Springer vs. Katahdin

imported
#1

First, I climbed Katahdin back in 1999 from the Roaring Brook campground - not on the AT but via a loop including the Helon Taylor, Knife Edge, Saddle & Chimney Ponds trails. It was a challenging hike and our group of 4 took 11 hours to complete the loop (including breaks at the peak and at Chimney Pond).

I’ve read a lot about the difficulty of the Springer Mountain approach trail. How does it compare to the acsent of Katahdin? I understand that the two mountains are completely different and most northbounders climb Springer with a full pack at the start of their hike. Also, Katahdin is often climbed with a daypack or lighter backpack at the conclusion of the hike.

So is the Springer approach as difficult as Katahdin? Or is it a function of pack weight and conditioning? Just curious since my section hikes will eventually take me there.

I do strongly recommend a trip across the Knife Edge after summiting Katahdin. Sure, it can create some logistical problems since the descent from Pamola Peak takes you to a different part of Baxter Park than where you started. But it is a worthy end to the journey (IMHO) and eliminates the backtrack on the AT.

What’s the concensus?

Stalking Tortoise

#2

Springer kicked my rump because, and
only because my partner and I were
in such foul shape. We started from
the parking lot and it felt like all
day we were going up up up up. But it
is nothing like Katahdin, yet Katahdin
didn’t take as much out of me because I
was, as are most Northbounders, in incredible
physical shape by the end, and therefor it
was not as hard as say something like Roan
Mtn. of TN. Yet again, a function of being
in shape versus the body not being used to
such rigorous climbing.

Good question though.

-Snack

Snack Attack

#3

True, the Approach trail is a lot of up from the ranger station, but as far as terrain and difficulty over all, it isnt even a contest.

Katahdin has about four different pitches that are over massive boulders (On the AT) and some hand over hand type stuff…The Approach is walking, tough and steep as it may be, and being out of shape for either is challanging, but as far as Difficulty levels, The K has The S beat by a million.

LK

LionKIng

#4

the approach trail is a joke unless you’re 50 lbs. overweight and fresh off the couch.

wolf

#5

Yeah, you’d better do some extreme training for the Springer ascent, it’s been know to break people. I flew to Patagonia for a three month training trip, alas, this was still not enough to prepare me for the mountain they call Springer.

Cheers

cheers

#6

I have thru-hiked and climbed both. In my opinion the approach trail was tougher. I don’t have a clue why. Probably psychological.

I will say this with some certainty: going up Katahdin was physically easier than coming down. When you are coming down, having to scramble over those big bouldars on the Hunt trail just about killed my knees. And I wasn’t out of shape then.

JAWS

#7

I start my thru-hike in March, but I would guess that for NOBOers Katahdin is summited on a surge of adrenaline. Its much easier to push oneself at the end of a 2,000 mile journey rather than the beginning.

Nomad

#8

The approach trail is tough only because many hikers are out of shape and somewhat tired from a long car ride. It’s a 2000 foot climb in 8 miles. Plus, many start out with too much gear. And many are not experienced.

But, don’t get me wrong, the southern appalachians are tough. The trail goes up and down a lot. Not like many places in New England where you have long ridge walks. Much of the trail is high, with severe weather. Switchbacks are a blessing.

Peaks