Whitney MT -vs- Baldy via Bear flat

titanhangman · Post by **titanhangman** » Mon Oct 26, 2009 1:44 pm

Hi everybody,
I just completed the Bear Flat trail to the summit of Baldy this past Saturday 10-24-09. I'm much more beat up than I was the day after doing Whitney on August 29th.

In trying to get ready for Whitney this summer (first time for the original 8 guys in our group), we did Baldy twice, San Jacinto, and San Gorgonio. The last time we did Baldy, just 3 weeks before Whitney, we did the Icehouse and 3 T's route, and up the Backbone. Then we made a bonehead move and took the wrong route down, which ultimately put us on the Bear Flat trail, and quite a distance from our car. Doh!

On that day I was stunned at how steep the trail was, and made a note that I was going to come back and try to summit via Bear Flat after Whitney. Well, I had no takers on my offer, so I went at it alone this past weekend. Having the Whitney trip still fresh in my mind, I have to say that if you took away the added altitude of Whitney, as well as the extra distance, the Bear flat trail was more difficult. I could have gone hiking the day after doing the 22 miles at Whitney, but I've been soaking my feet for the last two days after Baldy.

Does anyone have any thoughts/comparisons between the two, or am I just all wet?

RichardK · Post by **RichardK** » Mon Oct 26, 2009 2:15 pm

It is all about the steepness of the grade. Both gain around 6000 feet plus or minus. On Whitney, it's spread over 11 miles. On Baldy, it's only like 5 miles. It's a 10% grade versus a 20% grade. I can walk all day and all night on the flat and feel good about it. But a really steep grade whips me quick. That's the difference.

EnFuego · Post by **EnFuego** » Mon Oct 26, 2009 2:18 pm

RichardK wrote:It is all about the steepness of the grade. Both gain around 6000 feet plus or minus. On Whitney, it's spread over 11 miles. On Baldy, it's only like 5 miles. It's a 10% grade versus a 20% grade. I can walk all day and all night on the flat and feel good about it. But a really steep grade whips me quick. That's the difference.

What he said. Steepness accounts for everything (minus the elevation if you're acclimated).

titanhangman · Post by **titanhangman** » Mon Oct 26, 2009 2:46 pm

I just wonder if anyone who has done both felt similarly. The altitude at Whitney nearly did me in, but I found the actual hike to be fairly tame.

Ze Hiker · Post by **Ze Hiker** » Mon Oct 26, 2009 2:51 pm

titanhangman wrote:I just wonder if anyone who has done both felt similarly. The altitude at Whitney nearly did me in, but I found the actual hike to be fairly tame.

yes I totally agree.

the whole "training for Whitney" thing people go by is frankly a joke. the only "training" you need to go "train" your body by acclimating for a few days, that will do more than anything else.

Bear Flats is a great tough hike. Iron Mt is harder (and steeper) but not as enjoyable.

I might go as far as saying it's bad to train for Whitney. when you are fit then you feel like going faster than your body can acclimate to avoid sickness. If someone is sensitive to altitude (which isn't affected by conditioning) then they have to go slow (1000 ft per hr lets say).

titanhangman · Post by **titanhangman** » Mon Oct 26, 2009 2:56 pm

Thanks. I'm still getting fit, and, believe me, I am in no danger of gaining altitude too fast.

Training for Whitney- for me- meant hiking a lot at altitude. Still getting in shape, actually.