A friend of mine just returned from a three week ride in Africa, from Zimbabwe to Johannesburg. I have two trips that I have wanted to make for the last seven years, but worry a bit about the strength and stamina of my right led since my compound fracture.
Both are highly off-road, and both are at altitude. One is at extreme altitude, which is even more problematic as I’m a lowlander. However, at some point I may take the plunge and do at least one of them, but it’s unlikely that I’ll accomplish that this year.
The first trip is to Ladahk, India, where the average height of the excursion is almost 18,000 feet. The ride is called, the Roof of the World, and as the Himalayas are exactly that, the ride would be somewhat formidable. The route taken is on the infamous, Highway of Death. Enough said about that.
As a one-time climber, or shall I say trekker, I have always had the lure of the Himalayas, if only to stand at the base of Everest or Anapurna and revel in the thrill of the altitude. The ride itself encompasses a length of 1000 miles and the ride is made on a Royal Enfield Himalayan 411. The scenery is beyond incredible and the ride would be the culmination of my years of riding.
There is, however, one major caveat that acts as a deterrent. If, whether due to lack of acclimatization or illness, one arrives and experiences altitude sickness, and you are subsequently unable to continue, then you forfeit your rather high fee for the trip. At 70, acclimation to the altitude would be wise. A study completed by the US military on vets with an average age of 68 suggested that in 5 days, one should expect a reasonable level of acclimation to the altitude, at modest heights of just 7,500 feet. Riding at an average of 16,000 feet may well be a different proposition.
The second choice, and probably the more rational from the perspective of altitude is Patagonia in South America. The tour routes vary, but motorcycling the Andes would be the intent. The length of the trips vary, but a 16 day trip that covers approximately 2,500 miles sounds more doable than the excursion to Ladahk.
The Patagonian scenery is spectacular and the route less intensive, and dangerous, with the elevations being more humane at around 10,000 feet. I have an interest in vulcanology, and being able to visit an active volcano in the western Andes would be another interesting aside. Having been able to walk inside the caldera of four volcanoes so far has been incredible and a fascination that never gets old.
My question is a simple one. A) How many of you have made either trip, and B) Was the trip worth it?
Thanks for your information. I look forward to reading your answers.
Oh, and by the way, Happy New Year.
Ciao…
Leave a Reply