Mountains arranged by vertical ascent?

[billski]

Have you ever seen a list of New England mountains arranged by vertical ascent? I'm looking for hikes that are around the 1200' vertical mark, then progressing higher and higher. I'm really not interested in AMC book times, I can back into "difficulty" that way if I wanted to.

I am looking for a fairly comprehensive list, from about 1200 feet and higher, not just the 4000-footers, 3000 footers, or those "with a view"

Thanks,

Bill

 

[Tom Rankin]

Have you ever seen a list of New England mountains arranged by vertical ascent? I'm looking for hikes that are around the 1200' vertical mark, then progressing higher and higher. I'm really not interested in AMC book times, I can back into "difficulty" that way if I wanted to.

I am looking for a fairly comprehensive list, from about 1200 feet and higher, not just the 4000-footers, 3000 footers, or those "with a view"

Thanks,

Bill

Some peaks would need multiple listings if they have more than one trail. Also, are you concerned with elevation loss/gain to go from e.g. North Twin -> South Twin? FWIW, I don't think any of the NEHH would rank around 1200', unless you counted peak to peak.

I've never seen such a list, but I would be glad to help provide a few data points.

 

[bikehikeskifish]

Stratton is ~1750'
Pico is ~1900'

I think these are probably the two with the least minimum elevation gain.

Tim

 

[billski]

yes

Some peaks would need multiple listings if they have more than one trail. Also, are you concerned with elevation loss/gain to go from e.g. North Twin -> South Twin? FWIW, I don't think any of the NEHH would rank around 1200', unless you counted peak to peak.

I've never seen such a list, but I would be glad to help provide a few data points.

I just want absolute vertical, not by trail. Some hills have so many different trails (even excluding trail ups and down) that it's not worth compiling that. I'm going to take vertical as the first filter, then select a trail , gather it's length and make some qualitative decisions about pitch etc.. In general, I'm looking for a minimum of vertical to cover that day. The ups and downs are just icing.

Nothing scientific here.

 

[RoySwkr]

In a discussion in another group it was generally agreed that elevation gain was a property of a route not a summit, they couldn't even agree if minimum elevation gain was a property of a summit as then you had to determine if a route "counted" for that summit

And it sounds like you only want routes to summits, not huts or ponds or other points of interest?

I don't know of any such ranking but I think that many of the "50 Hikes" books have elevation gain listings for the hikes in the book and you could make a list of appealing hikes pretty quickly by glancing at a few - once you get to the 4k there are plenty of websites to help

Stratton is ~1750'
Pico is ~1900'

I think these are probably the two with the least minimum elevation gain.

Among the NEHH there are several with less, such as Abraham VT and Redington ME, since the request was not limited to any list there are plenty of smaller peaks with gains down to 100' or 0'

 

[billski]

I really don't care about precision. Tony for one can debate that the of "lift served" elevation is not the true summit. I'm not going to quibble about a few hundred feet. I'll take the USGS elevation for the summit.

As far as the lower limit, As long as the trailheads aren't way off (impact to the total vertical is +- 20-ish percent I'm happy. For those trails that start mid mountain, I'll drop it.

Thanks for the sources. I'm going to use some trailhead els for the first pass at this. There are way too many trails to try and categorize. I'll go with a rough start and refine it from here.

Kinda funny that some of the presi's have almost as much vertical as some of the 3000 footers!

BTW, I'm looking for a weekend hike of approx 2000 vertical feet.

 

[Raven]

I'm looking for hikes that are around the 1200' vertical mark, then progressing higher and higher.

These might work:

Mount Kearsage, NH, Wilmot Trail (1100'...a little low)
Mount Major, NH, Trail (1180')
Rumford Whitecap, ME (1200')
Mount Cardigan, NH, West Ridge Trail (1220')
Mount Potash, NH, Mount Potash Trail (1400')
Cadillac Mountain, ME, North Ridge Trail (1450')
East Royce, ME, East Royce Trail (1700')
Pleasant Mountain, ME, Bald Peak and Fire Wardens Trail, (1700')

Source: 100 Classic Hikes of the Northeast (Gange, 2000) happened to be sitting on my desk while reading the tread...

 

[Tom Rankin]

Kinda funny that some of the presi's have almost as much vertical as some of the 3000 footers!

'Little' Moriah has well over 3000' of ele and it's near the bottom of the 4K heap.

And don't forget to add PUDS into your totals, twice!

 

[surf88]

Have you ever seen a list of New England mountains arranged by vertical ascent? I'm looking for hikes that are around the 1200' vertical mark, then progressing higher and higher. I'm really not interested in AMC book times, I can back into "difficulty" that way if I wanted to.

I am looking for a fairly comprehensive list, from about 1200 feet and higher, not just the 4000-footers, 3000 footers, or those "with a view"

Thanks,

Bill

If your looking for vertical ascent, I think prominence (relative height) lists would be the most help. Heres alist of the top 100 in NH. Your range of around 1200' is in this list:
NH 100 most prominence

 

[wisher]

Consider if it's a sub-peak

Mount Adams has the most elevation gain of any 48 in NH, but it's nowhere on the prominence list because it only has a few hundred feet, due to Washington (which is of course on the list). So there may be more than one for every entry on that list. Mount Marcy in NY has the Haystacks, but they only have a few hundred feet of prominence due to Marcy. Just saying it's something to consider, but probably most people already realized that.

I think Ragged Mountain is around that much elevation gain by the main trail. It's not a bad ascent by there usually (so long as it's not too wet), some nice views. Crotched is as well; some of the trails have a good pitch but good fun.