What's the next great high altitude town for year around living/training?

let's be hones, come on wrote:

Boulder bro wrote:

not close to good job bro

#BRAP

Oh, ok. So the criteria is:

1. Altitude

2. Great weather

3. Inexpensive

4. Proximate to great jobs and thriving economy

5. Quick access to lower elevations

6. Great restaurants and night life and cultural activities

why not just add free luxury housing, personal butler, free luxury automobile

Western Slope Colorado towns, (Cortez area) are way cheaper than nearby Durango, but close enough to drive there.

Monticello Utah is another one that comes to mind. 7000 feet, easily can access higher elevations in the Abajo Mountains, but also can get down below 5000 in Bluff in less than an hour. Definitely a small Utah town (with Utah vibes), but reasonable cost of living. The "great restaurants and night lift" and "great jobs and thriving economy" part? That's the trade off

Boulder/Denver is still relatively inexpensive if you’re coming from the coasts (California, PNW, Northeast)

CU Buff wrote:

Laramie, WY - 7200 Feet.

1. Altitude - Check!

2. Great weather - Check! only 20F right now but was 60s two days ago! Just wait a day or two any bad weather will pass. Summers are fabulous. Ignore all the new wind turbines near the town. We are totally not windy! (by Mt Washington standards).

3. Inexpensive - Check! No state income tax either.

4. Proximate to great jobs and thriving economy - You can remote work! (also hint: you can't have great jobs/economy and inexpensive together unless you remote work).

5. Quick access to lower elevations - 5000 feet in about an hour. (Trivia: how many East Africans in Kenya/Ethiopia have easy access to low elevations? Answer: none!)

6. Great restaurants and night life and cultural activities - oh totally, you should checkout the Buckhorn. Some class individuals hang out there.

1. It's Wyoming. No.

2. It's a Wyoming town with a rail line. No.

3. Source: Former Wyoming resident.

Sandia Heights is a suburb north of Albuquerque, NM. It has gorgeous trails, safe affordable neighborhoods, good schools. It’s a close drive to some great mountain running at even higher elevations. It hardly ever snows.

The answer is in this thread, a few times.

There's only one place you can run at over 6000 feet and drive down to 1500 feet in 30-45 minutes.

RunningOtaku wrote:

So, where do you think the next great running mountain town will be?

Don't you already live in one of the most exclusive altitude running towns in America? The Halls are your neighbors.

thedawg42 wrote:

Sounds like Albuquerque to me, plus nicer weather year round then Boulder, Flag, Park City. Cheaper to live there too.

Scorching hot all summer, though you can start long runs in the dark to mitigate triple digit temps. Or make the hour commute up to Santa Fe, though SF is probably a nicer place to live full time and can be done affordably for most.

Sun Valley/Ketchum area of Idaho.

Also Bend, Oregon.

low do... wrote:

The whole access to lower elevations crap is just that. The entitled US runners feel they need it. Are you trying to tell me an elite 10k runner can't run 60 sec. 400's at altitude? How many 10k guys average 60 sec. pace in a race anyways? They can also knock off a couple of 55's to finish off a workout any time. Speed is not the issue.

This.

I was training at 6000 ft this summer and ran a 62 to close out my workout. I'm a 31:xx guy.

Jemez1 wrote:

I am an hour from Mexico City airport. Living and training my athletes at 3100m (10,100ft.) No snow, not too cold, great trails, track 30 minutes away at 2200m (7200 ft.).

Cost: apartment and lots of natural great food and juices, $450 month!!!

I'd like that place, does it have a name??

southwest bound wrote:

Here are a few options.

Raton NM – 6,700

Las Vegas NM – 6,400

Silver City NM – 5,900

Cedar City UT – 5,800 (St George is only 45 minutes away at 2,700 and rarely has snow)

I love New Mexico.

But you managed to list the worst places in the state. Raton and Las Vegas…. These places are sh*t Holes.

Albuquerque NM is the best altitude location in the US to live and train year round. Easily has the best weather of any altitude location.

The winters are mild and nothing compared to Flagstaff or Boulder.

Actually a city with low cost of living.

Endless Trails in the foothills at 6200ft +. Rive bike path is pancake flat at 4500ft 14 mile long point to point.

Tons of dirt roads on the outskirts.

Big Bear seems to small, unless you drive down, which os doable

Back in the day I dated a girl going to Idaho State University and I visited her for a week in Pocatello. The university (incl. the track) was about 4000', where she lived was at about 4500', and I was able to get over 6000' within a few miles of mostly trails. I loved running there and wondered why there weren't more (any?) good runners living there.

ABQ is too low and too hot June-September.

the correct answer wrote:

Sun Valley/Ketchum area of Idaho.

Also Bend, Oregon.

The OR poster asked for cheap places not for the usual rich peoples hang out.

Former ski bum wrote:

the correct answer wrote:

Sun Valley/Ketchum area of Idaho.

Also Bend, Oregon.

The OR poster asked for cheap places not for the usual rich peoples hang out.

I’ve lived in one and visited the other, I didn’t think they were expensive. Certainly not Ketchum/Hailey.

Buy this house for 100K:

https://www.realtor.com/realestateandhomes-detail/204-S-Myrtle-St_Kimball_NE_69145_M75959-68818

And run at the nearby highest point in Nebraska (Panorama Point), as long as you can "avoid the ranging bison and pay an entrance fee."

Evergreen CO 7300 ft. Lots of trails and only about 20 minutes down I70 to Golden. My sister lived there for a few years and commuted to downtown Denver.

old372 wrote:

Evergreen CO 7300 ft. Lots of trails and only about 20 minutes down I70 to Golden. My sister lived there for a few years and commuted to downtown Denver.

Lol. 20 minutes or 1.5 hrs depending on traffic.

Evergreen, Durango, Salida, and Boulder are all very expensive. Plus, Boulder isn't high altitude.

Colorado Springs (6,000-7,000ft) is much cheaper with better weather than all three. Crushed gravel paths through town with easy access to Pueblo if you want to get down to 4,000ft. You can also drive 20 min to Woodland Park for 8k-9k altitude. Fast growing, lots of jobs, and not hipster at all which will kill it for some folks. But, there's a reason the Bowerman group came here for several years and Chelimo's group is here permanently.

I've lived in Boulder and frequent Salida and Durango. Colorado Springs has better running than all three and is less than half the price for a young person wanting to just live and train. If you're a trail runner, forget about those other towns. We can get to 12k-14k pretty easily on the Pikes massif and the trail system is amazing here and uncrowded.

I've been watching these threads for years and its always the same boujie areas where no runner could afford to work at the local shop and train 100+ miles per week. Get real.... If you want to be in an actual city (500,000) with actual jobs and culture (besides the Jesus land area in north Colorado Springs). Not sure how you miss this location.