Powerball Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 I'll take a Chicago winter over a Boston or Detroit winter. They have higher bomb potential/frequency, the winters are sunnier, AND you can still maintain good snow packs and get hit by clippers often. Yeah, I would miss out on the nice lake effect snow squalls Detroit can get, but I'll live (it'll also mean better severe weather events). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpartyOn Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 The next one had BETTER be ours. Whats funny is that DTW is still beating ORD in seasonal snowfall. they can have the nickels next, give us a storm. Good luck with that next storm. Looks like a rinse wash repeat of this current system. (per euro..kinda) let's let our Chicago friends enjoy this. I think it would be great if they smoke us on seasonal totals. We have no powder storms. The majority of that DTW snow was a non issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpartyOn Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 Yea. I would most def take a Chicago over a Detroit winter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weatherpsycho Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 Yea. I would most def take a Chicago over a Detroit winter. Too similar. I would much rather have a GRR or Allegan winter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A-L-E-K Posted January 13, 2012 Author Share Posted January 13, 2012 People think Im SO optimistic all the time? I will throw a f*cking fit if that happens in ORD/MKE and we get rain or mostly rain! Im going to start treating the weather gods with as much ignorance and disrespect as many others on here do. Oh, futility records blah blah blah, it doesnt matter if theres 3 months of snow chances left....cant you see? A crappy start is undeniable sign that the entire snow season will remain that way. Its probably never ever going to snow!! Maybe SSC can give me some pointers on how to piss them off just right, luckily havent had to do that in a long time in Detroit...until this winter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmc76 Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 O.k guys we get the picture. stop burying Josh in the ground. Hes a great guy he's just getting frustrated. No big deal.. will get our winter blah blah blah Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blue60007 Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 Here's to hoping next weeks storm isn't rain here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicago WX Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 Here's to hoping next weeks storm isn't rain here. It gonna rain. Green Bay looks like a good spot right now...for snow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hm8 Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 I can't help but get frusterated when all of these kids from California and Florida here at UofM experiencing winter for the first time will think this is as bad as it usually gets Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buckeye Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 it would appear the 850's near chicago are warmer than Ft. Lauderdale. Sometimes you just gotta Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AppsRunner Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 Other than buckeye, why is Ohio included in this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buckeye Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 looking at the euro 2m temps on accuwx... not as toasty as it might appear, albeit still toasty. Chicago gets around 55 and the 65 line is around the ohio river. 60ish in central OH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michsnowfreak Posted January 14, 2012 Share Posted January 14, 2012 Yea. I would most def take a Chicago over a Detroit winter. Youve got to be kidding me. Because they have had a better snowstorm so far this season? The differences are so miniscule between Detroit and Chicago its not funny, and all the snow averages lean in Detroits favor, which include slightly more snowcover days, as well as slightly more days with 1"+, 3"+, and 5"+ snowfalls. Chicago has the edge on cold and sunny days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BowMeHunter Posted January 14, 2012 Share Posted January 14, 2012 Most geeks on here like big snow storms and are naso much snow cover nuts like a few of us so I'd imagine that plays in to their picking chicago over det. Both cities nice to visit but I would never live around either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wisconsinwx Posted January 14, 2012 Share Posted January 14, 2012 Most geeks on here like big snow storms and are naso much snow cover nuts like a few of us so I'd imagine that plays in to their picking chicago over det. Both cities nice to visit but I would never live around either. I too think I'd choose Chicago over Detroit for the same reason; of course, I don't have to make that decision b/c Milwaukee has an edge over both. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michsnowfreak Posted January 14, 2012 Share Posted January 14, 2012 O.k guys we get the picture. stop burying Josh in the ground. Hes a great guy he's just getting frustrated. No big deal.. will get our winter blah blah blah No one except powerball realized what I was doing with my rant post in the other thread- sarcasm. Its a nice wintry night out, 1.7" is at least twice what I thought wed get from this event, so I actually dont have any complaints about it. Everyone is not gonna score every storm, and this was the first widespread snow event of the season (sadly). We were fully expected to be in the worst spot possible with this event and still managed a blanket of snow. MY problem was that some are always blasting how sickeningly optimistic I am when pointing out that its ridiculous to talk about season futility records and such when theres 3 months of snow potential (I dont care if the models/pattern look as bleak as possible). Now, boom, they get a 3-7" snowfall and it changes on a dime. So I figured screw it, I will start acting like them, thats the only way to fit in on these boards anymore. Those wwbb days when it was actually about weather are long gone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michsnowfreak Posted January 14, 2012 Share Posted January 14, 2012 Most geeks on here like big snow storms and are naso much snow cover nuts like a few of us so I'd imagine that plays in to their picking chicago over det. Both cities nice to visit but I would never live around either. Chicago gets a few more big bombs than Detroit, but when it comes to run of the mill 6" storms, the two are neck and neck with Detroit if anything slightly in the lead. Both are wintrier climes than most major cities in this country, but if a snowlover would pick a place based soley on weather, they wouldnt pick either (and certainly not one over the other). And that is true, you and I seem to be two of a kind. Whats sad about the snowcover aspect is its one thing in Chicago and Detroit...but its another up north. And thats a rant/complaint I have thats perfect in this thread. My snow weekend up north this year is scheduled for the Mar 2-4th. After missing on a trip last winter (cancelled since, of ALL things, Detroit had deeper snow than the UP in early Feb)...NO WAY im not going up this year. There is one problem. Im going to be a snow-chaser to wherever has the deepest snow, so I have no idea where its going to be, and wont know til probably the week before. Once again i cant rely on Paradise, as their current depth is just 6" (most of which fell yesterday)....just like last Feb 5th when I was supposed to go, our depth was 16" theres was 11". This place should be having 3-4 feet on the level by Feb. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stebo Posted January 14, 2012 Share Posted January 14, 2012 You want a true complaint, all the asinine trolling that has occurred on this forum all winter has made it unreadable often. I don't care how much snow anyone gets compared to another person. There are winners and losers in every situation. So to go around and act like people care because you get more snow or less snow than others is downright foolish. This post is directed to both sides of the fense that feel the need to constantly poke each other. Hell another complaint is people posting every single thought that hits their brain, so much so that it ends up conflicting with themselves. Really makes it hard to even want to read some days. I am sure as hell that there are many who agree with both points I have made here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hm8 Posted January 14, 2012 Share Posted January 14, 2012 You want a true complaint, all the asinine trolling that has occurred on this forum all winter has made it unreadable often. I don't care how much snow anyone gets compared to another person. There are winners and losers in every situation. So to go around and act like people care because you get more snow or less snow than others is downright foolish. This post is directed to both sides of the fense that feel the need to constantly poke each other. Hell another complaint is people posting every single thought that hits their brain, so much so that it ends up conflicting with themselves. Really makes it hard to even want to read some days. I am sure as hell that there are many who agree with both points I have made here. I'm all for starting a thread for pure meterological discussion and then a banter thread for future storms, as we did with Irene this year.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AppsRunner Posted January 14, 2012 Share Posted January 14, 2012 You want a true complaint, all the asinine trolling that has occurred on this forum all winter has made it unreadable often. I don't care how much snow anyone gets compared to another person. There are winners and losers in every situation. So to go around and act like people care because you get more snow or less snow than others is downright foolish. This post is directed to both sides of the fense that feel the need to constantly poke each other. Hell another complaint is people posting every single thought that hits their brain, so much so that it ends up conflicting with themselves. Really makes it hard to even want to read some days. I am sure as hell that there are many who agree with both points I have made here. I agree strongly with all of this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stebo Posted January 14, 2012 Share Posted January 14, 2012 I'm all for starting a thread for pure meterological discussion and then a banter thread for future storms, as we did with Irene this year.... Banter threads are ok as long as the same banter doesn't happen in discussion threads, because then that entirely defeats the purpose of a banter thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Powerball Posted January 14, 2012 Share Posted January 14, 2012 Youve got to be kidding me. Because they have had a better snowstorm so far this season? The differences are so miniscule between Detroit and Chicago its not funny, and all the snow averages lean in Detroits favor, which include slightly more snowcover days, as well as slightly more days with 1"+, 3"+, and 5"+ snowfalls. Chicago has the edge on cold and sunny days. Chicago does has an edge on bigger synoptic snowfalls however (it's questionable how much Lake Michigan plays into it). In comparison, it's much easier for them to get a perfect synoptic storm track versus Detroit (between the mountains and the strength of the -NAO with regard to clippers, see December 2010) I would take that and sacrifice SLIGHTLY more snowcover days and less sunshine. Cloudy days just make everything much more miserable IMO, but that's just me. Meanwhile, I'm thinking Detroit's edge in snowfall (like Toronto edge in snowfall to Detrirt and Chicago) because of lake effect snow, not necessarily because they receive better synoptic hits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmc76 Posted January 14, 2012 Share Posted January 14, 2012 Chicago does has an edge on bigger synoptic snowfalls however (it's questionable how much Lake Michigan plays into it). In comparison, it's much easier for them to get a perfect synoptic storm track versus Detroit (between the mountains and the strength of the -NAO with regard to clippers, see December 2010) I would take that and sacrifice SLIGHTLY more snowcover days and less sunshine. Cloudy days just make everything much more miserable IMO, but that's just me. Meanwhile, I'm thinking Detroit's edge in snowfall (like Toronto edge in snowfall to Detrirt and Chicago) because of lake effect snow, not necessarily because they receive better synoptic hits. I would take Detroit over Chicago but Toronto over Detroit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michsnowfreak Posted January 14, 2012 Share Posted January 14, 2012 Chicago does has an edge on bigger synoptic snowfalls however (it's questionable how much Lake Michigan plays into it). In comparison, it's much easier for them to get a perfect synoptic storm track versus Detroit (between the mountains and the strength of the -NAO with regard to clippers, see December 2010) I would take that and sacrifice SLIGHTLY more snowcover days and less sunshine. Cloudy days just make everything much more miserable IMO, but that's just me. Meanwhile, I'm thinking Detroit's edge in snowfall (like Toronto edge in snowfall to Detrirt and Chicago) because of lake effect snow, not necessarily because they receive better synoptic hits. Chicago seems to do better with the BIG ones (see Jan 1999 and Feb 1/2, 2011). Per NOWdata, Chicago average days with 3"+ snowfall per year is 3.6 and Detroit is 4.2. Average days with 5"+ snowfall per year is 1.2 at Chicago and 1.7 at Detroit. Again though, these are the more moderate synoptic hits, not the NYblizz 1999s and GHD 2011s). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michsnowfreak Posted January 14, 2012 Share Posted January 14, 2012 I would take Detroit over Chicago but Toronto over Detroit. Thats how I would too, based on climo. But lately Toronto has been floundering. Since 2007-08, heres how Id rank: 2007-08: Toronto - Detroit - Chicago 2008-09: Detroit - Toronto - Chicago 2009-10: Chicago - Detroit - Toronto 2010-11: Detroit - Chicago - Toronto Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowstormcanuck Posted January 14, 2012 Share Posted January 14, 2012 I would take Detroit over Chicago but Toronto over Detroit. The last 15 years it's really been a push between here and Detroit. In fact, since 2004-05, I think officially, we've only beat DTW in seasonal snowfall once (2007-08). Although, part of that is due to Pearson's measuring problems. We don't have any propensity for bombs either. The only upside to Toronto is that we can occasionally get some heftier LES snows (>4"+). All in all, I'd take Detroit over Toronto. Although if this rut we're in is just temporary, rather than a trend, maybe I'd reconsider. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toronto4 Posted January 14, 2012 Share Posted January 14, 2012 I don't know where to post this, but I just noticed that Environment Canada has revised the Nov. 30th data for the downtown Toronto station at the U of T. It is now showing 1.0 cm (0.4") of snow instead of a trace. That's more accurate as there was a burst of heavy snow in the morning hours that accumulated on the grassy areas before melting quickly in the afternoon as temps rose to the upper 30s. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowstormcanuck Posted January 14, 2012 Share Posted January 14, 2012 I don't know where to post this, but I just noticed that Environment Canada has revised the Nov. 30th data for the downtown Toronto station at the U of T. It is now showing 1.0 cm (0.4") of snow instead of a trace. That's more accurate as there was a burst of heavy snow in the morning hours that accumulated on the grassy areas before melting quickly in the afternoon as temps rose to the upper 30s. If U of T doesn't get to 46.2cm this winter, I wonder how much validity the moniker of "least snowiest winter ever" will have, considering all their problems of late. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ottawa Blizzard Posted January 15, 2012 Share Posted January 15, 2012 If U of T doesn't get to 46.2cm this winter, I wonder how much validity the moniker of "least snowiest winter ever" will have, considering all their problems of late. 1918-1919 was apparently a hideous winter as well. http://www.climate.weatheroffice.gc.ca/climateData/dailydata_e.html?timeframe=2&Prov=ONT&StationID=5051&mlyRange=1840-01-01|2006-12-01&cmdB1=Go&Year=1919&cmdB2=Go&Month=1&Day=14 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowstormcanuck Posted January 15, 2012 Share Posted January 15, 2012 1918-1919 was apparently a hideous winter as well. http://www.climate.w...&Month=1&Day=14 Well, at least December 1918 was around normal in terms of snow. We're certainly trailblazing with this winter. It doesn't look like the 1999-00 narrative is going to work out since we're likely to head back into the furnace as we approach the beginning of February. At the same time, I refuse to believe we're going to finish up the season with like a foot of snow. It's just SOOOOOOOOOOOOO improbable based on almost 200 years of record keeping data. At some point, even if it be late March/early April, we're going to get ours. Even in 2009-10 February was close to normal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.