T Nation

Fall Road Tripping


#1

It looks like a trip to good old Manitoba could be in my foreseeable future. So, instead of coming back home the same boring ass way I was thinking about taking the long way and trying to make a little adventure out of it.

Here's what I was thinking:
Leave Manitoba south and go down to Kansas City. i29
Hit i70 west to Colorado then jump onto i15 through Las Vegas to Los Angeles.
From LA hit 101/1 up to around the Seattle area then from there it's into BC and a nice drive home.

Google maps puts this at 3days 11 hour drive time.

I would like to take a week to two weeks to do it. Has anyone done anything like this before? Any good locations to hit on that route? Any tips/advice?

Definitely would like to hit up Moab and ride some slick rock, but that depends on how my bike holds up through the summer.


#2

Is this topic really that lame that this,

http://tnation.tmuscle.com/free_online_forum/music_movies_girls_life/i_am_forever_

gets a reply and the above doesn't?

Nobody likes to drive? No one takes road trips just for the sake of seeing new shit?

Am I alone here? It appears so.


#3

We used to do this all the time in college. Grab a car, 2 or 3 good friends or significant others and just hit the road. I had a gps and I think we literally just threw in some state or address. Didn't worry too much about hotels because you'll always find something and if you don't you drive to the next town and you'll find something there. Some of my best memories are from those trips.


#4

No, I'm not too worried about hotels. It should be relatively warm when I go, so I will sleep in my car. It will be a solo adventure, so not a big deal.


#5

What are you going to do in Manitoba? There is nothing there.


#6

There is a family thing that is in the process of being planned. The drive through half of Alberta and Sask makes one suicidal. 16 hours of flat prairie you've already seen dozens of times makes you willing to travel the other way around the world to get home. At least there are a few clusters of trees in Manitoba.

So, I figured talking some vacation time and seeing what I can see wouldn't be the worst idea I've ever had.


#7

Don't just go. Plan things you want to see in every city/state. Otherwise you'll just end up driving/eating/shitting/sleeping. You'll end up walking down Main Street, saying, 'Wow, just like the last', hopping in your car, and going to the next Main Street. You'll drive within a few miles of some great natural wonders, but you'll never know it.


#8

Good advice. Already kind of started that.

I'd like to stop in Moab, Utah and do some bike riding. Some bungee jumping in LA. Poker in Vegas. One of the reasons I want to take the 101/1 along the west coast is to see the redwood forest.

Don't know if I'm really too interested in most of the cities. Other than poker I would like to keep the expenses down. 7500 kms is a lot of gas.

Kind of why I started this thread. If anybody that lives near these places have any ideas, that would be great. Or you know, just share some gnarly road trip experiences.


#9

Pop quiz hot shots:

You want to make it to Denver, Colorado from Manitoba. Do you A) Go all interstate to Kansas City, then head west to Denver? or, do you B) Straight shot through North and South Dakota and Wyoming into Denver. Shaving about 7-8 hours off your drive time.

What do you do?

WHAT DO YOU DO?


#10

Definitely want to hit up Sun Valley, Idaho. Resort town, soulless rich girls that will buy all of your drinks, plenty of trails to bike, hike...go fishing, hunting...never ends.


#11

Dude. That's like 12 hours off the proposed path. Is it really worth changing the whole itinerary?

It would cut out half of the coastal drive, which is a big draw for me.


#12

Haha, wow. In that case, kothreat, absolutely not. I figured I would just throw the idea out there. Sorry man! Should've mapped out your trek before suggesting anything. Coastal drive is hard to match...you've seen plenty of mountains before anyway.


#13

http://senseis.xmp.net/?KoThreat

A ko threat is a move with a "big" follow-up, which you play after your opponent has captured a ko; if your opponent answers it you may recapture the ko. (You cannot recapture the ko immediately, due to the basic rule of ko.) If your opponent does not answer your ko threat, but instead proceeds to resolve the ko, you can follow through on your threat and thus gain compensation for losing the ko.

The basic sequence of a ko fight is thus (1) White takes ko (2) Black makes threat (3) White answers threat (4) Black takes ko (5) White makes threat (6) Black answers threat (7) White takes ko, and so on until finally (3n) Black or White ignores threat to resolve the ko (3n+1) White or Black follows up on threat.

The term ko threat can be used to refer to a potential threat as well as one actually played. Example: "White has more ko threats than Black."

The term "ko material" is an alternative to ko threat, which can also refer to the aggregate of all potential ko threats one player has, as in "Felix has more ko material than Oscar." The Japanese terms kouzai and koudate, do not distinguish between singular and plural, and thus may be used to refer either to ko material in the aggregate or an individual ko threat.

The "size" of a ko threat is, informally, the potential gain from making the threatened follow-up (when your opponent ignores the threat and instead resolves the ko).

Ko is a Japanese go term adopted into English usage. It describes a situation where two alternating single stone captures would repeat the original board position. The alternating captures could repeat indefinitely, preventing the game from ending. The ko rule resolves the situation.


#14

If you are going to Kansas City, go to Arthur Bryant's in downtown KC; Legendary BBQ (If you are into that kind of thing).


#15

That's actually the reason I planned on going through KC. For the BBQ. Arthur Bryant's. Definitely remember that if I go through.

I always thought driving around to sample various delicacies would be an alright motive for a road trip. Kansas City for the BBQ, the South for some good old fashioned soul food mmmm hmm, LA for the all you can eat Paris Hilton. Philly for a real cheessteak.


#16

I moved from California to VA once, 4 days driving. BBQ in Kansas City was excellent. Kansas was a gigantic prairie, was able to pass through Vail and Aspen on the same highway (unsure which), Utah was very beautiful, Nevada is 79% federally owned lands---just find any BLM lands and you are allowed to set up camp anywhere provided you aren't in a hunting or heavily recreated area. Lake Tahoe is cool for everything.

I just finished up school for good, so I'm deciding between a moutaineering trip to Maine or go caving in KY. The choices..


#17

no longer have to go to manitoba. the reason this road trip came about was because an edmonton to manitoba to edmonton car ride is about as much fun as gluing your eyelids open and riding a motorcycle through mosquito country.

now it's just a round trip, edmonton to edmonton via an ass tonne of new places.

i've come to an impasse. do i keep the basic route and just hit a couple places high on the interest list, or cut the route short and hang out a bit more?

driving is relaxing for me. so a nice long meandering route wouldn't be so bad, but the more i look into it the more things keep popping up.

places that are a definite hit:
moab, utah: just thinking about riding slick rock makes me salivate.

redwood forest

crater lake, oregon: that place looks pretty nice.

astoria, oregon: HEEEY YOOOOOOU GUUUUYS!!!!

all of these places can be hit long or short. long would add in las vegas (and some other unkowns), but it would mean less time in each place seeing as how the driving time is around 6 days at about 10 hours a day. short just means more down time in the main places, with one or two nice scenic spots thrown in.

i'm leaning towards more down time;short route, but that means missing a lot of the coastal drive i was looking forward too.