I got some response to this question on the Touring forum, and nothing so far on the Road Forum, but
I bet the dedicated folks of the Long Distance forum will have opinions.

I've never ridden in the Cascades, but I've read a few descriptions of climbing Washington and Rainy Passes and I'd like to know how they compare with climbs in Vermont and MA, in particular Mt. Wachusetts,
Andover, Middlebury and Mt. Terrible. Looking at the elevation profiles the WA passes seem to be long, but of reasonable gradients around the 5% range. Has anyone ridden both sets of climbs so they can make direct comparisons.

i've only ridden NW passes, but for the most part they are in the 5% range; stevens pass (> 1000 m) is 6% for 5 miles one direction, and 7% for 6 miles (i believe) going the other way. but also there's about 20 miles of 4-5% climbing to get to that point.

cayuse pass (~1,500 m), near mount rainier, was harder, more like 8% for 8 miles, but then again that's just what i heard, i don't have a gps gizmo. but it seemed harder than the other local ones i've done (blewett, stevens, snoqualmie, white)

from what i can see on google maps (http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&geocode=&q=mt+Wachusetts,+Massachusetts,+United+States&ie=UTF8&ll=42.49172,-71.880155&spn=0.020727,0.031714&t=p&z=15&iwloc=A), wachusett mtn seems to top out at about 1,400 feet; so it seems a bit smaller than the passes around here.

hope this helps!

i've only ridden NW passes, but for the most part they are in the 5% range; stevens pass (> 1000 m) is 6% for 5 miles one direction, and 7% for 6 miles (i believe) going the other way. but also there's about 20 miles of 4-5% climbing to get to that point.

cayuse pass (~1,500 m), near mount rainier, was harder, more like 8% for 8 miles, but then again that's just what i heard, i don't have a gps gizmo. but it seemed harder than the other local ones i've done (blewett, stevens, snoqualmie, white)

from what i can see on google maps (http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&geocode=&q=mt+Wachusetts,+Massachusetts,+United+States&ie=UTF8&ll=42.49172,-71.880155&spn=0.020727,0.031714&t=p&z=15&iwloc=A), wachusett mtn seems to top out at about 1,400 feet; so it seems a bit smaller than the passes around here.

hope this helps!

Yes the climbs in the NE tend to be shorter than in the NW, but I've often heard people say that they find the eastern climbs tougher. You can't find the big altitude gains in the East that you do in the NW, but the hills might be a bit steeper. I have a few VT hill climbs as my metric and I wondered how they'd stack up against the climbs on the Cascades bit of the Northern Tier.

Yes the climbs in the NE tend to be shorter than in the NW, but I've often heard people say that they find the eastern climbs tougher. You can't find the big altitude gains in the East that you do in the NW, but the hills might be a bit steeper. I have a few VT hill climbs as my metric and I wondered how they'd stack up against the climbs on the Cascades bit of the Northern Tier.

true, shorter climbs are often steeper; one such local climb is cougar "mountain," 2.5 miles & 1,400 feet of elevation gain. more intense (steeper) than a mountain pass around here, but shorter too.

hill-wise, i think you'd find riding out here comparable to east coast inclines - in seattle for instance, there's a two-block section at 22%! and many, many more local streets easily at about 10% grade. and of course east of seattle, the cascade foothills offer many decent climbs.

but then again, i haven't done any real riding on the east coast, so i can't really compare. i just like to throw out climbing numbers! =]

I got some response to this question on the Touring forum, and nothing so far on the Road Forum, but
I bet the dedicated folks of the Long Distance forum will have opinions.

I've never ridden in the Cascades, but I've read a few descriptions of climbing Washington and Rainy Passes and I'd like to know how they compare with climbs in Vermont and MA, in particular Mt. Wachusetts,
Andover, Middlebury and Mt. Terrible. Looking at the elevation profiles the WA passes seem to be long, but of reasonable gradients around the 5% range. Has anyone ridden both sets of climbs so they can make direct comparisons.

nun, send me a pm with your email address. A couple of New England Randonneurs (NERDs), Chip Coldwell and Jake Kassen completed the Cascade 1200 (and also posted their ride reports to Randon) and they are also both veterans of the Boston Brevet Series and Boston-Montreal-Boston (though Jake rode the Quad Centuries rather than 1200k route, the Quad Centuries route still includes the Middlebury Gap and Mt. Pisgah) I can pass on your email to them and let them give you their impressions. The general thing I've heard from Jake is as you say -- that Washington state climbs aren't as steep as what we're used to in New England, but they are plenty long.

nun, send me a pm with your email address. A couple of New England Randonneurs (NERDs), Chip Coldwell and Jake Kassen completed the Cascade 1200 (and also posted their ride reports to Randon) and they are also both veterans of the Boston Brevet Series and Boston-Montreal-Boston (though Jake rode the Quad Centuries rather than 1200k route, the Quad Centuries route still includes the Middlebury Gap and Mt. Pisgah) I can pass on your email to them and let them give you their impressions. The general thing I've heard from Jake is as you say -- that Washington state climbs aren't as steep as what we're used to in New England, but they are plenty long.

jake seemed to feel that no part of the cascade 1200 was more difficult than the boston 600, and that BMB was the toughest 1200 he's done. do a search on the randon list - its a good read.

a 600-1200k over (steep) rolling hills might indeed be harder than a mountain-brevet, in general; but that could be the case even just in Washington..

sure, a short/steep climb might feel harder, but in the long run that's just < 5 mins of effort, compared to 1+ hour for a big climb.

i'm surprised to hear that riders felt the C1200 wasn't as hard as the BMB! although i haven't ridden either, just parts of the C1200.

for me, i think mountains seem harder mentally, due to their sheer size!

jake seemed to feel that no part of the cascade 1200 was more difficult than the boston 600, and that BMB was the toughest 1200 he's done. do a search on the randon list - its a good read.

bmike, just wanted to say thanks for the route recommendations through VT. I rode Rt100 recently and had a blast. I did 50 miles a day and it made me appreciate the challenge of a BMB and the accomplishment of those that do it

bmike, just wanted to say thanks for the route recommendations through VT. I rode Rt100 recently and had a blast. I did 50 miles a day and it made me appreciate the challenge of a BMB and the accomplishment of those that do it

great! i'm hoping to ride a long stretch of rt. 100 this sunday - from ludlow where i'll be visiting friends - back home to burlington. about 100 miles depending on how i cross the greens.

i've also nearing my self directed and supported oneway300k (http://cyclinginseattle.blogspot.com/2008/07/beyond-ramrod-september-600k-brevet.html) through the adirondacks... similar / different than riding in vermont... should be fun.

glad you enjoyed the ride. also glad that you liked the route - i am always a bit scared giving out route advice - what i consider fun and beautiful might not be what someone else does!

a 600-1200k over (steep) rolling hills might indeed be harder than a mountain-brevet, in general; but that could be the case even just in Washington..

sure, a short/steep climb might feel harder, but in the long run that's just < 5 mins of effort, compared to 1+ hour for a big climb.

i'm surprised to hear that riders felt the C1200 wasn't as hard as the BMB! although i haven't ridden either, just parts of the C1200.

for me, i think mountains seem harder mentally, due to their sheer size!


i don't know - i think i'd like knowing that i have several major passes to do (with the accompanying decents) rather than countless, hundreds of shorter, steep climbs. most of the BMB route is either up or down - there is very little that is flat or even at a moderate grade.

if i have a long climb up a pass @ 5% - mentally and physically i think i deal with that better than getting hammered by moderate to hard climb after climb, even if they are short. i've commented that the brevet organizer for boston only picks roads that go up. the 600k had 18k of climbing.


as per climbing in the east - mt. terrible is supposedly the worst on BMB - but you also have middlebury in both directions. middlebury is a sustained climb of 6-8 miles (depending on where you consider it to start) and it peaks out @ 18%. its been awhile since i've ridden it - but it runs above 10% for a long time.


a great resource for climbs and climbers (with a focus on the northeast) is northeast cycling (http://www.northeastcycling.com/). the author has done well at mt. washington - and has an extensive website for local climbs. there are also routes, training tips... and ride reports. one of the great rides he has listed is the 6 gaps of vermont - something i hope to do this year or next. (a previous attempt was abandoned due to absurd rain and cold temps)

mattm, don't underestimate the mountains of Vermont! We're not talking 5 minute climbs, we're talking (e.g., Middlebury the hard way, going south) 9.5 miles, 1700 feet, average grade of 3.4 percent, but some very steep pitches that I found hard to ride up in a 22x34 gear (at mile 517 of BMB in 2006). The mountains out west are certainly challenging, but overall I'd say the mountains in Vermont are tougher on the legs.

Just for reference, I've shown below a little table that I put together with some of the toughest climbs that I've ridden (except Wintergreen, which I haven't had the pleasure of trying, yet). As you'll see, the climbing in the DC region (Gappity Gap and the Miscellaneous climbs) is no slouch, either. Gappity Gap is the toughest 200K I've ever ridden; the 3 climbs shown are just the hardest out of ten, with a total of 10,000 feet of climbing on the ten gaps (passes), at an average 3.8 percent grade; total climbing for the brevet is 12,400 feet. By comparison, the SIR Four Passes 600K has a total of 15,200 feet of climbing on the major climbs, at an average 2.2 percent grade; total climbing for the brevet is 21,500 feet. Perhaps the most straightforward comparison is feet of climbing per hundred miles, 9800 for Gappity Gap and 5700 for Four Passes (and 6700 for BMB, 5700 for PBP).

miles feet grade Climb

Four Passes 600K
13.8 2990' 4.1% Stevens Pass
21.1 3060' 2.7% Blewett Pass
7.5 1429' 3.6% White Pass Climb from Rimrock
15.8 3140' 3.8% Cayuse Pass

BMB
10.0 1200' 2.3% Andover (northbound)
6.0 1240' 3.9% Middlebury (northbound)
9.5 1700' 3.4% Middlebury (southbound)
4.5 1200' 5.1% Terrible (southbound)

Gappity Gap
4.9 1390' 5.4% Thornton (eastbound)
3.3 1110' 6.4% Edith (eastbound)
3.3 1180' 6.8% Wolf (eastbound)

Miscellaneous
7.1 1330' 3.5% Big Flat
20.0 2800' 2.7% Skyline Drive
5.2 1773' 6.4% Wintergreen
1.1 738' 13.1% Wintergreen hardest part

I got some response to this question on the Touring forum, and nothing so far on the Road Forum, but
I bet the dedicated folks of the Long Distance forum will have opinions.

I've never ridden in the Cascades, but I've read a few descriptions of climbing Washington and Rainy Passes and I'd like to know how they compare with climbs in Vermont and MA, in particular Mt. Wachusetts,
Andover, Middlebury and Mt. Terrible. Looking at the elevation profiles the WA passes seem to be long, but of reasonable gradients around the 5% range. Has anyone ridden both sets of climbs so they can make direct comparisons.

I think you're right on most of the passes. If you want stats, go to bicycleclimbs.com and choose "mountains of washington" as the region to find a fair number of climbs.

The steeper climbs tend to be shorter. The Seattle rando club runs a "Mountain" populaire that's 110K with about 5K of climbing, and the steeper climbs on that peak in the 15-18% range. I think that's a harder ride than riding the passes.

bulls/bmike, i definitely see what you're saying. WA climbs might not feel as tough as east-coast inclines, i'll give you that since i haven't ridden out there.

but all i know is that the last 8 miles (at ~8%) of cayuse pass on that 600k (nick you were there a few hours ahead of me!) was one of the hardest things i've ever done, including the local steep climb of Cougar Mountain (http://bicycleclimbs.com/climbdetail.aspx?ClimbId=6) (avg 8.8%, max 20%), part of the 100k populaire eric mentioned.

but then again maybe cayuse seemed so hard because of the 280 miles & ~27 hours of riding to get there, on a semi-loaded bike, that made it feel next-to-impossible.

bulls/bmike, i definitely see what you're saying. WA climbs might not feel as tough as east-coast inclines, i'll give you that since i haven't ridden out there.

but all i know is that the last 8 miles (at ~8%) of cayuse pass on that 600k (nick you were there a few hours ahead of me!) was one of the hardest things i've ever done, including the local steep climb of Cougar Mountain (http://bicycleclimbs.com/climbdetail.aspx?ClimbId=6) (avg 8.8%, max 20%), part of the 100k populaire eric mentioned.

but then again maybe cayuse seemed so hard because of the 280 miles & ~27 hours of riding to get there, on a semi-loaded bike, that made it feel next-to-impossible. A speaker turned up to 10 isn't as loud as a speaker turned up to 11, but the speaker that's turned up to 10 is still plenty loud.

I think that most randonneurs can reasonably take pride in their accomplishments, as subjective as those accomplishments may be sometimes. Some folks find long, steady mountain ascents easier than a constant string of short, steep rollers. Others prefer it the other way around. Some find persistent headwinds more demoralizing than isolated night riding. In the end, there's relatively limited utility in going by another person's judgement for how tough or how easy a certain course may be. It's better to look at the basic characteristics of the route and decide for yourself how well you handle that sort of terrain, and when you look back on your accomplishments, that you understand how much of a challenge it was for you and you alone.

i've ridden the Rockies in Canada and the US and while I found some of the climbs extraordinary I've encountered stiffer climbs in PA, NY, VT, NH and MA. The Rockies are similar to the Kancamangus Highway in NH but sometimes longer. I find the Kancamangus challenging but not brutal as far as the overall grade, which ever direction I do it in.
There are some gaps in VT and even some climbs here in the Berkshires that are crushing despite their shorter length.

I think the toughest climb I've ever done was on the way home from a back to back cross country trip where I'd done the Canadian Rockies on the way out and the US Rockies in Washington and Idaho on the way back- but the hardest climb was somewhere in PA. An incredible incline and for an amazing distance. I normally prided myself on not stopping until I summitted. On this climb I had to stop, regroup and determined not to actually walk the thing stood for a minute to look up at what I had to climb and I began to slide down the hill on my cleats and had to hold the bike in place with the brakes till I could get back on and ride up it weaving back and forth.

i've ridden the Rockies in Canada and the US and while I found some of the climbs extraordinary I've encountered stiffer climbs in PA, NY, VT, NH and MA. The Rockies are similar to the Kancamangus Highway in NH but sometimes longer. I find the Kancamangus challenging but not brutal as far as the overall grade, which ever direction I do it in.
There are some gaps in VT and even some climbs here in the Berkshires that are crushing despite their shorter length.

I think the toughest climb I've ever done was on the way home from a back to back cross country trip where I'd done the Canadian Rockies on the way out and the US Rockies in Washington and Idaho on the way back- but the hardest climb was somewhere in PA. An incredible incline and for an amazing distance. I normally prided myself on not stopping until I summitted. On this climb I had to stop, regroup and determined not to actually walk the thing stood for a minute to look up at what I had to climb and I began to slide down the hill on my cleats and had to hold the bike in place with the brakes till I could get back on and ride up it weaving back and forth.

beckett! i was just down near washington ma. got out on my fixed gear for a short ride. i was teaching a workshop down there...

beckett! i was just down near washington ma. got out on my fixed gear for a short ride. i was teaching a workshop down there...

a workshop? In washington MA? Was it in Timber Framing?

OP here, just a bit off topic, but I'm interested in the level of response to my question on the 3 forums I posted it; Touring, Long Distance and Road. The Long Distance forum has by far the most responses, then Touring and finally Road Cycling with one very informative and useful answer. This makes me wonder if tourers and randonneurs are most of the cyclists that go over mountains. It may have something to do with location too as most cyclists don't live near big climbs and it's only the committed tourers and long distance types that get to ride them.