Granlibakken vs Mount Waterman
Granlibakken (California) and Mount Waterman (California) head-to-head: stats, terrain, and 2026-27 pass coverage.
| Stat | Granlibakken | Mount Waterman |
|---|---|---|
| Vertical drop | 207 ft (63 m) | 1,001 ft (305 m) |
| Summit elevation | 6,555 ft | 7,956 ft |
| Base elevation | 6,348 ft | 6,959 ft |
| Lifts | 1 | 3 |
| Runs | 1 | 20 |
| Beginner terrain | 0% | 35% |
| Intermediate terrain | 100% | 30% |
| Expert terrain | 0% | 35% |
| Night skiing | - | - |
Mount Waterman has the bigger vertical (1,001 ft vs 207 ft); Mount Waterman has more runs (20 vs 1); Mount Waterman skews more expert (35% expert terrain).
Which pass covers them?
| Resort | Pass coverage (2026-27) |
|---|---|
| Granlibakken | Not on a major pass; lift tickets only |
| Mount Waterman | Not on a major pass; lift tickets only |
No single pass covers both, so skiing both means separate passes or lift tickets. Check your full resort list in the pass finder →
Stay near Granlibakken
Lodging near the base fills up first during peak weeks. Search stays near Granlibakken
Related comparisons
Mammoth Mountain Ski Area vs Mount WatermanMount Waterman vs Palisades TahoeGranlibakken vs Mammoth Mountain Ski AreaGranlibakken vs Palisades TahoeMount Waterman vs Northstar CaliforniaGranlibakken vs Northstar CaliforniaAlpine Meadows vs Mount WatermanChina Peak vs Mount Waterman
More detail: Granlibakken stats · Mount Waterman stats