Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner

24th St. or Geronimo - Which Sucks Least

1K views 10 replies 10 participants last post by  eatdrinkride 
#1 ·
for climbing?

did Geronimo once, took 45 minutes with much hiking and was very tiring, but it was a fast way to get from the 24th st. lot to the top.

Thank you.
 
#2 ·
chollaball said:
for climbing?

did Geronimo once, took 45 minutes with much hiking and was very tiring, but it was a fast way to get from the 24th st. lot to the top.

Thank you.
No question for me. 24th is WAY easier to climb/hike it takes much less energy IMO. it is shorter and has a few leveled out spots to ride and catch your breath.
 
#3 ·
I agree. According to the map, Mormon is 1.1 miles to Mormon Loop, and Geronimo is 1.4 miles to Buena Vista. I have ridden up both more times than I can count, and Mormon wins hands down.

Geronimo is brutal right from the bottom. It is a very tech climb that really works the body. The tech is more consistant than the tech on Mormon. I think the grade on Mormon is a bit more friendly as well. The shallower grades on Geronimo always seem to be littered with loose rock.
 
#4 ·
24th St fer sher.

Both suck, but 24th St/Mormon sucks less. It's either "rideable" or a hike-a-bike. Not much in between.

Geronimo, on the other hand, is almost all in-between. By "in-between" I mean it's steep/tech enough to be "rideable", but only for short distances at a time...and then you just burn out. And when start walking up sections you are like "hell, I can ride this". So you start the pedaling and burn out quickly. Then you start walking...then riding from disgust...walking...and the frustrating cycle continues.

On 24th St, you never feel bad about walking up certain sections.

Thx...Doug
 
#6 ·
dgangi said:


Both suck, but 24th St/Mormon sucks less. It's either "rideable" or a hike-a-bike.
I love both trails.... good ol' technical riding combined with some hike-a-bike :thumbsup: both challenge my technical ascending skills. I think 24th is shorter and faster than Geronimo, although I think I am on my bike more when I do Geronimo.
 
#7 ·
thanks guys. guess i figured 24th would be harder to climb since imo its a harder descent. Sounds like either route will get me to BV in about the same amount of time, but 24th to National will be much more ridable and more fun.

I got hooked on descending the north-side trails when i was riding from my office at 48th and Baseline. Last week i drove to Somo for the first time in forever (our office has moved :cryin: :sad: :madman:) , and i figured once I was in the car I might as well start at 24th instead of 46th or Pima Canyon. Its definitely harder, but nice not to have to use Javalina and the canals to connect all the really fun stuff especially in the heat when the ride must be shorter.

i'm riding Thursday ~4:30, 24th to National to BV, then either down National and back up Mormon to 24th or out to Tele and then back National to 24th. If anyone wants to join in, let me know. :thumbsup:
 
#8 ·
Really?

Greffster said:
Not really sure why u would wanna climb such a great DH trail but what ever floats your boat I guess.
Because he can!

SKILLs, fitness, stamina, general all around MTB bad assnes, and most importantly; so one can access fine DH trails other than Somo or Sunrise and the other shuttle monkey trails.
 
#9 ·
I must disagree with most here.

I think geronimo is way more rideable. 24th is rideable too, but it's problem solving type riding the whole way, which is very fun, but stop and go the whole way. Geronimo is a slow grind that goes on forever with very few (except for maybe the bottom) boulder problems.

Seems like building your fitness level could yield a dab-free geronimo climb, whereas I think it's probably unlikely for the best of the best to do that on 24th. I've been wrong before though.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top