-
Women skiers, this is the place for you -- an online community without the male-orientation you'll find in conventional ski magazines and internet ski forums. At TheSkiDiva.com, you can connect with other women to talk about skiing in a way that you can relate to, about things that you find of interest. Be sure to join our community to participate (women only, please!). Registration is fast and simple. Just be sure to add [email protected] to your address book so your registration activation emails won't be routed as spam. And please give careful consideration to your user name -- it will not be changed once your registration is confirmed.
Hike or bike?
- Thread starter ski diva
- Start date
ScottishGirlie
Ski Diva Extraordinaire
I love both activities.
But if it was a choice, especially if the hike takes me up a scenic mountain, I would go for the hike.
But if it was a choice, especially if the hike takes me up a scenic mountain, I would go for the hike.
Purely personal.
In terms of exertion, I'd prefer to bike 50 miles which is less tiring than a 10 mile hike. I also enjoy biking to no place special.
I don't enjoy walking 10 miles unless it's to some place I can't get to by bike. There're plenty of those in the northeast so I hike when I can't bike, though ONLY if I can't bike it.
But if it's a 10 mile hike to the top of Bond Cliff vs 50 miles bike in southern Jersey, I'd take the hike any day.
In terms of exertion, I'd prefer to bike 50 miles which is less tiring than a 10 mile hike. I also enjoy biking to no place special.
I don't enjoy walking 10 miles unless it's to some place I can't get to by bike. There're plenty of those in the northeast so I hike when I can't bike, though ONLY if I can't bike it.
But if it's a 10 mile hike to the top of Bond Cliff vs 50 miles bike in southern Jersey, I'd take the hike any day.
Pandita
Ski Diva Extraordinaire
Probably the 10 mile hike especially i it was going up in the mountains, versus a 50 mile bike ride. I like having a destination to get to or a summit to climb, most of my bike rides are loop rides and do not have a sepcific destination except mileage (sometimes I do though), whereas with a hike, there is a specific hike, and even though it is round trip, there is usually midpoint and some great views.
If it was 100 miles I would do the 100 miles over the hike though
If it was 100 miles I would do the 100 miles over the hike though
NZfarmgirl
Ski Diva Extraordinaire
I'm not bike fit at the moment so I'll say the walk- although I'd have to convert that into kilometres to really make an informed choice. And I'd say tramp not hike as I'm from NZ.
50 mile bike. Though as much as I love mountain biking, a 50 mile ride could be quite a challenge if it was on a rough, technical trail - I'd still take it over that much hiking. 50 mile road ride wouldn't be bad at all, even if it was through mountains. 10 miles of hiking would be a guarantee of bleeding, blistered feet for me, so that doesn't sound fun.
litterbug
Ski Diva Extraordinaire
The boots make all the difference. I've blistered enough heels and balls of my feet and blackened enough toenails to know how to choose a just-stiff-enough boot with a big enough toe box to keep my feet happy. I love to ride roads, including decent dirt roads, but on anything that requires concentration I don't get to see much of what I'm passing or explore off trail the way I like to. I know I could go further and faster into the backcountry on a mountain bike but I'd feel like I missed too much. Hiking feels more spacious to me.
Maybe it's about age? Mountain bikes were very new in Canyonlands in the mid-80s. I was a 20 something park ranger then and developed a bit of an attitude about mountain bikers making tracks through pristine cryptobiotic soils that would be visible for 30 years just to avoid sand they weren't willing to slog through or because they couldn't handle steep, rocky and narrow foot trails.
I know the sport is different now and I respect those who enjoy it. I even had fun with a gang on a mud-season White Rim trip once, but it's just not my thang.
I've never found anything that doesn't blister my heels if I walk far enough. And we're talking 10 years of wearing boots in the military, ski boots if I go touring, XC ski boots, hiking boots, whatever. I have oddly shaped heels (pointy almost - out to the rear and then they curve back in a lot for my achilles) and everything bothers them. So basically, if I can't do it barefoot, the next best thing is bike shoes because that doesn't cause irritation.
I know what you're saying about enjoying the scenery, but to me it's all about how biking (particularly something technical) puts me in the moment like nothing else - I can (and do) stop and check out the scenery on a regular basis though. Hiking, I tend to daydream and think about everything other than what I'm doing the whole time.
litterbug
Ski Diva Extraordinaire
Tis true that biking can be better for those with troublesome feet or some kinds of bad knees. It took me forever to find a brand with a last that accommodate my narrow heels and broad forefoot with a toe box that protects the wrecked joints in my left big toe. Good thing you found sports that leave your poor tootsies alone!
I wish I could buy cleats now. I have nothing stiff enough (besides hiking boots) to make me happy on flat pedals and my feet wander around too much. Once I'm sure I've got the $$ for a new apartment I think pedals and shoes will be one of my first purchases. McCool at SL Bicycle said he'd set me up as soon as I had them. :D
I wish I could buy cleats now. I have nothing stiff enough (besides hiking boots) to make me happy on flat pedals and my feet wander around too much. Once I'm sure I've got the $$ for a new apartment I think pedals and shoes will be one of my first purchases. McCool at SL Bicycle said he'd set me up as soon as I had them. :D
Have you tried Five Ten biking shoes? The Karver is the women's version (and are actually designed for a narrower heel/wider forefoot). They are stiff and there is no chance of your feet shifting with that sticky rubber sole. I only use flat pedals for mountain biking and save the clipless for road riding or my singlespeed.
litterbug
Ski Diva Extraordinaire
I didn't know Five-Ten sold biking shoes. I'll check them out, but I've got a no-discretionary-spending rule in place for at least the next few weeks.
I was considering pedals with clips (or whatever you call the things that you click the cleats into) on one side and flat on the other because I'll spend most of my time on roads, and a lot of that around town doing errands. What do you think about them?
I was considering pedals with clips (or whatever you call the things that you click the cleats into) on one side and flat on the other because I'll spend most of my time on roads, and a lot of that around town doing errands. What do you think about them?
That's "clipless", believe it or not. "Clips" are toe-clips, aka pedal cages with a little strap to tighten down (or what I like to think of as "death traps"). So they call the system with cleats "clipless", since there are no "toe clips" even though that's the pedal system that you actually click into... Go figure.
Regarding double sided pedals (meaning the half flat/half clipless hybrid thing), I could see that for running errands, but definitely wouldn't use those on a trail. You don't want to have to try to find the right side of the pedal while trail riding.
Back on topic - thinking about it, if I'm out road riding for 50 miles - that to me tends to be totally enjoy the scenery type of activity. A little different if I have traffic to contend with or am maxed out climbing a mountain, but, for example when I'm road riding in Moab - like along Potash road, it's all immersion in the scenery.
