Comparing My Appalachian Trail and Pacific Crest Trail Thru-Hikes

In 2019, I thru-hiked the Appalachian Trail (A.T.) and in 2022, I thru-hiked the Pacific Crest Trail (PCT). I wrote summary posts for both of those hikes (A.T., PCT) and I thought it might be interesting to do a post comparing my experiences on both trails. Note that I normally track both imperial and metric units but to make the comparisons less cluttered I will stick with Imperial measurements.

Statistical Differences

The most obvious difference is that the PCT is about 461 miles longer (depending on the year’s trail length considered).

Interestingly, despite it being significantly longer, I actually needed three less hiking days to finish the PCT. The number of zeros is probably not a straightforward comparison since I more heavily relied on nearos on the A.T.

The following chart is pretty obvious considering I used less days to hike more miles on the PCT, but you can see how those miles were broken down in daily ranges.

Again, this is obvious, but you can clearly see how I consistently did more miles on the PCT (4.4 more per hiking day), though interestingly, the maximum mileage days for both hikes was almost exactly the same.

My sleeping situations were very different. This was obviously going to be the case since I used a hammock on the A.T. and a tent on the PCT. But, the number of hostels on the A.T. had a huge impact on that hike compared the lack of them on the PCT. Of course, the frequent wet weather on the A.T. had me wanting to stay in a warm bed much more often than the nice PCT weather did, so that was another factor, as was the presence of shelters on the A.T. that don’t exist on the PCT.

Looking at the elevation changes on the two trails illustrates how much “gentler” the PCT is than the A.T. Notice it had 31,375 feet less gain than the A.T. despite being 461 miles longer. The per mile stat illustrates that clearly, as the A.T. was, on average, 52 feet steeper per mile. It’s also interesting that my biggest climbing day on the A.T. was almost 1,400 feet more than on the PCT.

Looking at ranges, I had 71 days exceeding 4,000 feet of gain on the A.T. vs. 65 such days on the PCT, despite averaging 4.4 miles more per day on the latter.

Looking at the elevation loss, the PCT had 42,992 feet less loss than the A.T., or 46.1 feet less per mile. Unlike the gain statistic, however, my biggest elevation loss on the PCT was significantly greater (2,118 feet more) than on the A.T.

Looking at ranges, I had 64 days exceeding 4,000 feet of loss on the A.T. vs. 53 such days on the PCT, again despite averaging 4.4 miles more per day on the latter.

So, there you have the hiking statistical differences, for whatever they may be worth. Next, let’s consider expenses.

Budget & Expenses Summary

The chart below summarizes the differences in spending for my two thru-hikes, including daily and gear expenses. It might seems surprising that I spent more on gear before my PCT hike than I did before my A.T. hike, especially since the A.T. was my first long-distance effort and I needed all new gear. But, as it turns out, I more or less ditched or replaced most of my A.T. gear for the PCT, so it was like starting over (e.g., I switched from a hammock to a tent, switched to a warmer quilt, bought a new UL backpack, bought new clothes, had to replace my water filtration setup, etc.).

Note that the daily expenses were also about 27% higher on the PCT than on the A.T. Below I break down the categories of spending. The biggest differences were that I spent more on transportation for the PCT. That’s because I left the trail for a month and so I needed two round-trip flights from Atlanta to CA. In contrast, since I was staying in Atlanta, for the A.T. I really just needed one flight from Maine back home.

Food was about 24% more on the PCT than the A.T. That was partly because the West Coast is just more expensive and perhaps there was a bit of COVID related inflation kicking in as well.

Lodging was actually less expensive on the PCT because I took fewer zeroes and town stays. My mobile phone plan was more expensive (relatively) but that’s probably not something you will track separately if you live in the U.S. I usually live overseas so I had to buy a plan for my hike. My plan on the A.T. didn’t really include enough data so I got a better plan for the PCT.

Expenses vary wildly depending on the person, the lifestyle, and other variables (where you are traveling from, etc). So, perhaps looking at mine isn’t super helpful, but it is a topic that comes up often on Reddit and FB hiking groups so maybe it will be helpful for some folks. I hope so.

Below I’ll offer a more subjective comparison of the two hikes.

Subjective Differences

Many people on the PCT asked me which trail I thought was harder or better. I think the statistics above show that the A.T. is more physically challenging, though there are a few hardy souls that prefer the more rugged nature of that trail. And, though memory is naturally selective, I do remember the A.T. being more strenuous (physically and mentally). That was undoubtedly due to the countless PUDS (pointless ups and downs) and the frequency of wet weather.

Related to those PUDS, I think the PCT is far superior to the A.T. in terms of views. That isn’t to say that the A.T. isn’t beautiful, because it is, and, obviously, that is very subjective as some hikers actually prefer the “green tunnel” nature of the A.T. And, I think that New Hampshire and Maine had beauty to rival that of the PCT. But, for me, the PCT consistently had more and better views. It also had better diversity of terrain and views.

In terms of weather, there was no comparison for me. The PCT was far superior. That does depend on the year, but 2022 was a low snow year, which made the Sierra section much easier than it can be in a high snow year. Still, I had very few days of rain and only one day of snow (though many days with snow still on the ground). Both trails had plenty of cold nights but I wouldn’t say one was colder than the other, for the months that I hiked.

One possible way that weather could affect which trail is better is if you are a particularly slow hiker. The hiking “season” for the PCT is shorter than for the A.T., enough so that if you start too late and/or hike too slowly, you could run the risk of not finishing before bad weather sends you home. These days, the PCT also experiences multiple, often very bad, forest fires, which are apt to close small to large portions of the trail. Dealing with those can be a challenge, and timing is tricky. You can try to start earlier in the season to get through the trail before fire season kicks in, but then you will probably have to hit the Sierra with high snow amounts. You could flip around that, but then the snow can be quite bad in Northern California and further north if you hit those sections too soon. It really is a challenge without an obvious solution.

Another consideration is which trail is more social. Again, that’s subjective and down a bit to luck, but I didn’t notice much difference. They are both very social trails where it is very easy to make new friends and develop a trail family if so desired. I personally experienced far more trail magic on the A.T., but other hikers I met on the PCT ran into it much more often than I did, so that might have just been a luck thing. I had no real problems hitchhiking on either trail.

A final consideration is how easy it is to plan, logistically, a hike on each trail. In prior years, the A.T. was considered far easier in that regard, but in recent years the PCT has gotten much easier. I would say that the A.T. is still easier, mostly because it has more frequent access to towns, resupply options, and hiker hostels. Plus, the fire issues I just mentioned can complicate PCT logistics.

For these reasons, if you are considering only hiking one of these trails, I would recommend the PCT. The daily rewards (views) simply make it a better option. On the other hand, if you are planning to hike both trails, I would recommend starting with the A.T. so you can finish with the incredible west coast views. Of course, the main risk in that choice is that you may end up only doing one trail and then you would have missed the beauty of the PCT.

Feel fee to leave a comment if you disagree with my assessment or have anything to add.

Like this content? Why not share it?