Breckenridge vs. Vail
 

Is Vail really that much nicer than Breckenridge? I am curious as to what justifies that higher prices in Vail compared to Breckenridge. Are the scenic views nicer?

No

They can get them. And some snob appeal along with good marketing.

No

Vail appeals to the non-skiing, very wealthy, fur coat crowd. It's a fantastic ski mountain, too, but my kids say they feel uncomfortable in Vail Village wearing ski clothing because everyone else is totally dressed to kill.

Breckenridge is more family-oriented and casual. I think it's setting is prettier, too.

Breck is a real town from the mining days (old in terms of Colorado standards) whereas the villages at Vail were developed relatively recently around the ski industry. The Vail villages abut the mountains in a narrow valley, which limits the views somewhat; and Breck is in a more spread out, scenic area.

I suppose Vail does have more appeal for richer visitors, but that's never stopped me from enjoying skiing or eating there. Breck would have more choices and more of a down-home appeal for all economic levels, but it has its upper crust facilities too. It's hard to say whether Vail's higher prices are justified by its location or amenities, only that they charge what they can get away with, I'm sure!

Vail has some lodging and restaurants that are more upscale than anything you will find in Breck. Also, the back bowls of Vail are a unique skiing experience. There is nowhere else in North America like it.

Breck definitely has better views overall; the front side of Vail faces the interstate.

If you are questioning whether it's worth staying in Vail, then I suggest staying in Breck and doing a day trip to Vail to check it out.

I think Breckenridge appeals to more families than Vail. As stated above, Vail has great skiing but also comes with higher priced restaurants and high end stores (as well as the fur coat crowd).

Breckenridge is more low key. Good skiing, affordable lodging and dining and is more family friendly. imo.

I like them both for what they have to offer. Just returned from Vail and while it is very beautiful and love the shops and dining, I can only handle so many days before the snoot factor drives me crazy. (And the snoot is coming from the little rich kids.)

We have never felt uncomfortable walking around Vail in the evening in jeans and ski jackets, so I guess the snooty factor goes right by me.

We like both Breck and Vail, but the amount of terrain at Vail is twice as much as Breck.

I agree, pretty much, with the differences between the two places.

In terms of ski mountains, not much in the world can beat the amount of terrain that Vail has, and if you like more natural ski conditions ("terrain"), then you'll love Blue Sky basin. The views from the top of Vail are as beautiful as those from either the valley or the top of the mountain at Breckenridge. The views from the valley in which the town of Vail sits aren't so good, as already noted, because the valley is narrow and the highway is RIGHT THERE.

The restaurant selection in Vail is better, but they are more expensive than those in Breck.

The snooty factor is higher in Vail, but I just tune those people out.

You may need to define "nicer." Most of the previous comments are accurate. Breck and Vail comparison is more like apples and oranges. It is definitely more up scale and should be compared to Aspen. For a very good skier who can appreciate it, the Vail terrain is superior to Breck and it is much larger and varied. You could ski Vail for week and not cover all the ground. However, Breck is very good and I personally prefer the Breck restaurant scene. I will ski Vail five or six times and Breck maybe 20 during the year.

PS -- someone suggest Vail was a relatively recent development. It may be newer than some but Vail is approaching its 50th birthday. Skied there the 3rd year it was open -- didn't think much of it -- shows you what I know. Copper Mt and Keystone are newer.