MoapaPk wrote:Whoa, we are now adding descent to gain?

Imho since we almost always get back to the starting point, adding the descent is nonsense. mentioning the descended amount is only worth if the destination is different than the start.

visentin wrote:

MoapaPk wrote:Whoa, we are now adding descent to gain?

Imho since we almost always get back to the starting point, adding the descent is nonsense. mentioning the descended amount is only worth if the destination is different than the start.

I only mentioned mine as RT, because I saw others mention it as well. You guys are right though; a bit redundant. The title of the post is "altitude gain."

Diego Sahagún wrote:

WouterB wrote:

Diego Sahagún wrote:For me:

Gain = SUM of all slopes in ascent

Total descended = SUM of all slopes in descent

I would agree with that if it wasn't so hard to measure

Take an altimeter or GPS with you

I use a Garmin 60CSx GPS, and I don't know why but they usually overestimate elevation gain. What I usually do is take the recorded gain and subtract 1,000-2,000 ft. to get a more accurate estimate, which can be confirmed via TOPO maping software.

MoapaPk wrote:

Buz Groshong wrote:I prefer net gain, but then net gain is high point minus low point not finish minus start. Total gain is for type A freaks.

Do you try ridge traverses or multi-summit days? It's good to estimate accumulated gain beforehand, so you won't get pooped out and surprised on the way. and will pace properly. I went over 2 DPS peaks last Sunday; Palmer and Grapevine. By the net method, that would be 2000'. The true accumulated gain is about 6500'. Each summit requires multiple ups and downs.

For this hike, the net is about 1300'. The accumulated is over 7000'.

ha, I was planning to do Palmer (from the Death Valley side) this past Sunday -7,000 ft. of gain. But was too tired after the 15 hour canyon I did on Saturday.

phydeux wrote:The most I can remember doing in a single day with a full backpack was the Mt. Whitney trail (California, Sierra Nevada Mtns), from the 8500 ft trailhead to the 14500 ft Mt. Whitney summit where we spent the night.

I think the best way to approach training is just by going out there and start doing elevation gains, and increasing the amount every week. I noticed about myself, is that I can go forever downhill with very little food or water, but start having considerable difficulty going uphill if I don't eat enough. Regular snacking is important to maintain energy levels which is tricky because at high altitude I tend to lose my appetite and go through long periods of deprivation as a result. While a lot of it is training, the majority of it is psychological and the ability to push yourself (wanting to go harder and farther), as the body is capable of much more than we think. What I've done in the past is use a 50 lbs. weighted vest (can be adjusted to lesser weight) to go uphill when training. I think running also has its benefits for improving speed/endurance.

Also, by "most amount of elevation gain in a day"....do you mean most amount of gain, overall, with no pressure to return to starting point? Because if you cut out the time it takes to return to starting point (trailhead), you could just do continuous elevation gain for 20+ hours and accumulate tons of gain that way, but that does not accurately represent real life wilderness circumstances. Another estimate would be most amount of elevation gain, and back to starting point in a day. There is more pressure here (because you can't simply focus on accumulating elevation gain alone). The measure is also limited, because there is only 24 hours in the day, and you are spending a good 1/3 of your time just returning to the starting point (time that could be spend acquiring more gain). Based on this criteria, the most gain I have managed to do is 14,000 ft. of gain (as an extended dayhike linking up two remote peaks (car to car), walking/non running) but it went over the 24 hour mark by 3 hours, so it was still a continuous 27 hour push. Muscle fatigue had set in and I had not eaten enough.

Daria wrote:

Diego Sahagún wrote:

WouterB wrote:

Diego Sahagún wrote:For me:

Gain = SUM of all slopes in ascent

Total descended = SUM of all slopes in descent

I would agree with that if it wasn't so hard to measure

Take an altimeter or GPS with you

I use a Garmin 60CSx GPS, and I don't know why but they usually overestimate elevation gain. What I usually do is take the recorded gain and subtract 1,000-2,000 ft. to get a more accurate estimate, which can be confirmed via TOPO maping software.

Good posts, Darija. (Don't let that go to your head! ).

The 60csx does overestimate gain whenever you go through canyons or any terrain with poor satellite reception-- even reflections off walls. I also check the track against a mapping program -- however the program uses a coarse digital elevation model, and misses the small ups-and-downs. The elevation gain program on the 60csx must run a filter over the spectrum to cut out spikes from random variation; it does this with varied success. Since the elevation gain is available only on units with barometric altimeters, I assume the gain is calculated from the barometer; if you get a poor calibration when you start out, or a weather system passes through, all bets are off.

I climbed all 400 steps to the top of Moro Rock this past Sunday.


It was epic.

MooseTracks wrote:I climbed all 400 steps to the top of Moro Rock this past Sunday.
It was epic.

I did that 3 times with my nephews in June 2001! They were little kids, but they did kiddie track and field, and they got bored because their parents were taking so long. At one point, a woman whom we'd passed (3 times up and 3 times down) grabbed my sleeve and said, "please stop making fun of us."

9miles roundtrip
1010 altitude gain (says watch, map says 975 but a bit of downhill sections so might be correct)
2.30 hours (exact) car-to-car

training for welsh 3000s

lost ten minutes when some fat people got lost in the fog ...

sjarelkwint wrote:lost ten minutes when some fat people got lost in the fog ...

Very insensitive. You mean GCPs, gravitationally-challenged people.

Fatties in a fog, is that like Gorillas in the Mist?

lol
Ok those people were just panicking and i had to get them back on track
they had taken the train up to hike down with a huge fog i don't think it's the best idea if you don't know where you are heading for so yes i was frustrated ...

We climbed from 1900m to 4000m in one day (2100m upwards gain) with full packs (enough gear for 2 weeks and 4 days food) in PNG climbing the Mt Wilhelm Traverse. The best part about this was we started in hot/humid jungle and arrived at camp on icy rocks.

The following day we summited (4510m) and descended back down to 2000m, which is 3000m total gain/loss.

The camp at 4000m was ok (no one was sick) but nearing the summit and half way down my head was pretty sore.

I guess these numbers aren’t as impressive as some on this thread but the fact that we did it hauling huge packs while summiting a 4500m peak brought us to our limits..........

Why is this complicated? "Maximum amount of altitude gain" means how many feet you went up in a day.....it could be in a straight shot, or over multiple hills or mountains (or up stairs), you just count each foot you go up, whatever else you do (go down, eat lunch, listen to your ipod),...is immaterial.