hi all
anybody been to copper mountain?
looking for slopeside accomodation (which appears to be easy to do here) we are intermediate skiers and the piste map looks good for us.......interested on anyones thoughts!
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?
It was the late 90's - the skiing (which won't have changed) will suit your requirements to a tee - however the village (which may have developed) was basically one big building with lodging and facilities for weekend skiers. You might wish to consider the town of Frisco - which has all the facilities and cheaper accommodation and when I was there a free bus service to the slopes (and to Breck, A Basin and Keystone)
however the village (which may have developed) was basically one big building with lodging and facilities for weekend skiers.
That information is outdated!
In the past 10-15 years, Copper had build a sprawling village around the base. You wouldn't recognise the place now.
Personally, I found Copper a very pleasent place to ski. But I can't speak for the OP. I "like the blacks".
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
I am no Copper expert and have never stayed in the base village. There's skiing for all abilities and the layout kind of segregates different abilities. The easiest terrain is mostly on the far left (skiers left) and becomes more difficult as you move to skiers right. There's much more in the base village these days but it is a purpose built village. Probably a good choice for slopeside accommodations. I'm personally not big on purpose built resort villages, but they are convenient. Frisco is 5-6 miles away on a major highway. Frisco and Copper kind of have a partnership and the buses between Frisco and Copper are pretty convenient. Frisco is an old mining town and Main Street is lined with Victorian buildings. It would be pretty easy to stay slopeside and then venture into Frisco a few evenings. And it would be pretty convenient to stay in Frisco (especially if on the Summit Stage (bus) line to Copper) and ski at Copper. I find downtown Frisco a mini Breckenridge. I've stayed in Frisco and have really enjoyed it. Breck is 15 miles or so from Copper, Keystone probably around 20, and Vail is somewhere around 25 miles to the West. Keep in mind the base at Copper is 9500+ feet above sea level.
Great resort good piste and off-piste, nice condos to rent. Snow sure and has good places to eat. Tree skiing in the enchanted forest, challenging steeps at very top and bowl skiing. One disadvantage already mentioned it's height, 9200 getting to sleep and a propensity for hms, but the locals are used to treating this if you are unfortunate. Copper is country to Vail's "City" about 30 minutes down the road which you must visit together with skiings Paton Place, Beaver Creek so take a car and go for two weeks.
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
thanks for the replies, we are not really into the 'steep stuff' prefer easy cruising blues and greens and a resort you can ski back to, we seem to be struggling to find anywhere in the USA that fits this description!!........ and of course there is a concearn about going all that way and suffering from altitude sickness? we may end up going back to canada ......
After all it is free
After all it is free
cbowls30, Go to Vail fit you exactly, hms not problematic there. American snow makes Canadian feel like European crud is so light and dry anyone with a slightly wider ski can try and be a powder expert there, you will not regret it. Lots of cruising blues and all end in Vail Centre which is modelled on Austrian lines. Vail's secret saying "People only spend money if they are enjoying themselves" they make sure you will. I know Vail very well and have taken friends there with your very outlook most are hooked being a single mountain resort you just go up and down.
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.
cbowls30, aspen , buttermilk, best "easy" mountain in the world
Ski the Net with snowHeads
Ski the Net with snowHeads
cbowls30, You might also take a look at Steamboat which has lots of blue cruisers and is around 6800 feet at the base. And my wife and I really like the Park City area, though I think it's probably tougher for folks from across the pond to get to. Three pretty large ski areas which could be linked but don't share a ticket. All have lots of intermediate friendly terrain and it's a real nice town.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
thanks for all the advice, looks like steamboat is the place! - just trying to work out now best places to stay, sheraton looks a bit pricey!!!.....
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.
You've still flown in to mile mile High City Denver if hms is your worry.
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
Steamboat is a great mtn.
If you like blue runs... Big Sky is also an alternative...
You know it makes sense.
You know it makes sense.
Cynic wrote:
You've still flown in to mile mile High City Denver if hms is your worry.
Denver is only 6000', never heard of anyone having trouble at that altitude!
makomakoman wrote:
If you like blue runs... Big Sky is also an alternative...
Talk about hard to get to!!! Lodging is not cheap either. But yes, the skiing is brilliant... even more "black" than Copper!
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
abc, my wife ski instructor got hms in Les Menuires.
Poster: A snowHead
Poster: A snowHead
Cynic wrote:
abc, my wife ski instructor got hms in Les Menuires.
If that's the case, where the heck can you find (ok, "real") ski resort below 6000'?
(sure, Whistler is, but that requiremet is seriously limited number!)
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
abc, Sleeping height is the problem in hms, we went to Whistler for American powder low height sleeping, pi##ed with rain for 10 days shut everything, never went back. HMS not continous she had it in Copper first then French high resorts, took a week off from teaching one year and rested up and we worked in Vail she was OK and it has not returned. It strikes even WC racers who were born in the mountains, an occupational hazard, I think in most cases of lower height hms brought on by chest infections and tiredness.
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?
Cynic wrote:
I think in most cases of lower height hms brought on by chest infections and tiredness.
That would make more sense.
In practical terms, if you consider Big Sky and Denver as "high", there really not that many resorts you can sleep in! Majority of none-snow-sure "low" resorts have starting height of around 6000'! Below that, you'll be water skiing in the rain in Febuary!!!
FAQ
Poster: A snowHead
we may end up going back to canada ......
