39 replies to this topic

[nathanvg]

Triple and quad lifts were installed throughout the Midwest in the 60’s yet Western ski areas didn’t embrace quad lifts until the 80’s. Western ski areas would often install two doubles next to each other instead of installing a quad. Does anyone know why western ski areas didn’t install quad lifts sooner?

[Dr Frankenstein]

Because they didn't exist at this time. The first real quad was built un 1981, enven if there was, if I recall correctly a quad prototype in the '60, but there was just one.

[nathanvg]

Dr Frankenstein, on Oct 14 2005, 09:14 PM, said:

Because they didn't exist at this time. The first real quad was built un 1981, enven if there was, if I recall correctly a quad prototype in the '60, but there was just one.

Take a look at the lift survey, lots of quads were built before 81. For example, 1969:
Boyne Highlands N/A 4C Riblet N/A 1639 360 2400 400
Boyne Mountain N/A 4C Riblet N/A 2159 351 2400 400
Indianhead N/A 4C Riblet N/A 3339 511 2250 400

Other years show quads installed at other midwest resorts prior to '81. Most were made by riblet, but others made quads in the 70's too. (hall, borvig, thiokol)

The survey doesn't go back far enough, but the first quad was put in at boyne mt in the early or mid 60's.

This post has been edited by nathanvg: 14 October 2005 - 08:18 PM

[hyak.net]

My guess would be that most western resorts already had double chairs and instead of ripping them out to install a quad it was cheaper to just add another double. This would add a little more flexability, allow lifts to spread the riders out a bit more and on slow days they would only need to run half of the chairs. If I was running a resort in the 70's that is how I would have thought about it.

[Kicking Horse]

Dr Frankenstein, on Oct 14 2005, 09:14 PM, said:

Because they didn't exist at this time. The first real quad was built un 1981, enven if there was, if I recall correctly a quad prototype in the '60, but there was just one.

DO u mean the first high speed quad?

[liftmech]

No.
I think Jack's right- using Baker for an example, they built chair 4 in 1968 and by 1974 realised they needed more capacity so they built chair 5 right next to it. Once 5 was up and running, 4 went to a weekend-only mode and remained that way until both lifts were removed in '02. I don't recall running 4 hardly at all on weekdays. Snoqualmie did the same with 360 Bowl, Dodge Ridge, and Big Bill, which were all serving basically the same runs.

[Benbosnow]

wow, you people must be old!--- (just jokes, no offence)

[liftmech]

Whatever you say, young one...

[Benbosnow]

---, liftmech how long have u been one?

[liftmech]

8 1/2 years. I was 20 when I started.

[nathanvg]

hyak.net, on Oct 14 2005, 10:33 PM, said:

My guess would be that most western resorts already had double chairs and instead of ripping them out to install a quad it was cheaper to just add another double. This would add a little more flexability, allow lifts to spread the riders out a bit more and on slow days they would only need to run half of the chairs. If I was running a resort in the 70's that is how I would have thought about it.

I suspect that your reason is right for most situations, but it seems really odd that no one in the west had the need for a quad for 20 years.

Some installs, such as Vail's '76 install of lifts 2 and 17 are very odd. Both lifts were doubles and right next to each other.

Any other thoughts?

[Jonni]

Double-doubles aren't uncommon. We have a few of them still left here in the Northeast. They basically had the two lifts right next to each other so that if the line at one of them got really long on a particular day they basically just fired up the other and were able to get twice the capacity. Since double-doubles basically used the same towers for most if not all the way up, it cut down on costs to construct the lifts as well.

Here is a picture of the double-double at Attitash here in NH. I know that theres two of them at Bromley and maybe one at McIntyre in Manchester.

Attached File(s)

•  double2_line.jpg (82.95K)
  Number of downloads: 59

[Durrrant]

Jonni, on Oct 15 2005, 05:43 PM, said:

Double-doubles aren't uncommon. We have a few of them still left here in the Northeast. They basically had the two lifts right next to each other so that if the line at one of them got really long on a particular day they basically just fired up the other and were able to get twice the capacity. Since double-doubles basically used the same towers for most if not all the way up, it cut down on costs to construct the lifts as well.

Here is a picture of the double-double at Attitash here in NH. I know that theres two of them at Bromley and maybe one at McIntyre in Manchester.

There are also double-doubles at Big Boulder, PA, Whiteface, NY (removed either in 02 or 03), as well as a one double built as a double-double at Burke, VT. As far as 2 doubles built next to each other: Blue Mt, PA, Jack Frost, PA (they just put two new Partek's next to each other a couple of years ago), Elk, PA, Killington, VT, Big Boulder, PA (has a double-double next to a double, so there are 3 doubles next to each other)

so yes, they are out there.

[boardski]

nathanvg, on Oct 15 2005, 01:01 PM, said:

I suspect that your reason is right for most situations, but it seems really odd that no one in the west had the need for a quad for 20 years.

Some installs, such as Vail's '76 install of lifts 2 and 17 are very odd. Both lifts were doubles and right next to each other.

Any other thoughts?

Steamboat has some configurations in which lifts are next to each other mostly a double next to a triple such as Christie 2 & Christie 3, Sundown (formerly triple) next to Priest Creek, Arrowhead used to follow almost the same line as Thunderhead but unloaded lower down the ridge. Almost nobody rode Arrowhead since it unloaded too low to get to the lodge but it was a quick way to get to Storm Peak.
Areas such as Eldora (Challenge next to Cannonball) and Keystone (River Run Gondola next to Summit Express HSQ) may benefit from having a back-up lift if one of the paralell lifts have mechanical problems and need to be shut down then all the terrain can remain open.

[skiPhreak]

I think the reason there are so many quads in the midwest is because the need for a high capacity. Usually lifts in the midwest are short so people will make a run and ride the lift a min later, while out west people ride the lift once every 15 min because it is longer making less need for a high capacity this is why you see these small midwest resorts with above 20,000 pph capacity. As for the west building doubles right next to each other it's probably because of the legth of the lift it would cost a lot of money to take out a 5000' double and put in a quad while in the midwest it it wouldn't cost that much to take out a 700' lift and put in a quad.

[iceberg210]

In the West many of our resorts are far larger then the ones in the midwest and therefore could spread out more then their midwest conterparts. Also the population desities in the Midwest made it so that the smaller resorts need more capacity per lift also due to the aforementioned size. Also many of the lifts that run paralel to each other still serve different purposes. For example at Solitude although Apex and Powderhorn run paralel to each other and really aren't that different in destination Apex serves a hill that would be hard to get to otherwise and Powderhorn brings you up to the rigde. At Snowbird Mid Gad acesses no more terrain then Gadzoom although being only slightly shorter however due to its mid station and it serving the begginers it can run as well as Gadzoom although they probally wouldn't need it if they simply upgraded Gadzoom to a HSS. There are various other examples including Wildcat and Collins at Alta and Evergreen and Milicent at Brighton. At Snoquamie I don't know why they decided to build so many lifts instead of simply upgrading to quads as that would have been a good place to do it I would think.

[Bill]

Snoqualmie was in a lift building war with at the time Alpental, Ski Acres and Hyak. They built lifts just to say that they had more than so and so. Once the purchase from Booth, you saw lifts being removed and using quads and triples as well as the detachables.

[hyak.net]

BTW, anyone remember where the first quad in WA was installed? It wasn't at Crystal, Stevens or Baker but at Snoqualmie Summit (Little Thunder)..... Pretty funny, eh?

[Bill]

Yep. I remember all the hype on the promotion for it. Its listed as the Quad in Washington.

Crystal however boasted that it had the first detach quad.

[hyak.net]

Bill, on Oct 19 2005, 11:04 AM, said:

Yep. I remember all the hype on the promotion for it. Its listed as the Quad in Washington.

Crystal however boasted that it had the first detach quad.

Was Ski Acres the only area that installed triple chairs in WA? Triple 60 and Silver Fir are the only triple chairs I can think of.......???