SHR vs JMT Mileage Q

If you've been searching for the best source of information and stimulating discussion related to Spring/Summer/Fall backpacking, hiking and camping in the Sierra Nevada...look no further!
User avatar
Matthewkphx
Topix Regular
Posts: 132
Joined: Sat May 14, 2016 6:14 pm
Experience: Level 3 Backpacker

Re: SHR vs JMT Mileage Q

Post by Matthewkphx »

Good points. Bringing the .gpx files and having them turned off gives me options I won’t have if I don’t load them on my phone.
User avatar
commonloon
Topix Regular
Posts: 325
Joined: Wed Aug 07, 2013 3:32 pm
Experience: Level 4 Explorer

Re: SHR vs JMT Mileage Q

Post by commonloon »

YMMV but for me there really isn't a big difference between JMT and SHR mileage. What affects mileage more is: stops (to check navigation), bushwacking or traveling thru trees (e.g. the SHR section between Evolution Lake and the approach to Snow Tongue Pass is s-l-o-w going) and elevation change (just like the JMT). Some sections, e.g., the Bear Lakes area, are just damn nice in comparison to a narrow sometimes crowded trail, and movement is quick. In general you will obviously have more of those 3 things than on the JMT.

I'd also recommend having GPS. I rarely take out my GPS. Compass, altitude and map and simply following the terrain are usually plenty.

Mileage to various places marked down on your map while on the SHR can be very helpful. You can camp nearly anywhere, but better to camp just above that pretty lake in the trees rather than in a talus field below a pass. The mileage helps with making decision to stop or keep going... just my 2 cents.
User avatar
Wandering Daisy
Topix Docent
Posts: 6641
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2010 8:19 pm
Experience: N/A
Location: Fair Oaks CA (Sacramento area)
Contact:

Re: SHR vs JMT Mileage Q

Post by Wandering Daisy »

To be clear, I am not against using a GPS. I am concerned about a specific GPS tracks, because that will eventually lead to a use-trail along the route and it will cease to be an off-trail route. GPS tracks can lead unqualified backpackers into terrain that exceed their ability, such as knowing the safety factors and judgement needed to safely travel through loose talus fields and steep passes.

There are a lot of "six of one, half dozen the other" choices along the SHR. A lot of variations work. And Roper specifically designed his route to be fluid and flexible, not written in stone. I feel that following a GPS track is the anthesis of his intent. Nevertheless, using that track to get yourself out of a pickle is certainly a good idea for those with little or no off-trail experience.
User avatar
longri
Topix Fanatic
Posts: 1082
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2012 9:13 am
Experience: N/A

Re: SHR vs JMT Mileage Q

Post by longri »

commonloon wrote:YMMV but for me there really isn't a big difference between JMT and SHR mileage.
Well you're an outlier. Even Skurka wrote that he couldn't match his trail mileage.
User avatar
longri
Topix Fanatic
Posts: 1082
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2012 9:13 am
Experience: N/A

Re: SHR vs JMT Mileage Q

Post by longri »

Matthewkphx wrote:Good points. Bringing the .gpx files and having them turned off gives me options I won’t have if I don’t load them on my phone.
If you the Skurka maps and a phone you'll be fine. If you get confused your GPS will put you on the map and that's all you really need. You don't need to micro-navigate on the SHR.
User avatar
commonloon
Topix Regular
Posts: 325
Joined: Wed Aug 07, 2013 3:32 pm
Experience: Level 4 Explorer

Re: SHR vs JMT Mileage Q

Post by commonloon »

longri wrote:
commonloon wrote:YMMV but for me there really isn't a big difference between JMT and SHR mileage.
Well you're an outlier. Even Skurka wrote that he couldn't match his trail mileage.
Agreed, my hiking habits are a little out there :D

The point I was trying to make ineffectively, I guess, was that the on-trail vs off-trail speed/distance reduction is a pretty gross generalization. The actual speed depends more on conditions (snow and type of snow, stream flows, temperature, rain, etc.) and terrain (bushwacking, talus, steepness, gain(!), loss, ease of navigation, etc.), and often I at least find myself cruising like I would be a on trail. I've also found, for example, going down an icy Glenn Pass on the JMT early season to be horribly slow because conditions dictated it. IMHO it is more important to think off trail miles with some flexibility, have choices at least thought of where you might camp, so you can adjust on the fly based on the days speed. Also, that some sections of the SHR are easier (miles wise) than others.
User avatar
Wandering Daisy
Topix Docent
Posts: 6641
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2010 8:19 pm
Experience: N/A
Location: Fair Oaks CA (Sacramento area)
Contact:

Re: SHR vs JMT Mileage Q

Post by Wandering Daisy »

I do not agree that hiking speed depends more on conditions than terrain. Because of general lack of exposure, mostly steady footing, and little if any micro-route finding; "conditions" less impact trail travel than off-trail travel. Hopping talus, in good conditions, takes some care and skill and is slower than walking on a trail; add snow on top of the talus, and the impact is much more than on a trail. In a storm you may be able to quickly get over a high pass. I once was stuck on Colby Pass just as a big lightning storm hit. I could quickly get down out of the danger zone. Were I going down Feather Pass towards Bear Lakes, "hurrying" down is just not a safe option.

With practice and experience the gap between speed on trails vs off-trail does get less; but is not entirely eliminated. But off-trail novices will experience a huge gap in trail speed vs off-trail speed. This post is a question by someone who is an off-trail novice.

What has not been mentioned is the mental fatigue that you get from all day travel off-trail, particularly if worried about your ability to do a difficult pass ahead of you. Even though I am very at-home on off-trail terrain, the anxiety level is always a bit higher off-trail. And although most of us would not admit that it reduces the anxiety, when on a trail, it is more likely that if in trouble, someone will come along. I have been off-trail, not seeing anyone in a week, stormed into a holding patter in a location (with local grizzly bears) and no easy way out. :eek: Lucky I was not hurt and had plenty of food. I could not keep out of my head, that a few years prior, at a nearby pass rarely used, a fellow rolled a boulder and pinned his legs. It took him over a week to die and he wrote in his journal as he was dying.

Granted, there is some easy off-trail terrain in the Sierra that you can fly through as fast as on a trail, but that is NOT the norm. I think if you read all of Rogue's posts, he would agree that off-trail travel is slower, given the same conditions.
User avatar
longri
Topix Fanatic
Posts: 1082
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2012 9:13 am
Experience: N/A

Re: SHR vs JMT Mileage Q

Post by longri »

I don't agree that it is a gross generalization. I think that it mostly holds true that trails are easier to walk on than cross country terrain.

And in the specific case you referred to I think that it is clearly true, for just about everybody. Look at the existing FKTs: 3.5 days for the JMT and 4.7 days for the SHR. That works out to an SHR speed that is 74% the JMT speed, just slightly outside of the 50-70% range that Skurka estimated.

But you could be different for various reasons. What are your personal fastest times on the JMT and SHR?
User avatar
Wandering Daisy
Topix Docent
Posts: 6641
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2010 8:19 pm
Experience: N/A
Location: Fair Oaks CA (Sacramento area)
Contact:

Re: SHR vs JMT Mileage Q

Post by Wandering Daisy »

Longri not sure if that question is for me or commonloon.

It is not just "speed" but how far you go in a day. Off trail simply is harder (uses more energy, both physical and mental) than trail. Two years ago exiting from the Meet-Up I went 21 miles (3000 feet gain - a lot of smaller ups and downs) on a well-maintained trail in 11 hours. I have NEVER done 21 miles off-trail, even easy off-trail! I do not think the SHR has ANY 20-miles stretch of easy off-trail. You do 33 passes! My fast days on the SHR, were when it actually follows the JMT, I recall one 15 mile day.

I never have just hiked until I reached a certain mileage. My decision to camp is based on a good campsite and scenery for photography or fishing. My 11-day stretch on the middle part of the SHR, averaged 4 miles a day! That is because I did a LOT of fishing. I did the entire SHR (plus two days of side trips not on the route) in 32 days. That is pretty slow. I flip-flopped (one north-to-south and two south-to-north) simply for transport logistics.
User avatar
commonloon
Topix Regular
Posts: 325
Joined: Wed Aug 07, 2013 3:32 pm
Experience: Level 4 Explorer

Re: SHR vs JMT Mileage Q

Post by commonloon »

longri wrote:I don't agree that it is a gross generalization. I think that it mostly holds true that trails are easier to walk on than cross country terrain.

And in the specific case you referred to I think that it is clearly true, for just about everybody. Look at the existing FKTs: 3.5 days for the JMT and 4.7 days for the SHR. That works out to an SHR speed that is 74% the JMT speed, just slightly outside of the 50-70% range that Skurka estimated.

But you could be different for various reasons. What are your personal fastest times on the JMT and SHR?
The FKT comparison is good logic, particularly if you think about the SHR as partially on-trail....

PRs? :-k
Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: moonburn and 151 guests