Steep sections?

[AllDownhillFromHere]

I've been reviewing the PCT elevation profiles on Halfmile's page, and while I'm sure there's small ups and downs they can't show, I'm looking for the gruelling sections. By this I mean the 1000' per mile stuff. For instance climbing out of KM you do about 4000 up in a 17 mile stretch, so there's elevation, but not steepness. How do the mountain sections stand up against for instance places like the Adirondacks, or the Whites? I imagine the pitch and footing are different, I don't think the Sierras got glaciated, so the erosion processes are different, but the elevation profiles don't look similar.

[nsherry61]

The western states have figured out what a graded trail tread and a switchback are. Out east, the trails are crappy rock pile gaps in the trees that head straight up the hill. In the west, the trails have relatively smoother treads and they engineer the trails with these miraculous things called switchbacks that allow you to go up the mountain (if you can even call these eastern hills mountains) in a reasonable and gentlemanly fashion, albeit at above 10,000 ft at times and instead of being a steep climb from hell up a rock pile for 1 mile and 1000 ft, it is a long steady climb for 7 miles and 5000 ft. . . or something like that. Out east, the trails seem to run along ridge lines over the tops of the mountains. Out west, the trails go much higher, kinda like the mountains, but the trails go around the peaks instead of over them because the peaks are far to jagged and technical to put a trail over the top of in most cases.

The high points of the PCT (not counting Mt. Whitney) are mountain passes (the low points in the mountain ranges). The high points along the AT are the various peaks that the trail goes over the top of.

[MuddyWaters]

Western trails are stock trails. Graded for horses and mules.

And the occassional llama.

[Malto]

The only two climbs that in the early sections that I remember being difficult were the climb North from Paradise Cafe up to San Jacinto and the climb out of Cajon Pass. Neither were steep, in fact quite frustratingly the opposite. (You hike a half mile and look down to see the trail just 60' below you.) But, it isn't the steepness that is the difficulty. It is the duration, elevation and often the exposure to the sun that make some of these climbs a challenge. Look at the total elevation gain on the two climbs I listed above as well as the climbs out of Belden and Seiad Valley. All of these are very long climbs that take the better part of the day for most hikers. Also you will notice that all of them occur directly after common resupply points and in some cases you will need some of the heaviest water carries. This is what adds the difficulty.

The Sierra passes are whole different critter.

[nsherry61]

Western trails are stock trails. Graded for horses and mules.

And the occassional llama.

God, how I wish it were the other way around with llamas and occasionally a horse or a mule. Although if the trails were build for llamas, they wouldn't need to be as carefully engineered and graded.

I love horses. But, I really hate the damage stock does to wilderness trails! Heck, I hate the damage they do to urban trails they use. Basically, trail damage by stock anywhere really sucks, even in their own barnyard.

And, for what it's worth, even trails in the west that are build without the expectation of use by stock, are still well graded with smoother tread than most eastern trails, maybe because of the tradition of trails being built to a certain level for stock elsewhere?

[nsherry61]

. . . Neither were steep, in fact quite frustratingly the opposite. (You hike a half mile and look down to see the trail just 60' below you.) But, it isn't the steepness that is the difficulty. It is the duration, elevation and often the exposure to the sun that make some of these climbs a challenge. . .

I must admit, as a kid, I spend many long hours complaining about how stupid and miserable all the switchbacks were when hiking and backpacking. Now that I am living out east, I complain about how stupid and miserable the lack of switchbacks is.

Hmmm. Maybe it's not the trail, but the hill and the hiker that are the problem?

[Malto]

I must admit, as a kid, I spend many long hours complaining about how stupid and miserable all the switchbacks were when hiking and backpacking. Now that I am living out east, I complain about how stupid and miserable the lack of switchbacks is.

Hmmm. Maybe it's not the trail, but the hill and the hiker that are the problem?

I eased my frustration by reminding myself that that half mile count toward the 2656 miles and I was there to hike the trail that was there, not the one that thought it should be. The descent off Fuller ridge is another head scratcher. That trail wasn't going down anytime fast. But it was quite enjoyable first thing in the morning. The sand crossing at the bottom was a bit less enjoyable until the Ice cold Sunkist under the highway. Then it was fixded.

[Engine]

...I was there to hike the trail that was there, not the one that thought it should be...

I like this! I'm going to store that one away and remind myself of that thought during the occasional bad climb or descent.

[YoungBloodOnTrail]

You will never climb 100 feet per mile on the PCT. It's a much different trail than the Appalachian.

[Venchka]

You will never climb 100 feet per mile on the PCT. It's a much different trail than the Appalachian.

1,000 feet per mile maybe?
On the other hand, much of the time you will be climbing with 1/2 or less of the oxygen you might have on the East Coast.
Wayne


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[burger]

The western states have figured out what a graded trail tread and a switchback are. Out east, the trails are crappy rock pile gaps in the trees that head straight up the hill. In the west, the trails have relatively smoother treads and they engineer the trails with these miraculous things called switchbacks that allow you to go up the mountain (if you can even call these eastern hills mountains) in a reasonable and gentlemanly fashion, albeit at above 10,000 ft at times and instead of being a steep climb from hell up a rock pile for 1 mile and 1000 ft, it is a long steady climb for 7 miles and 5000 ft. . . or something like that. Out east, the trails seem to run along ridge lines over the tops of the mountains. Out west, the trails go much higher, kinda like the mountains, but the trails go around the peaks instead of over them because the peaks are far to jagged and technical to put a trail over the top of in most cases.

A few years ago, I would've agreed with you on the east-west thing, but I've lived in the West a while now, and there PLENTY of crappy, 1000-foot-per-mile rockpile trails in the West, too. The trail we hike the most often in my town is a 2,500' climb in 2.5 miles. And the thing about the crappy western trails is that a lot of them are at high elevation. There is not enough oxygen at 12,000 feet to be doing scramble type hiking, but there are plenty of trails here that do that.

As for the PCT, Malto summed it up. I can't think of a single climb on the PCT that would make my list of top 50 worst climbs on the AT. I recall one or two gnarly climbs north of Tahoe, iirc. Nothing awful though. PCT climbs can go on forever, but not at a terrible grade. And you are often enjoying nice views while you are doing those PCT climbs. The worst thing about PCT climbs to me is that you are often big, long climbs while carrying ungodly amounts of food and water. The climb out of Tehachapi Pass wasn't horrible grade-wise, but I think I had 6 L of water and 7 days of food (plus it was roastingly hot), which didn't help.

[Venchka]

I don't mind the climbs in the West. I don't mind the horse destroyed sections or the streams that take over the trails occasionally.
What tears me up are the all day long downhills. That doesn't bother me enough to stay away. I'm just mentioning it so others will be aware of the long downhills.
Wayne


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Traveler]

1,000 feet per mile maybe?
On the other hand, much of the time you will be climbing with 1/2 or less of the oxygen you might have on the East Coast.
Wayne

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

A misconception to be sure. There is little difference in oxygen levels between the east and west coasts despite what CA does or how NJ acts.

*Disclaimer - intended for comic relief not political consumption

[nsherry61]

A misconception to be sure. There is little difference in oxygen levels between the east and west coasts despite what CA does or how NJ acts. . .

FWIW, the amount of oxygen at 10,000 ft is about 25% less than sea level. I think that is a surprising difference. Sure, not half, but 1/2 of 1/2 as much. In the end it's probably something like 1/4 of 1/2 as much over the average heights of the AT vs the PCT or CDT.

As for politics, maybe the difference in O2 explains the dizzy Californian stereotype? Oh, no, most of the population in southern CA is near sealevel. . . hmm.

[4eyedbuzzard]

FOr anyone interested, here is Guthook's data and elevation profiles on the steepest sections of the AT, PCT, and CDT http://www.guthookhikes.com/2015/01/...t-and-pct.html

[Spirit Walker]

The only time we had really steep climbs on the PCT or CDT were when a pass was covered with snow. Then we would climb straight up rather than attempt to follow the buried trail. Some of those climbs were very steep.

For the rest, especially on the PCT, the extremely gentle grade was often irritating, because it took forever to go up or down. Yes, it's all part of the overall mileage, but when you're heading toward water or a road and the trail goes up while you are supposed to be heading down, it's frustrating.

[Traveler]

FWIW, the amount of oxygen at 10,000 ft is about 25% less than sea level. I think that is a surprising difference. Sure, not half, but 1/2 of 1/2 as much. In the end it's probably something like 1/4 of 1/2 as much over the average heights of the AT vs the PCT or CDT.

As for politics, maybe the difference in O2 explains the dizzy Californian stereotype? Oh, no, most of the population in southern CA is near sealevel. . . hmm.

Or just a literacy issue,,,,

[kyhipo]

You will never climb 100 feet per mile on the PCT. It's a much different trail than the Appalachian.

my side hiking trips down to kings canyon was my hardest hike the canyon was a trip alone.

[Turk6177]

I can only answer your question in the regards of what I experienced on the John Muir Trail, which is the PCT in many parts. Like you have read above, most of the climbs are mainly switch backs. Having hiked in New Hampshire, Maine and the southern AT, I found the trails out west to be much less taxing when it comes to sheer grueling uphill climbing (Wildcat Mountain coming out of Pinkham Notch visitor center). I would have to believe this is how so many hikers have no problem doing 20 mile days.

[HooKooDooKu]

On the other hand, much of the time you will be climbing with 1/2 or less of the oxygen you might have on the East Coast.

Does that really make much of a difference once you've had a chance to acclimate?

One of the three worst climbs I faced on the JMT was the steep climb as the trail turns away from Little Yosemite Valley towards Sunrise Mountain at an altitude of ~9,000'.
The climb out of Yosemite Valley the day before was steeper, but it was easier because it was at altitudes of ~4,000' to ~6,000'; the altitudes I'm used to hiking in GSMNP.

But after spending 3 days at altitudes above 8,000', I noticed a distinct improvement in my ability to climb hills.
The only other climbs I had any difficulty for the rest of the trip included The Golden Stair Case and Glen Pass (both approaching a grade of 1,000'/mile).
Had no problems with Forestor Pass and the climb to Mt Whittney.