 Poster: A snowHead
|
My wife and I(each in our early 60s) have done most of our skiing in the US but with a decline in trips to the US for business reasons we are starting to explore Europe more. We are each intermediate /advanced and are considering either St Anton or Zermatt for January 2015. My wife has a preference for broader runs with some at least through trees. Could anyone on the forum give us information to compare Zermatt with St Anton or suggest anpother esort where these criteria might be met in some part at least.
Many thanks in anticipation
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
I've never been to St ANton, but Zermatt is fantastic in almost every respect (apart from the paying bit).
Enjoy yourself, while your still in the pink- go to both.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
|
Pistes in st Anton not great. This is a resort best for the off piste experience. If you like to stay on piste I wouldn't bother. But I'm sure it's gotta be an arm and leg cheaper than Zermatt. I have not been to Zermatt but it sounds great if money not an issue, and you don't mind taking a long time to get up the mountain in the morning
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
I've been to Zermatt twice and St Anton once and loved them both. Can't remember a lot of tree runs at either. As far as broader runs are concerned both have quite a few, especially if you go over to Cervinia from Zermatt.
Zermatt has got very pricey due mainly to the strength of the Swiss Franc. If you stay in the right place there you can actually get up the mountain very quickly, I don't know anywhere else you can be at 4000m by 9 (via Matterhorn Express which starts at 8.30).
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
I have skied Zermatt in the shoulder season (end of Nov) and would say, when you factor in Cervinia, Zermatt offers far more wide cruising options. For piste skiers I would not recommend St A-pistes are narrower and (admittedly based on on week's experience) more crowded. I just thought the on piste skiing there was hard to enjoy. With an Arlberg pass you can get the bus to Lech for more cruisey stuff and I think overall there are more trees in St A, simply because there is more skiing below the tree line (usually around 1800m).
In January the other thing to bear in mind is that, as the skiing and lifts in Zermatt go so high, you are more prone to high winds and lift closures when the weather comes in.
Zermatt is expensive...but beautiful....and definitely a place to ski at least once in your life....you can see the way I'm thinking...
If you want somewhere else to tick the boxes of cruisey skiing with trees, but lots of challenging stuff, it's hard to beat the 3V. Maybe Courchevel 1650 (or 1850 if you can stand the fur coat and bling contingency from Russia). They don't have as much architectural alpine charm off the hill, but there is something for everyone..
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
What Perty says, almost exactly. 3V brilliant for this - stay in Meribel so you can access all 3V easily, ski in Courchevel.
I actually like St Anton a great deal, but for the apres ski and off piste. Pistes are narrow, often pretty flat, crowded (very) and actually dangerous at the end of the day as everyone skis en masse, out of control, to the Krazy Kangaruh and Mooservirt bars. OH, a far better skier than me, but prefers piste/moguls, and hates St Anton. That said, Lech & Zurs (just up the valley) would definitely be a better bet for you.
Zermatt is lovely, but will be pricey. For on-piste, definitely better than St Anton. But I would seriously consider France as well.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Harry Flashman wrote: |
| everyone skis en masse, out of control, to the Krazy Kangaruh and Mooservirt bars. |
ahh what fun!
St Anton is less fun for just piste skiing than say 3V or even Solden or Saalbach. Off piste is meant to be excellent is St A but sadly there wasn't enough snow last year and we were mainly stuck on piste. TBH I preferred the apres in Solden. If I were you I'd take the plunge and go Zermatt. You only live once as they say.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks very much everyone - I will consult with my wife and let you know what we decide. will have a look at Lech and Zurs. Doesn't llok lke St Anton
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
|
Crystal ski are doing 2 for 1 ski pass atm for lots of resorts including Zermatt. Might be worth a look.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Having skied both a lot, you'll have a great time in either place. In my view the two top resorts in Europe, and in the top 5 worldwide.
St Anton is definitely better value for money, and has just as good skiing as Zermatt.
St Anton is for skiers. It has great off piste, fantastic high mountain powder, and great tree runs off Nasserein, Rendl, Schongraben. You also get Lech and Zurs as well as Sonnekopf and Zug.
The apres isn't that over the top. We're usually in bed by 10:30 and if you stay in St jakob, or outside the centre of town it's really nice, quiet and relaxing. Also better value.
The locals's saying is that you take your wife to Lech, your mistress to Zurs and your Skis to St Anton. That is hard on Lech and Zurs, which are really nice,
but just don't have the steepness of St Anton generally. It gets pretty good snow - never had a problem in 8 years skiing there every year.
Zermatt is a great place. Particularly fantastic skiing off the Stockhorn and the Rote Nas. The apres is definitely more genteel than
St Anton (although they won't agree in Sneewitchen), and there are some fabulous restaurants (my favourite is Chez Vrony at the end of the day). The only problem is the price
it is becoming ridiculously expensive. Even the italian side is expensive.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
|
Thanks for that considered and very helpful response. My wife loved the quote!
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
|
I'm pretty sure you'd both love Lech. Good range of pistes, excellent hotels, classy village with some nice mellow bars for après. Easy to get to Zurs (you can ski there) where there are some steeped pistes. Zurs itself isn't much more than a group of 4/5 star hotels. In January it's in the shade most of the day while Lech is mostly sunny. Only negative for Lech is that there's not a lot of tree runs. Zell am See has good broad tree runs and the village is nice, but being a bit lower is not as snow sure. The big plus for Zell if the snow is poor is that your lift pass includes the glacier skiing at Kaprun, about half an hour away on the ski bus.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lech and Zurs is a great option - the wife and I had one of our most memorable long ski weekends there - arrived late driving from Munich airport in a snow storm woke the next day to 4 feet of snow on the roof of our car and still snowing - barely stopped all weekend and the road out of the valley was closed but luckily we didn't care because we were too busy skiing in knee deep powder. Not sure i could comment too much on the pistes because with that much snow we could hardly tell whether we were on them or not. Milder level of of apres ski than ST A for sure but still great fun!
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
| Valkyrie wrote: |
| In January it's [Zurs] in the shade most of the day while Lech is mostly sunny. |
Hmmm.... not strictly true. Even in January, the Hexaboden side of Zurs is in sun for most of the day. Trittkopf gets it later in the morning, but finishes the day in the sun. Agree with you about the Seekopf side.
You will not really find the tree-lined pistes in the Arlberg, as you do in parts of the USA. Don't know why. Maybe the treeline is higher in the USA or the snowline lower? Certainly nothing in the Arlberg compares to, say, Breck:
http://www.breckenridge.com/~/media/breckenridge/files/maps/breckenridge-trail-map-20112012.ashx
The relatively few tree lined runs tend to be heavily used runs back to the villages, eg Nasserein (24/25), R1 on Rendl, and Zammermoos-St Anton (1). St Christoph and Zurs are entirely above the tree line.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
