Login with Facebook
 ADVANCED
Life in the Wasatch?
View Latest Posts in This Forum or All Forums
   Page 3 of 4.  <<First   <Prev   1  2  3  4   Next>   Last>>
Follow replies to this topic? Notify me at the top of web site.
1

Email me.
 
 
By John Herreshoff
From Ann Arbor, MI
Feb 13, 2013
Tyler N wrote:
PC is like a big east coast resort? That's gotta be a joke. And I can get a season at Canyons for almost half the price of Alta...LCC is not twice the skiing PC is, not even close. I'd say 10% better.


PCMR is also crowded, and the Canyons is like a 4,000 acre runout.

As for Deer Valley...don't ever go there. There's no pow, they groom the trees and there's no pow. Anywhere.

FLAG
By cdec
From SLC and Moab, ut
Feb 13, 2013
Tyler N wrote:
PC is like a big east coast resort? That's gotta be a joke. And I can get a season at Canyons for almost half the price of Alta...LCC is not twice the skiing PC is, not even close. I'd say 10% better.


Comparing Alta and Snowbird to any of the PC resorts is like saying El Cap is 10% better than the Gate Buttress. Please.

FLAG
By frankstoneline
Feb 13, 2013
Aerili wrote:
I don't agree that the Bay area, LA, or Vegas at least can compare to the 3 hour radius of SLC. LA can maybe compete if you extend it to a 4 hour radius but even then, those cities require much more extensive drive time for the radness than SLC does. At least in my experience. On other hand, those cities have a normal culture and better looking people (err... in my opinion! :)).


Seattle is passable at best as well, and the seasons are short at most of the stuff that is really good.

Additionally, cost of living appears to be considerably more reasonable in the SLC area than LA, SF, Vegas or Seattle.

FLAG
By Tyler W
From Utah
Feb 13, 2013
Scooby Snacks
John Herreshoff wrote:
PCMR is also crowded, and the Canyons is like a 4,000 acre runout. As for Deer Valley...don't ever go there. There's no pow, they groom the trees and there's no pow. Anywhere.


Nevermind everything I've been saying, there's no incredible powder or trees anywhere in Park City! Nobody ski there, it's absolutely terrible.

FLAG
By akafaultline
Feb 13, 2013
In one of the best days I've had in Utah I did the following

Woke up at 5-went paragliding at Pom until 8.
Went to sundance for downhill biking at 1000 until 100
Then went backcountry skiing at elks point-did 3 laps.
Met some friends on Provo river for one lap down the lower portion
Lastly went climbing in rock canyon.

Now none of the areas mentioned above are spectacular but still good. Hard to complain.

In the shoulder seasons you can easily do many different season sports as long as you know the conditions. Earlier posters a right- you can ski most of the year but you really have to be despite to hike up in September to go down the "glacier" on timp. But I've been desperate enough to do just that.

All that in one day.

I live in alaska now and find myself envious of the remarkably easy access to the terrain in the wasatch and the extremely close proximity to everything. IMO the wasatch is about as good as it gets. If you want to get out of the smog-move to Heber or something similar.

FLAG
By cdec
From SLC and Moab, ut
Feb 13, 2013
Tyler N wrote:
Nobody ski there, it's absolutely terrible.


Not terrible, just a distant second place.

FLAG
By Boissal
From Small Lake, UT
Feb 13, 2013
Tyler N wrote:
Nevermind everything I've been saying, there's no incredible powder or trees anywhere in Park City! Nobody ski there, it's absolutely terrible.

+1.
The LCC crowd has by far the biggest online dick and is always willing to put it on the table for a measuring contest. It happens to be an amusing delusion of grandeur. The Alta bros are by far the worst...

FLAG
By Mick S
Feb 13, 2013
FWIW I spent 8 years skiing the Wasatch, and while PC is OK, it does not compare to the LCC resorts unless you are into groomers. The comment about Deer Valley is right on. I'm surprised no one has mentioned snow amounts ... 18 inches at Alta means 8 inches at PC. But it's all relative, compared to most East Coast resorts PC is awesome.

The traffic in SLC is OK only if compared to other very large cities. If you are thinking mountain town, it's not so great. SLC is suffering from it's own success, and while the canyons are an escape, they are an escape for everyone else as well. Spend some time sitting in traffic going up or down LCC, as you descend into the inversion, and you start to wonder, WTF.

That said you could do a lot worse. Lots of options for climbing and skiing away from the crowds, but you'll have to try a bit harder.

FLAG
 
By BruceH
From Salt Lake City,UT
Feb 13, 2013
New Religion
Aerili wrote:
I don't agree that the Bay area, LA, or Vegas at least can compare to the 3 hour radius of SLC. LA can maybe compete if you extend it to a 4 hour radius but even then, those cities require much more extensive drive time for the radness than SLC does.


Having lived in LA and the Bay area, I agree with the disagreement. In LA, the 3 hour driving radius extends all the way to Sherman Oaks. From a center at Westwood. At 2:03am Tuesday morning. The Bay area is a wonderful place, especially if you've sold your startup to Cisco. No sarcasm intended about the former aspect: the Bay area is beautiful, and is great for outdoor recreation. However, OP asked about X-country skiing close to town, and there are very few skinny skis at Fisherman's Wharf. (Very few skinny anything at FW.) And the pow is much better on Superior than Diablo.

Aerili wrote:
On other hand, those cities have a normal culture and better looking people (err... in my opinion! :)).


I assume you're talking about statistical means here. When I leave town (for one of these great places within a 3-4 hour drive), which is often, normalcy and looks revert to reasonable levels.

FLAG
By Aerili
From Salt Lake City, UT
Feb 13, 2013
The West Desert...it's not just for climbing, suck...
BruceH wrote:
Having lived in LA and the Bay area, I agree with the disagreement. In LA, the 3 hour driving radius extends all the way to Sherman Oaks. From a center at Westwood. At 2:03am Tuesday morning. The Bay area is a wonderful place, especially if you've sold your startup to Cisco. No sarcasm intended about the former aspect: the Bay area is beautiful, and is great for outdoor recreation. However, OP asked about X-country skiing close to town, and there are very few skinny skis at Fisherman's Wharf. (Very few skinny anything at FW.) And the pow is much better on Superior than Diablo.


Not saying the major cities of California don't have proximity to some pretty good stuff, but I used to climb in all the same areas as the Bay area crowd and they were typically driving 3 hours to get there (some of the paddling is closer by an hour I think). If I drove 3 hours from Salt Lake, I'd almost be to Moab and have passed up a shit ton of good stuff on the way of all varieties. Maybe that helps illustrate my opinion better.

Also, I personally prefer paying Salt Lake cost of living than Bay area or LA cost of living.

That said, LA and Bay area men are still hotter than Salt Lake men, and I'm bummed I didn't make it to the People Party in Oakland when I lived 8 hours closer than I do now. :(

FLAG
By frankstoneline
Feb 14, 2013
...Also, I personally prefer paying Salt Lake cost of living than Bay area or LA cost of living./quote>

As I look at cost of living for a move I realize this more and more.

FLAG
By SMR
Feb 14, 2013
frankstoneline wrote:
Whats the drive-time like for WY limestone to the northeast? Looks like Wild Iris is ~4hours, anyone have any experience w/ this drive for wild/tensleep/sinks?


Driving times for Wild Iris is about 4 hours/ Sinks 4.5 hours and for
Ten Sleep, we have driven it in 8 hours. If there is any road construction, these times can be lengthened.
For reference I live on the east side of SLC.

FLAG
By Pete Spri
Feb 14, 2013
Aerili wrote:
This. I don't agree that the Bay area, LA, or Vegas at least can compare to the 3 hour radius of SLC. LA can maybe compete if you extend it to a 4 hour radius but even then, those cities require much more extensive drive time for the radness than SLC does. At least in my experience. On other hand, those cities have a normal culture and better looking people (err... in my opinion! :)).


In a 3 hour radius of SLC you have the Wasatch, Ibex, and City of Rocks, and the Uintas. That is great stuff for sure, but you cant get to Zion or IC or the Swell in 3 hours.

Seattle has Index, Squamish, Frenchman's Coulee, North Cascades, and Tieton and Leavenworth, not to mention any of the alpine stuff in the cascades.

San Fran has the Tahoe, Yosemite, Sierras.

LA has Joshua Tree, Red Rocks, Idyllwild, Bishop and the backside of the Sierra.

I mean, I get that SLC is well positioned, but so is just about any other city. And don't go into a 6 hour radius, because all of the other western cities just start getting even better. I certainly have a soft spot in my heart for SLC; it's got a good location. But I think that people just get into the mindset of there own hometown being so great, but really dont look at the reality that when you start saying "3 hour radius" or "6 hour radius" you really start ending up with a LARGE amount of cities in the West being absolutely amazing with respect to world class rock that they are in reach of.

FLAG
By Pete Spri
Feb 14, 2013
Aerili wrote:
If I drove 3 hours from Salt Lake, I'd almost be to Moab and have passed up a shit ton of good stuff on the way of all varieties.

Really, you think that all that choss on the way to Moab on Hwy 6 is good rock?

PS Moab is more like 4 and IC is more like just over 5.

FLAG
By kennoyce
From Layton, UT
Feb 14, 2013
Climbing at the Gallery in Red Rocks
Spri wrote:
Really, you think that all that choss on the way to Moab on Hwy 6 is good rock? PS Moab is more like 4 and IC is more like just over 5.


wow, you drive slow, I've done SLC to moab in 3 plenty of times. The swell is also easily doable in 3. IC or zions are a bit over 4 though.

FLAG
By BScallout
Feb 14, 2013
No you just drive like a reckless jerk on the 6. ^^

FLAG
 
By Mark Lewis
From Salt Lake City, Utah
Feb 14, 2013
The Swell is separated into two general areas, north and south. The north part of the swell is easily accessible from SLC in 2 hours. This will put you in Triassic and/or Buckhorn area - two fantastic climbing areas.

The southern portion, or the Reef area, is about 4 hours depending on your exact destination.

Joe's is between 2-3 hours as well.

Everyone saying SLC sucks compared to other cities is correct. Our men are ugly and our climbing even uglier. It isn't worth moving here, go to LA instead.

FLAG
By Tyler W
From Utah
Feb 14, 2013
Scooby Snacks
^^^ I second the above. And Moab is definitely about a 3.5 hr drive consistently.

FLAG
By Aaron G
From Driggs, ID
Feb 14, 2013
The boots felt better in the store than after 20 m...
I grew up in Was Angeles (SLC) and have a love/hate relationship with it that ultimately led to leaving for good. It just isn't the place I grew up. If you are someone that can "see the sunny side" even when the air is so polluted you can't see 1 block (no joke), I'd say go for it. If you are at all unable to ignore things like air, traffic, rampant crime since the cops are not equipped to handle the unbelievable growth, then maybe its not for you.

It really is an amazing place with a lot of really great people. Just make sure you can have a positive attitude in any conditions or it will eat you alive from the inside.

FLAG
By frankstoneline
Feb 14, 2013
People keep mentioning seattle in this thread, but no one discusses the fact that the climbing season is effectively 6 months of the year, and the majority of the good climbing lies at least 2 hours away.

FLAG
By Aerili
From Salt Lake City, UT
Feb 14, 2013
The West Desert...it's not just for climbing, suck...
Spri wrote:
Really, you think that all that choss on the way to Moab on Hwy 6 is good rock? PS Moab is more like 4 and IC is more like just over 5.


I was not actually referring to just climbing but rather all one's outdoor adventure options. And I do know how far Moab is, therefore I put in those key words "almost to".

Bishop and the Sierras are not 3 hours from LA nor the Bay area (neither is the Valley). I used to live next to the Sierra and have many climbing partners in both cities so I am well acquainted with how long it took them to meet me.

I would certainly pick LA or the Bay area over living in DC or Baltimore, for example. But I'll admit I'm pretty stoked with my current city's proximity to outdoor escapes and I think it is somewhat unique as larger cities go. Just my opinion.

FLAG
By Pete Spri
Feb 14, 2013
kennoyce wrote:
wow, you drive slow, I've done SLC to moab in 3 plenty of times. The swell is also easily doable in 3. IC or zions are a bit over 4 though.

Yeah, I'm talking standardized drive times. If you drive by 15 over the whole way, minus price where the cops hang out, then sure, you could make it there in 3. Without stopping for gas or food. And not hitting traffic through Provo after 5pm when leaving SLC.

Just saying.

FLAG
By Boissal
From Small Lake, UT
Feb 14, 2013
SLC Moab in 3 is ballsy. There are enough cops from Helper to Wellington to drain your bank account three times over. Not to mention the Provo area. Best I've ever done is 3:30 and that was leaving town at 4:30 AM on a Thursday, driving 10-15 over the speed limit the whole time with no stops.
Then again I have a friend who gets to Ibex in 2 1/2 hours...

FLAG
By Pete Spri
Feb 14, 2013
Aerili wrote:
I was not actually referring to just climbing but rather all one's outdoor adventure options.

Well if that's the case, then there are even more "outdoor" options for other cities. You start adding river running and boating, fishing, etc and you'll have way more competition for SLC just because it has so little water.

My point is not to trash SLC: it's awesome and amazing; the best thing about SLC is not what is in 3 or 6 hours, because all western cities have really good climbing in 3 to 6 hours. The Wasatch in 30 minutes is what makes SLC unique and amazing.

I just think that especially on sites like this, people talk up their own town without really thinking about what other places have to offer in the same travel times. Talk it up for the wasatch, not for drive time radii.

FLAG
 
By Pete Spri
Feb 14, 2013
frankstoneline wrote:
People keep mentioning seattle in this thread, but no one discusses the fact that the climbing season is effectively 6 months of the year, and the majority of the good climbing lies at least 2 hours away.

Only if you are talking purely rock. If you add in alpine and ice you have full season climbing. Not to bag on the Wasatch in this respect but it has nothing on the Cascades for ice/alpine/mixed and mountaineering routes.

FLAG


Follow replies to this topic? Notify me at the top of web site.
1

Email me.
Page 3 of 4.  <<First   <Prev   1  2  3  4   Next>   Last>>