What Makes a Mountain Ski Big or Small?

So the amount of snowfall affects the bigness?

If I wanted to ski on man made snow, I'd just stay in the east.

Killington does not advertise 3400 vertical.  They advertise 3050.  However, the bottom 1100 feet is part of the run down to Skyeship Base which most people don't lap.

Harvey wrote

So the amount of snowfall affects the bigness?

Only up to a certain point within the same region.  PowMow gets less total snow than LCC where Alta and Snowbird are located.  But PowMow is a big place where runs go on, and on, and on.  Far fewer people so the powder can last for days.  Great fun!  My impression is that Canyons, before it was connected to PCMR, did not ski as big as Snowbird.  My sense is that the Canyons layout is in the same style as Gore, a few distinct mountains and getting from one to another takes a while.  But I haven't skied Canyons at all.

Between Massanutten and Plattekill, which have the same acreage, no question that all the natural snow that Platty gets is a factor in how big it feels in comparison.  The average total snowfall at Mnut is around 20 inches I think.

Same comparison holds for Massanutten and Blue Knob in southern PA.  The vert at BK is about the same, with 100 acres that includes a few named tree areas.  BK skiing is based on natural snowfall since they don't have much snowmaking except for a few key groomers.

Northeast bowl on Algonquin and the new slide off Colden ski big!  

snoloco wrote

If I wanted to ski on man made snow, I'd just stay in the east.

Killington does not advertise 3400 vertical.  They advertise 3050.  However, the bottom 1100 feet is part of the run down to Skyeship Base which most people don't lap.

How does Killington compare to Stowe?  To Smuggs?

I spent a short day checking out Pico instead of K-ton a few years ago.  Decided I'd have more fun without having to think hard about where to go next.  It was a mid-week day that turned out to be a powder day, so worked out well.  I had the place practically to myself.

I guess if there are no trees in play ever that matters for bigness.  It seemed that with the Sun Valley thing Coach was wandering off into what mountains do you like or want to ski.

marznc wrote

 
How does Killington compare to Stowe?  To Smuggs?
 

IMO if you toss in the easy access to the Notch, $towe and Smugs blow it away. Like not even close.

I've always liked Killington a lot.  No other place in the east has that much terrain and it really can take a week to fully explore everything.  That being said, many of the runs are quite short considering the size of the mountain.

I've been to both Stowe and Smuggs.  The gondola and Four Runner Quad at Stowe are both over 2000 vertical.  The steepest terrain is off Four Runner, but ends in a long runout.  The gondola terrain is all intermediate (except Chin Clip), but has constant pitch all the way to the bottom.  Then you have Spruce Peak which has a HSQ on the lower portion and the upper portion.  The lower one has some good but short blue groomers with constant pitch all the way down.  My personal favorite is the Upper Spruce HSQ.  Sterling is one of the best groomers that I've skied in the east, and Smuggler's and Main Street are good challenging trails pretty much all the way down.  It is also often the least crowded of the good lifts.

Smuggs has two lifts that are worth skiing for experts.  Sterling and Madonna 1.  The steepest terrain on the mountain is off Madonna, but ends in a long runout.  Sterling is shorter and not as steep, but the pitch is pretty much constant all the way down.  Since both lifts are 50 year old Hall doubles, the trails are never crowded.

I liked Stowe a lot the one time I went there, but I don't think I'll be going back now that Vail owns it and will make it even more expensive than it already was unless you have the Epic Pass.

The weekend I was at Smuggs was not particularly good when it came to weather.  Still, I liked the terrain and would be open to skiing there again.  Not sure when I'll get back because I already spent over 300 dollars on the Max Pass add on and won't be skiing at resorts that aren't on it.

As to which one skis bigger, it's kind of hard to say.  I'd say that Stowe skis bigger than Smuggs because all 3 mountains at Stowe have good terrain for experts.  The lower mountain at Smuggs is a bunch of boring greens and lower blues and the lifts are very slow and stop a lot.  The Madonna and Sterling lifts are pretty fast.  Still, I think Killington skis bigger than both of them.

campgottagopee wrote

marznc wrote

 
How does Killington compare to Stowe?  To Smuggs?
 

IMO if you toss in the easy access to the Notch, $towe and Smugs blow it away. Like not even close.

There is no connection between Stowe and Smuggs because you have to buy two tickets which will set you back over 200 dollars to ski on both sides.  I'm not sure why you keep promoting something that's non existent.  Pico has an off map connection to Killington and you can ski on both sides with one ticket.

snoloco wrote

campgottagopee wrote

marznc wrote

 
How does Killington compare to Stowe?  To Smuggs?
 

IMO if you toss in the easy access to the Notch, $towe and Smugs blow it away. Like not even close.

There is no connection between Stowe and Smuggs because you have to buy two tickets which will set you back over 200 dollars to ski on both sides.  I'm not sure why you keep promoting something that's non existent.  Pico has an off map connection to Killington and you can ski on both sides with one ticket.

I'm thinking you misunderstood me lil Tonto

What I'm saying is both Smuggs and $stowe have easy access to the Notch, some of the best skiing in VT. So if you chose to ski Smuggs OR $towe you can go crazy there.

You can ski in between both places, and yes you have to buy lift tickets for each place. Unless you go outlaw

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that snow ridge skis small. But boy do they get some POW!

louie.mirags wrote

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that snow ridge skis small. But boy do they get some POW!

MAJOR POW!!!!

They measure in feet up there. Amazing.

I think how a mountain skis (small or big) is a relative measure.  Like measuring a boxer pound for pound.

I'll go out on a limb and say Snow Ridge skis big.  I've skied there bell-to-bell without being bored, and the place has 400 (?) vert.

Agreed I was just joking around.  Leaving there I've had way more sore legs than any other "big" mountain.  Granted that was 2 years in a row with 2ft+ of POW in november.  

Harvey wrote

I guess if there are no trees in play ever that matters for bigness.  It seemed that with the Sun Valley thing Coach was wandering off into what mountains do you like or want to ski.

Snow also factors into how big especially out west as the more fresh snow the more the trees and bowls are in play

Case in point I skied Le 3 Valle in France alledgely the biggest ski area in the world but the off piste was not in play due to lack of snow so it skied much smaller than it was.

I don't think expansive skis big, it's the terrain and snowfall to match that terrain matters for me The Stowe/Smuggs combo with sidecountry skis a whole lot bigger than killington imo.

Killington while vast and expansive skis like a bunch of small mountains side by side and are over stuffed with poorly created trails and traverses. It skis like a mess, not big.

Lots of snow let's you ski big. Remember that marketing phrase "big mountain skiing". You aren't skiing big on all manmade groomers.

raisingarizona wrote

I don't think expansive skis big, it's the terrain and snowfall to match that terrain matters for me The Stowe/Smuggs combo with sidecountry skis a whole lot bigger than killington imo.

Killington while vast and expansive skis like a bunch of small mountains side by side and are over stuffed with poorly created trails and traverses. It skis like a mess, not big.

Lots of snow let's you ski big. Remember that marketing phrase "big mountain skiing". You aren't skiing big on all manmade groomers.

Is there a ski resort that you think skis big that does not have any side country or hike-to in-bounds terrain?  Not really thinking about destination resorts like Aspen or JH.  Can you think of any ski areas under 500 acres that ski big, as opposed to ski small?

Agree that sheer acreage is not necessarily a key factor.  In WV, Snowshoe is far larger in terms of acreage than the other three ski areas in WV.  But Timberline definitely skis bigger.

when the bowl is open and the connections are open and there is good snow in the trees Gore and all the available back and side country terrain is absolutely huge with just a little hiking involved.

marznc wrote

raisingarizona wrote

I don't think expansive skis big, it's the terrain and snowfall to match that terrain matters for me The Stowe/Smuggs combo with sidecountry skis a whole lot bigger than killington imo.

Killington while vast and expansive skis like a bunch of small mountains side by side and are over stuffed with poorly created trails and traverses. It skis like a mess, not big.

Lots of snow let's you ski big. Remember that marketing phrase "big mountain skiing". You aren't skiing big on all manmade groomers.

Is there a ski resort that you think skis big that does not have any side country or hike-to in-bounds terrain?  Not really thinking about destination resorts like Aspen or JH.  Can you think of any ski areas under 500 acres that ski big, as opposed to ski small?

Agree that sheer acreage is not necessarily a key factor.  In WV, Snowshoe is far larger in terms of acreage than the other three ski areas in WV.  But Timberline definitely skis bigger.

MRG for sure. Plattekill skis a lot bigger than the numbers suggest. Snowking in Jackson skis pretty big for it's total acreage. I've always heard people say that Berkshire East skis a lot bigger than it is. In contrast you could look at the numbers and trail map of a place like Wolf Creek and think it's big skiing but it doesn't ski big at all. It's a nice place but most of the hill is really flat.

If you have 1000 to 1500 feet of vert and a consistent pitch of 28 degrees or more with lots of open terrain options mixed with islands of skiable trees and trees in between the runs I would say that's pretty darn good skiing, add in enough natural snowfall and that's awesome.

Bridger Bowl I would think skis a lot bigger than Vail or most of the Summit areas but that's just my opinion. You can have 3000 acres of green and easy blues but I wouldn't call that big skiing. It's nice expansive family skiing but that's about it.

The Bowl at Mount Ashland in Oregon is a good example of big skiing in a small package.

Not my photo.