Results 26 to 50 of 190
Thread: Where to live for surf and ski??
-
10-08-2006, 10:00 PM #26
Christchurch, nz
I've been living here for a couple months and I've done the ski to surf 5 times. The wave quality in town here is pretty low now that we are going into spring but during the winter brighton was pretty good. Taylors can produce quality but it can go from head high to a half of crap in the time it takes you to drive out there. You have the banks peninsula with a couple pretty high quality breaks ranging from an hour to more depending how far you get out in the middle of no where. And then there are the great breaks of kaikora which is a little over 2 hrs. Job market here should be good since its a decent sized city and the mountains are 1-1.5 hours with alot of options.
Dunedin,nz
A smaller city but it has much better waves and tons of swell straight out of the roaring forties. If you like bigger waves you will be happy here. The mountains are two hours away and then your in the southern lakes of wanaka and queenstown. Lots of good riding down there.
The trade off of nz is that imho despite the mountains being really sick they are too exposed and snow quality suffers. I wasnt really that stoked on the skiing while I've been here and have just done alot of surfing. Maybe thats the right blend for you.
I've heard good things about italy and ski surf combo days there but I suspect that the surf is poor.
-
10-09-2006, 06:55 PM #27
I'd say Santa Cruz or Chile. Chile might be tough on the job/language front, but there's definitely life in Santiago. Skiing is close and good. Cost of living should be a bit lower than CA.
Santa Cruz gives you the before-work surf option, as long as you don't mind wearing neoprene. I know a bunch of folks who live down there and surf during the week and ride/ski on weekends. You can do a day trip to Kirkwood with reasonable ease (4ish hours each way). Tahoe's a manageable commute for weekends if you plan it right. I drive it every single weekend all winter (although I'm not quite as far as SC, but similar) and its mind-numbing at times, but I get through.
San Fran is an otion too. Closer to tahoe than SC, not as many ultra-left-wing-militant dykes as SC. Heck, I'm pretty far left on the political spectrum and I feel like a republican when I hang in SC. More culture in SF, although I get the sense that the surfing's not as good (I don't surf much).
-
10-10-2006, 09:29 AM #28
north carolina...i live there can drive 1 hour to skiing...its ok not great...then can drive about 2 hours atleast...its alright
-
10-10-2006, 09:30 AM #29
2 hours to surf
-
07-28-2007, 10:22 PM #30
Great Debate. I'm thinking Chile might be the best bet. Osorno? beach is 30 Miles. antillanca ski resort is 60 miles.
-
07-28-2007, 10:27 PM #31Registered User
- Join Date
- Oct 2003
- Posts
- 8,887
-
07-29-2007, 12:14 AM #32
Santa Cruz. Plain and simple. Just have to give up the board short wish - but that is what a trip to the tropics is for.
Great surf and still a decent job market. Can get a variety of Tahoe passes for 4 bills. And it is a 4 hour drive to the snow. Day trips are within reason for those great powder days. Daily surf sessions are really not a problem.
If you are willing to commute to the valley for work - you can earn even more. or save your gas and time, scrimp and live the surf/ski bum life. It can still be done.
And there are still secret spots around here if you are willing to go off the beaten path - read sharky waters.
Oh, never mind. It sucks here. Try New Jersey.
But actually - if you are looking for adventure Santiago, Chile is really were it can be done.
-
07-29-2007, 09:46 AM #33
I'm in SB. I'd pick living in Ventura or Oxnard over SB for surf. SB has no south swell window and slightly smaller window for swell in winter.
The drive to Mammoth is six hours. If you are skiing backcountry, you hit Lone Pine and plenty of options there within 4.5.
It's best to live within being able to check the waves within minutes. I can't count how many times I've checked the waves to find, "It's good out there. Where did these waves come from?" Then I go and grab my stuff. With the wave forecasting tools if you are away from the beach, you're likely only to show up when the waves are forecast.
-
07-29-2007, 09:55 PM #34Registered User
- Join Date
- Dec 2006
- Location
- LA
- Posts
- 160
antarcitca. not so hot in winter maybe hard to get a job. 2nd choice would be chile for sure.
-
07-30-2007, 10:14 AM #35
For those of you who consider 5-6 hours away from skiing relativley close, how many days a year do you get in?
-
07-30-2007, 11:36 AM #36
I'd say that a lot of the SoCal Maggots who go to Mammoth get 40-60 days per season.
-
07-30-2007, 08:10 PM #37
I'm 4 hours drive. Not quite 5-6 hours, but I've had over 55 days each the past three seasons.
trying to break the 60 day mark. I think a good snow year with a touring rig could make that happen.
-
07-30-2007, 09:58 PM #38
If I'm not a living breathing personification of your desired lifestyle than I don't think anyone is.
Santa Cruz is king.
wow, that seriously did not mean to come off as cocky as it did.
-
07-30-2007, 10:24 PM #39Registered User
- Join Date
- Oct 2003
- Posts
- 8,887
-
07-30-2007, 11:36 PM #40
-
07-30-2007, 11:44 PM #41
Agreed. I lived in socal for 26 years and surfed probably 3 times a week on average. I skied maybe 10 times a year. Now I live near the mountains and ski about 30 times a year and surf almost 0 times a year and have noodle arms for sure. If I could afford it- Santa Cruz or Ventura would be my picks.
-
07-31-2007, 12:50 AM #42Registered User
- Join Date
- Apr 2006
- Posts
- 267
Southern South America.
-
07-31-2007, 01:21 AM #43
I surf ~100 days a year. Ski 150+.
Like I said Santa Cruz rules.
-
07-31-2007, 05:05 AM #44
Since no one else has mentioned it yet - New Hampshire. Preferably, Portsmouth. A twenty minute drive north or south gets you nice longboard waves in the summer and tubes in the winter. Two hours north, you've got plenty of mountains - and the Presidential Range - to pick your lines from. Another hour north and you're at Stowe, MGR, Sugarbush and Jay. Yeah, the water's cold most of the summer but that's what wetsuits are for.
There aren't many places in the country where you have those kind of options so close by. That's what I love about living here. And there's some pretty good fishing and kayaking, too.People shooting ski areas should be sued.
-
08-01-2007, 09:05 PM #45
I live right where the 5 and 14 freeways meet in Southern California. I drive 50 minutes each way to surf Ventura almost every day. 4 hours to Mammoth in the winter. Not too bad. I don't know if I want to move to Utah and ski for the winter, or move to Ventura. Something needs to happen, though.
Last edited by seanpistol; 08-01-2007 at 09:15 PM.
-
08-01-2007, 11:39 PM #46
-
08-03-2007, 02:33 PM #47Registered User
- Join Date
- Apr 2006
- Location
- Girdwood AK
- Posts
- 74
[QUOTE=cj001f;1366475]Lovely warm water down there Why not thrown in Alaska and Norway too.
no surfing here. No skiing either. I think California is where it at.
-
08-03-2007, 05:11 PM #48Registered User
- Join Date
- Apr 2006
- Posts
- 267
To each his/her own. That being said, Socal blows. And this is coming from USC grad who had every perk playing football there, albeit a walk-on scrub. Nocal only option in the USA. No matter how good the snow or no matter how accessable Salt Lake is, being landlocked is NOT an option. Anyone who could deal with not living on a coast just doesn't have surf in their blood.
-
08-03-2007, 05:29 PM #49Registered User
- Join Date
- Oct 2003
- Posts
- 8,887
-
08-03-2007, 06:16 PM #50
[QUOTE=cito;1374375]Socal blows. QUOTE]
Why? What aspect blows? Surf, access to snow, expense, traffic, which of the many ills of SoCal causes it to get permanently veto'd in your view?
I won't even make a comment about SC...He who has the most fun wins!
Bookmarks