 Poster: A snowHead
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
bhmandminx in a 2 week trip you should get to Mammoth as well as the Tahoe area, we drove from SF to Tahoe for a few days, then down to Mammoth for second part of the trip then back up to SF via the bottom of the Sierra Nevada range so that we could visit Yosemite which is stunning.
An good alternative alternative would be SF/Tahoe/Mammoth then Vegas or LA for a couple of nights and fly back from one of those
I've been to plenty of cities across the pond and SF is a favourite, would recommend a visit there if you havent been, also plenty of other threads on here about the skiing around Tahoe if you do a search
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
I'm not going to pitch one over the other. Both are good choices, with different flavor.
I know the Tahoe area quite well (used to live in SF). No, you don't need to keep moving bases. One week north and one week south would be perfect, assuming you're "sampling" the resorts.
Heavenly in the south would be a no brainer. Easy access to slope and to food/entertainment in the village. For the north, it's a bit tricky...
Assuming also, you're competent skier, Squaw is a good base and you can go to Alpine from there. But if you also want to sample Northstar and Mt. Rose, you'd be better off staying at Tahoe City/Incline. Neither of those bases are particularly lively.
The suggestion of Mommoth is also very tempting. I've never skied there. But the terrain, glimps at summer, look very interesting. Though personally, I would find that too much moving about for a mere 2 weeks. Your preference may be different...
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
Tahoe doesn't really have a resort associated with it (according to Mr Snowy) like Whistler does so they're 2 completely different types of ski experience.
Whistler is a town with a wide range of apres and free transport around town, meaning you won't need a car while you're there whereas I think most people jump in their cars after skiing in Tahoe and head home (i.e. a bit dead in the evening).
But then if you like the quiet life, perhaps Tahoe is the place to go...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
Tahoe is hardly "quiet", especially Heavenly. There're nightly shows and music in the casinos. Just not pub kind of places. Also abundant places to eat, from dirt cheap to super expensive. I bet you can do Tahoe cheaper than Whistler, the low value of US dollar notwithstanding. (BTW, the Canadian dollar is not particularly cheap)
Whistler is a bit more like Europe. Tahoe is very typical N.American. Depends on your taste, really.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
More interested in the skiing.
As long as there's good food and several beers available, we're happy.
abc, yes we were thinking of doing 1 week south, 1 week North.
Roger C, I doubt I'd get Bhm away from slopes for any more than a day or 2. He'd quite happily board all 14 days. "What would we want to go there for when there's snow here" will be his response.
Any more opinions greatfully received.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For me that would be a bit of a no brainer. Skied quite a bit in Tahoe, but only because I was working in the bay area and could drive there at the weekend (note that the ski areas (they are not really resorts) are spread over quite a large area and are in themselves relatively small). Skied quite a lot more at Whistler. I would not personally make the effort to go all the way to Tahoe for a skiing holiday.
I did not really like Heavenly that much when I skied there, I liked the 'town(s)' attached to it with it's cheesy casinos and row of motels far less. Squaw and Kirkwood were pretty good but limited compared to Whistler.
Getting to Tahoe isn't really that bad once you get to San Fran, its a pretty straightforward drive and good roads for either the north or south lake. Getting to Whistler is more complex as you have to get through downtown vancouver and the roads are a bit trickier (than to N. Tahoe at least) but takes less time. Best option is to get the coach then you don't have to worry about it.
Slight downside with your dates (guess you can't really change them!) is that if you are not careful you will be there during Presidents weekend - Whistler gets annoyingly busy at this time - not sure about Tahoe but I'd presume it will be the same. If you go to Whistler and can have the 9th Feb towards the end that may be better - I find that's about the best time to be in Whistler anyway as the snow is good (usually - never can tell!) and it is a bit quieter.
abc, hasn't the Cdn$ overtaken the US$ 
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
Right, so one week south and one week north. In the north, there's simply no good solutions. Stay at Squaw, you're in Squaw & Alpine. Stay at Tahoe City, you need to drive EVERYDAY.
One possible option (for the north) is to use the "transfer day(s)" to sample Mt. Rose and Northstar (if you want to ski those) for a day each. Then stay put at Squaw the rest of the week. Especially if you're fling into Reno, you can ski Mt Rose or Northstar on either first or last day, enroute to your destination south/north. Or the day you transfer from south to north.
Though if you're thinking of choosing the resort based on condition of the day, you would have to stay at a more central location, which would be Tahoe City/Incline. And drive each day.
Regarding the flight/drive, either SF or Reno would do, depending if you want a tour of SF for a day (and how comfortable you're with driving in snow, if need be). Sacramento has no advantage. The drive from SF is easy and fast in good weather. You won't notice when it's over. But in bad weather, that 3 hour drive can turn into a hellish 5-6 hour crawl. Only in that case, the same drive from Sacramento is an equally hellish 5 hour crawl also! Because it's just like SF, located on the WRONG side of the mountain pass from Tahoe.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Last season answer would be a no brainer - Whistler. Miracle March 2006, Tahoe would have been the place to be (something like 20+ straight powder days). I suspect Tahoe is the cheaper option, Whistler the better "all-in" option. Feb is Canuck school hols as weel IIRC (teacher's convention or whatever its called as well as Pres week) so not a great time for Whistler crowds wise.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
| Quote: |
abc, hasn't the Cdn$ overtaken the US$
|
Any day now!
Good warning about Presidents Day. But it isn't until the weekend following the 9th (16/2/09). So as long as you're transfering OUT on that weekend, you'll miss the crowd.
Tahoe will be even worse than Whistler on that weekend. So if you can't avoid that, don't go to Tahoe. It's quite a mob scene.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
Fortunately my "special" birthday is 1st Feb. Phewwww. Should be gone by Presidents Day.
Hmmm still not sure.
Minx.
Last edited by And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports. on Fri 21-09-07 17:46; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, you could research the skiable areas. Whistler has over 8000 skiiable inbounds acres. If it's the skiing and terrain you're after, including off-piste, chutes, steeps etc. it's Whistler. If you're not bothered about going off the groomers then Tahoe is prettier.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
Whistler is more of a destination resort. If you join up with Ski Esprit you will get some excellent skiing in.
SLT was OK as a base but I like cheesy and cheap motels. Casinos were also interesting for a night or two - people watching, rather than gambling. You can ring the changes with Sierra, Kirkwood and Squaw. A car is not necessary once you are there. You can get buses from SLT to the other resorts. One way rental cuts the cost of car hire.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
| veeeight wrote: |
| Well, you could research the skiable areas. Whistler has over 8000 skiiable inbounds acres. If it's the skiing and terrain you're after, including off-piste, chutes, steeps etc. it's Whistler. If you're not bothered about going off the groomers then Tahoe is prettier. |
To be fair Tahoe also has some great stuff just not really at Heavenly or Flatstar & more tourable backcountry than you can shake a whole forest of sticks at. But at Whistler its definitely on a plate for you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
If you dont mind driving to the different mountains then Tahoe every time We stayed near Tahoe City and the longest we drove was to Kirkwood ( 80 min drive ) weather will probably be more consistant and the lift lines ( see onther post , http://snowheads.com/ski-forum/viewtopic.php?t=29259&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=80 ) are non existant in Tahoe. We went Feb, Presidents Weekend and the only problem was if you hadnt booked your table in the restaurants. we generally had fresh powder most days in two weeks with blue skies all except 1. And very little queuing on the mountain
Whistler is a good resort but having been twice wouldnt rush to go back where as Tahoe will be back on the list again sometime. Each mountain gives so much variety and I disagree with veeeight, as we found plenty of steeps, off piste, chutes etc to keep us more than entertained.
It all depends on what type of holiday you want.
Fly to Reno and have a 40 min drive to the area - North of the Lake - but make sure you have a 4x4 , cos if its snowing you can have problems.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
Personally if I had my time again, definitely Whistler but with a 3-4 day stop in Vancouver. If you go to SLT or wherever around there, you've got to have a car but then you do get to go to a couple of resorts and an hour or so each way. Apart from the Casinos SLT is quiet with a capital F though. I really liked Kirkwood and Alpine Meadows and my friends whinged me in to trying snowboarding at Squaw but it looked good (as I effed and jeffed on the beginner slopes).
If it's just the two of you and you fancy a bit more of an adventure/want to see more than one ski resort, spend a w/e in SF and treat the journey as a road trip. If you just want to ski, go to Whistler.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
What can you do in Vancouver for 3-4 days, 666? Most of the tours e.g. whale watching, don't run over the winter we found, so apart from a look downtown, a trip up the lookout tower and a look round Stanley Park, what else is there to do?
You might mention Grouse Mountain, but then if you've just returning from Whistler or on your way there, it seems a bit rubbish attempting to ski there since it's rather rainy in Vancouver at the best of times.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
bhmandminx, this site is a bit old, but some friends of mine did a huge trip in 2000/1 all over those areas, and documented the whole thing with films and reviews, you might find it handy for getting a feel of the places?
http://www.3riders.com/
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| Quote: |
Whistler - straight forward, maybe a 1 or 2 night stay in Vancouver as it's a city I've always wanted to see. Any Hotel recommendations or area or do's/dont's.
The only thing that puts us off Tahoe is it's a bit of a pain to fly/get to.
We can go Manchester to San Francisco, long drive, 1 plane change. Manchester to Sacramento, 2 hour drive, 1 plane change. Manchester to Reno, 1 hour drive, 2 plane changes ( possibility of a Delta flight Man/Atlanta/Reno)
Is it worth the hassle? Where would you stay or would you stay in a few places. We were thinking of staying in Heavenly, Squaw Valley and Incline. Is it necessary or is it easy enough to get around from one base. Anyone done any of the above.
|
We have done both Tahoe and Whistler a few times . What is said above is pretty fair overall, subject no doubt to individuals own preferences.
You have every chance of good snow at both.You will almost certainly get better weather at Tahoe. At Whistler you do not need a car. At Tahoe you might be able to survive without one (just) but you will get on better with one. Whistler has everything at the bottom of the lifts ie the bars/restaurants/hotels. Tahoe generally does not so it is pretty much you drive there, ski, drive away again. There are some places with some bars etc at the base (Squaw for example) but it is not "apres ski nightlife" as you would know from Europe.
We stopped off for a couple of days in Vancouver last Jan en route to Whistler. Very nice city. Loads of good restaurants, downtown is walkable. Get an hotel in the central downtown area and you should be ok .....check on tripadvisor.com. But it rains a lot in Vancouver so be warned. We hit it on 2 sunny days and it was glorious but on the way back it was raining and it didnt look so good !
For Whistler you have an array of hotels or you can book an apartment. We use alluradirect.com which books with the owner.
The drive from SF to North Lake Tahoe, so long as it is ok weather and you avoid rush hour is not a problem. You drive past Sacramento on the way there so if you can get a convenient flight, that is an option. Personally I would go via SF and add on a few days in SF since it is a special trip for you and SF is a "must see" city in my book. Going into Reno is also an option, you can see the Mount Rose ski area from the airport and it is probably 45 mins max to the North of the Lake on the Mount Rose highway in good weather (as said you may want to go for a 4wd)
We have always stayed in Incline when there....because we like it and as we travelled with kids, the casinos of South Lake Tahoe were of no great interest. There are some very nice places to stay and it is an easy drive (in good weather) to a lot of the North lake ski areas. Getting to South Lake Tahoe was no great problem (that said I didnt take to Heavenly and we only went once).
Personally I wouldnt stay at Squaw and Incline since they are not that far apart and I am not sure why you would want/need to move from one to the other. Pick one of them would be my view.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'd agree with most opinions above. Both Tahoe and Whistler have a maritime climate, so a far higher risk of rain and/or wet snow than the high altitude, "continental climate" resorts of Utah or Colorado. I can attest that Tahoe does have plenty of challenging off-piste, chutes and steeps (primarily at Kirkwood and Squaw). The "Palisades" at Squaw are often seen as the spiritual home of American "extreme skiing". Heavenly is more about high-mileage groomers, although it has some long steep bump runs, beloved by Glen Plake!
Advantages of Whistler: compact resort, no car required, similar amount of terrain to Tahoe - but all within one ski area.
Advantages of Tahoe: the casinos of South Lake Tahoe (if you're into that kind of thing) and a somewhat lower chance of rain.
Can't comment on San Fran, because I've never been, but Vancouver certainly is a stunning city. Reno is like a smaller Las Vegas, with big casinos but without quite the same over-the-top architecture. It's nothing special - I think you'd be better off doing the longer transfer and spending some time in SF.
Tahoe may be somewhat quieter mid-week, but probably as busy as Whistler at weekends.
Prices may be fairly similar, now that the "Loonie" and the "greenback" have reached near parity.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The only thing that I'd add is that Whislter is more "Alpine" in character (I mean the terrain rather than the architecture!). At the top of the mountain you ski big open bowls that are somewhat reminiscent of some of the bowls on the Gd Montets (not as dramatic surroundings though!). Below the bowls you have long pistes through the trees. The ski areas around Tahoe tend to have lots of short chutes rather than grand open bowls. Of course Whistler has chutes too - in fact, its probably one of the most complete resorts in the world in terms of variety of terrain.
You'll not go wrong with either
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
rob and sharon, Thanks for that. Good info.
Might be swaying toward Whistler !!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
brian
brian
Guest
|
|
I've not skied at either but I've been to Vancouver and SF. Both are great cities, SF is possibly more interesting but also a bit more touristy. It will also be considerably warmer to wander around in Feb than Vancouver would be.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
bhmandminx, PM us and we'll give you some more info if we can
Rob
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
