As for dogs, remember that dogs are not allowed in the backcountry of Sequoia, Kings Canyon, and Yosemite National Parks (basically the JMT section of the trail).
And I want to second the earlier post about dogs. The PCT is no place for the dogs, and the PCT is nothing at all like the Bruce Trail. First, the surface of the PCT is almost all rocks and dirt--rarely leaves or pine needles. Second, the heat of the desert is going to be a big problem for a dog. And there's a big difference between a few hundred miles on the Bruce Trail and a 2600-mile thru-hike. Leave the dog home.