gender bender
Active member
7000 from bottom of valley ttt.. totally doable!!
7000 foot chutes for nxt yr!!!!
- Thread starter gender bender
- Start date
7000 from bottom of valley ttt.. totally doable!!
mxz sledhead
Active VIP Member
maybe for you but not me the first thing comes to mind is what if!!!!
treemongrol
Active VIP Member
Have fun with that
SLAYERMIKE
Active VIP Member
looks like atleast 3 good lines up that! whats the bottom look like!
- Thread starter
- #5
gender bender
Active member
park rest area...lol
Al "ley Cat"
Active VIP Member
[/IMG]
7000 from bottom of valley ttt.. totally doable!!
You better be pressing gas+NOS instead of your groan !!
SLAYERMIKE
Active VIP Member
terrain trap + 200 hundred people watching = a good time!!!
hypnotoad
Active VIP Member
isn't that still inside the park anyways, so it would fall under a no ride zone
mountainbigbull
Active VIP Member
So turbo hill is 1050 feet vertical from the starting point to summit. Actual distance covered in the climb of turbo is 2700 feet. Averaging a 67° climb.
I would be interested in the location of this mountain.
I would be interested in the location of this mountain.
steveo10
Active VIP Member
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2008
- Messages
- 1,905
- Reaction score
- 1,289
- Location
- Vermilion, Alberta
- Website
- www.facebook.com
between Golden and Revy?
mountainbigbull
Active VIP Member
My guess is between Golden and field in the Yoho National Park. Some of the mountains in there are 9000 to 10000 feet and the valley bottom is around 3000 to 4000 feet.
Carbon
Active VIP Member
[/IMG]
7000 from bottom of valley ttt.. totally doable!!
Its not even ride able,why post something you can't even do anyway's...
Now these are chutes to be Climbed.
Attachments
- Thread starter
- #15
gender bender
Active member
not ride able? i guesse u cant tell better from looking at a picture then i can seeing it in person....
Carbon
Active VIP Member
Yup.... not hard to tell...Just don't see it happening.its like saying your going to climb lines off the highway in rogers...not going to happen
Your math does not add up, Turbo cannot be more than 45 degrees, since at 45 degrees, you are travelling at a 1:1 horizontal/vertical ratio. That means that if Turbo is 1050 ft high and had an average slope of 45 degrees, you would travel 1050 ft to get to the top. If it was 67 degrees, you should actually travel less distance than 1050 ft to get to the top, not more. Average slope of Turbo has to be like 35 degrees in order to travel more horizontal distance than vertical distance. The sine of an angle is the ratio of the length of the opposite side (total vertical of 1050 ft) to the length of the hypotenuse (2700 ft). In our case Sin @ = opp/hyp = O/H. Sorry, don't have a sin function on my calc here to do the proper math but guessing by the horizontal vs vertical distance travelled that the average angle of Turbo is about 30-40 degrees, can't be over 45 though.
Sorry, Geometry's a hobby
.Highest mountains around there are in the 2700-2800 mtr range (according to google), the highest point on the rogers pass highway is 1300 mtrs, total vertical gain of 1400 meters or 4500 ft to the mountain top. I guess total distance travelled could be 7000 ft by the time you're done, but I'm not overly concerned with total distance, just vertical.
tekim
Active VIP Member
Your math does not add up, Turbo cannot be more than 45 degrees, since at 45 degrees, you are travelling at a 1:1 horizontal/vertical ratio. That means that if Turbo is 1050 ft high and had an average slope of 45 degrees, you would travel 1050 ft to get to the top. If it was 67 degrees, you should actually travel less distance than 1050 ft to get to the top, not more. Average slope of Turbo has to be like 35 degrees in order to travel more horizontal distance than vertical distance. The sine of an angle is the ratio of the length of the opposite side (total vertical of 1050 ft) to the length of the hypotenuse (2700 ft). In our case Sin @ = opp/hyp = O/H. Sorry, don't have a sin function on my calc here to do the proper math but guessing by the horizontal vs vertical distance travelled that the average angle of Turbo is about 30-40 degrees, can't be over 45 though.
Sorry, Geometry's a hobby
Highest mountains around there are in the 2700-2800 mtr range (according to google), the highest point on the rogers pass highway is 1300 mtrs, total vertical gain of 1400 meters or 4500 ft to the mountain top. I guess total distance travelled could be 7000 ft by the time you're done, but I'm not overly concerned with total distance, just vertical.
If 1050ft is your vertical, wouldn't it also be your horizontal distance travelled? Actual distance up the slope (if it were 45 degrees) would be 1485ft?
mountainbigbull
Active VIP Member
Your math does not add up, Turbo cannot be more than 45 degrees, since at 45 degrees, you are travelling at a 1:1 horizontal/vertical ratio. That means that if Turbo is 1050 ft high and had an average slope of 45 degrees, you would travel 1050 ft to get to the top. If it was 67 degrees, you should actually travel less distance than 1050 ft to get to the top, not more. Average slope of Turbo has to be like 35 degrees in order to travel more horizontal distance than vertical distance. The sine of an angle is the ratio of the length of the opposite side (total vertical of 1050 ft) to the length of the hypotenuse (2700 ft). In our case Sin @ = opp/hyp = O/H. Sorry, don't have a sin function on my calc here to do the proper math but guessing by the horizontal vs vertical distance travelled that the average angle of Turbo is about 30-40 degrees, can't be over 45 though.
Sorry, Geometry's a hobby
Highest mountains around there are in the 2700-2800 mtr range (according to google), the highest point on the rogers pass highway is 1300 mtrs, total vertical gain of 1400 meters or 4500 ft to the mountain top. I guess total distance travelled could be 7000 ft by the time you're done, but I'm not overly concerned with total distance, just vertical.
Yes you are right, I used the wrong angle, I used a online triangle calculator,
I'm not that smart but I can google stuff!!:d
Here's my numbers 1050Ft is the vertical and 2460FT is GPS waypoints from the summit to the bottom. The answer is average angle
23° but that includes some less steep points as at the bottom and the top.
The mountain I was thinking about is It runs as stated in the link 6500Ft up from the valley floor.
plio7
GBCA Member
i'm no math expert but i can tell you the only way to get your total distance travelled on a slope you need either the rise (vertical) and run (horizontal).....or at least have the vertical plus a degree of slope to get the total distance travelled up the slope......just sayin.
modman your math is off........if your rise is 1050 with a 45degree angle then you are talking a right angle triangle......this would make your run have to equal your rise.....making your total slope on a 45 degree angle with a rise of 1050.......1484.9242
modman your math is off........if your rise is 1050 with a 45degree angle then you are talking a right angle triangle......this would make your run have to equal your rise.....making your total slope on a 45 degree angle with a rise of 1050.......1484.9242
Attachments
Similar threads
