Re: Biggest change in elevation.
Posted: Tue Mar 24, 2020 10:16 am
It seems that those vase measurements above also say that HImalayan peaks have a greater rise than Denali.martinleroux wrote: ↑Tue Mar 24, 2020 9:54 am It depends what you mean by "base", which isn't a clearly-defined concept. Here's a very short list of rough estimates based on my own, arbitrary judgement as to what constitutes a "base":
Denali: 3,600m above the Kahiltna Glacier (9km distance)
Mt Blanc: 3,600m above Les Bossons (8km)
Mt Logan: 4,000m above the Seward Glacier (7km)
Mt St Elias: 4,500m above the Libby Glacier (7km)
Nanga Parbat: 4,500m above the Rupal Valley (4.5km)
The Rupal face of Nanga Parbat you mention isn't as high as some of the other, albeit less steep faces.
The Rakhiot Flank rises more than 23000 feet/7000 meters over 15 miles (25 kms). Denali can't match that, just like it can't match you measurements above.
Dhualagiri and Namcha Barwa also have huge rises.
Namcha Barwa rises about 22,300 /6800 meters feet in ~six miles (10.5 kms). Denali doesn't come close to this, though it still has an impressive rise.
Outside the greater Himalayan region though, Denali and St Elias do have the highest rises I know of. St Elias still does seem to beat out Denali though.