Colorado peak questions, condition requests and other info.
Forum rules
This is a mountaineering forum, so please keep your posts on-topic. Posts do not all have to be related to the 14ers but should at least be mountaineering-related.
Personal attacks and confrontational behavior will result in removal from the forum at the discretion of the administrators.
Do not use this forum to advertise, sell photos or other products or promote a commercial website.
Posts will be removed at the discretion of the site administrator or moderator(s), including: Troll posts, posts pushing political views or religious beliefs, and posts with the purpose of instigating conflict within the forum.
For more details, please see the Terms of Use you agreed to when joining the forum.
Certainly not drastic. lol. You won't be climbing the wrong tower anyway. They are the same. Not to mention, it's probably all moot anyway because it is probably no longer 4 inches taller. 2 inches of movable rock is too variable to be statistically significant.
But, they aren't the same. Equivelancy is not equality.
You will spin it as you want to spin it. As stands on Aug 3rd, is East Crestone higher than West Crestone? Can you definitively say?
Can you definitively say West is higher than east? No, but it doesn't change the fact that one IS higher. This is the argument for one to the best of our knowledge.
I agree they should be treated as equivelant from the peakbagger perspective, but the fact remains that one of them is the true highpoint, and they are two distinct locations, thus they are not equal. Because we've brought up the survey results, now more people are informed and can do whatever they want with that information.
But, they aren't the same. Equivelancy is not equality.
You will spin it as you want to spin it. As stands on Aug 3rd, is East Crestone higher than West Crestone? Can you definitively say?
Can you definitively say West is higher than east? No, but it doesn't change the fact that one IS higher. This is the argument for one to the best of our knowledge.
I agree they should be treated as equivelant from the peakbagger perspective, but the fact remains that one of them is the true highpoint, and they are two distinct locations, thus they are not equal. Because we've brought up the survey results, now more people are informed and can do whatever they want with that information.
I think a few inches differential of not solid mass is insufficient to claim one over the other. They are the same. They could have said it was the east side 50 years ago and I would say the same about the west side. Since they are equal and the west side has been the formal summit for many years, I say don't mess with what is not broken. There are over 10,000 finishers. Why screw with that over a few inches, Especially since the east side could now actually be a few inches lower than the west side due to tampering.
I'm not messing with any finishers, if you finished you finished, I haven't stripped anyone's title.
Idk if the historical argument means anything, but you also don't have to go climb East. In fact nobody has to climb anything at all, but if you care about which is taller in its natural state you'll go do it, it's really not too deep.
onebyone wrote: ↑Mon Aug 03, 2026 5:08 pm
They had it right back in the day. They had to call one the summit so they chose the West side of the mountain.
Negative. "Back in the day," mountaineering and surveying were integral skillsets. They cared then which was truly higher as much as we do now, they just didn't have the tech or disposable time. No one's asking you to turn in your finisher medallion. Most who care about having actually stood on the highest point will have already visited both. If I hadn't yet, I'd want to know which is the true summit. Think of the children!
I wonder if the next geoid revision could wipe out a three-inch difference between two points a few hundred feet apart. The amount of science and technology that has gone into these measurements is mind-boggling. I mean....what the heck does "sea level" even mean 1000 miles from the nearest ocean?
Climbing at altitude is like hitting your head against a brick wall — it's great when you stop. -- Chris Darwin
I'm pretty tired. I think I'll go home now. -- Forrest Gump
Jim Davies wrote: ↑Tue Aug 04, 2026 9:30 am
I wonder if the next geoid revision could wipe out a three-inch difference between two points a few hundred feet apart. The amount of science and technology that has gone into these measurements is mind-boggling. I mean....what the heck does "sea level" even mean 1000 miles from the nearest ocean?
EDIT: Per Veory's mathematical research, not possible. But it could definitely knock off the lowest 13ers that are currently on the list. And right? They estimate where gravity is similar to where "sea level" is currently at, also based off the density of the earth in different areas. As a part of the GRAV-D project, they've flown over the US and its territories between 2007 and 2023 collecting detailed gravity data for the US portion of the NAPGD2022. Starting in 2024, they've been flying over other North American countries as well. https://geodesy.noaa.gov/GRAV-D/
You can see the approximate differences between the current vertical datum used in the US (NAVD88) vs the new NAPGD2022 (yet to be officially finalized or implemented). Differences are in meters; mean sea level will be defined as a little higher, so everything will be "lowered." You can click on a point on the map and see the approximate elevation difference. Or search for coordinates using the magnifying glass and find the difference that way.
Most of Colorado will "drop" 1.64-2.46 feet (purple), and some will only drop 0.82-1.64 feet (dark blue).
NAVD88 to NAPGD2022 Difference.png
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Last edited by bdloftin77 on Tue Aug 04, 2026 10:45 am, edited 2 times in total.
Jim Davies wrote: ↑Tue Aug 04, 2026 9:30 am
I wonder if the next geoid revision could wipe out a three-inch difference between two points a few hundred feet apart. The amount of science and technology that has gone into these measurements is mind-boggling. I mean....what the heck does "sea level" even mean 1000 miles from the nearest ocean?
Actually not possible. Since these two points are so close, the only way for the gravitational geopotential to vary 4 inches in between them would require an angle of deviation of roughly 172 arcseconds. The largest recorded angle of deviation anywhere in the world is 109 arcseconds (from what I can find). Odds are crestones, along the axis oriented between the peaks, likely has very little deviation and so any updates to the geoid will likely change the differential by only millimeters, certaintly not more than an inch. The net elevation might change, but not the difference between them.
Jim Davies wrote: ↑Tue Aug 04, 2026 9:30 am
I wonder if the next geoid revision could wipe out a three-inch difference between two points a few hundred feet apart. The amount of science and technology that has gone into these measurements is mind-boggling. I mean....what the heck does "sea level" even mean 1000 miles from the nearest ocean?
Actually not possible. Since these two points are so close, the only way for the gravitational geopotential to vary 4 inches in between them would require an angle of deviation of roughly 172 arcseconds. The largest recorded angle of deviation anywhere in the world is 109 arcseconds (from what I can find). Odds are crestones, along the axis oriented between the peaks, likely has very little deviation and so any updates to the geoid will likely change the differential by only millimeters, certaintly not more than an inch. The net elevation might change, but not the difference between them.
Thanks for the correction! I hadn't researched any math, just went off the top of my head knowing that the differences are usually pretty small, especially that close together.
Looks like Peak R will probably be dropped, and 13002 will be right on the cusp.
bdloftin77 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 04, 2026 10:09 am
Most of Colorado will "drop" 1.64-2.46 feet (purple), and some will only drop 0.82-1.64 feet (dark blue).
Still super interesting, maybe we'll have to survey Sunshine as a just in case after that drop . I'd be less sad about that than the Columbia demotion. Who knows, the summit might have been artificially altered since the last LiDAR scan
Last edited by Veory on Tue Aug 04, 2026 10:43 am, edited 2 times in total.
Veory wrote: ↑Tue Aug 04, 2026 10:18 am
Since these two points are so close, the only way for the gravitational geopotential to vary 4 inches in between them [science and maths...]
But how many arcseconds of deviation are needed to definitively rank West Eolus??
Veory wrote: ↑Tue Aug 04, 2026 10:18 am
Since these two points are so close, the only way for the gravitational geopotential to vary 4 inches in between them [science and maths...]
But how many arcseconds of deviation are needed to definitively rank West Eolus??
Interesting question. In the least optimistic model from Joseph's TR (Trimble RTX-PP), the confidence was 77.6% unranked. To increase the confidence to 95%, that would require a differential of 0.264 inches, which, at a distance of 440' would equate to an change of angle of deflection by only 10.3 arcseconds. It's not necessarily that the total angle of deflection would be 10.3 arcseconds, but that it would change by 10.3 arcseconds (since we are no longer comparing two points of equal height). This seems like a possible update, considering 10 arcseconds is pretty standard for undulations in flat areas due to ununiformities under the surface. The more optimistic models would require even less variation. This would be to unrank W Eolus though.
To rank it, we'd have to be off by an additional 0.828", equating to 42 arcseconds difference (in the opposite direction). This is... technically possible but unlikely.
Also, I am not an expert in this field so I could totally be wrong about realistic changes just FYI. Trying to do by due dilegance though.
onebyone wrote: ↑Mon Aug 03, 2026 5:08 pm
They had it right back in the day. They had to call one the summit so they chose the West side of the mountain.
Negative. "Back in the day," mountaineering and surveying were integral skillsets. They cared then which was truly higher as much as we do now, they just didn't have the tech or disposable time. No one's asking you to turn in your finisher medallion. Most who care about having actually stood on the highest point will have already visited both. If I hadn't yet, I'd want to know which is the true summit. Think of the children!
You prob didn't stand on the highest point of a lot of 14ers, never mind Crestone, east or west. . I climbed East Crestone and good chance I never stood higher than I did on the west side. also did the traverse. ::shrugs::
. I'd be less sad about that than the Columbia demotion. Who knows, the summit might have been artificially altered since the last LiDAR scan 