# Hill or Mountain?
**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hill-or-mountain/49786
**Category:** Factual Questions
**Created:** [January 13, 2001, 12:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hill-or-mountain/49786 "2001-01-13T00:09:44Z")
**Posts on this page:** 4
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@tsunamisurfer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tsunamisurfer)
#### Post date: [January 13, 2001, 12:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hill-or-mountain/49786/1 "2001-01-13T00:09:44Z")
What’s the difference between a hill and a mountain?
I recently saw Hugh Grant in “The Englishman Who Walked Up a Hill and Came Down a Mountain.” Got me thinking: out here in the mid-Atlantic, people are always talking about our “mountains.” And they are referring to topographic features maybe 400 feet above sea level!
Here’s a related thought: if the peak of a hill/mountain is 8000 feet above sea level, but the surrounding countryside is at 7,500 feet, is it a mountain or hill?
---
### Author:  [@Ad\_Noctum](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ad_Noctum)
#### Post date: [January 13, 2001, 12:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hill-or-mountain/49786/2 "2001-01-13T00:25:17Z")
I (coming from Central Minnesota) tend to believe that that is a Mountain. Hills are generally more sloped, and grassy, Mountains are more peaked and tree-laden
I know the things we hiked through last summer were mountains, but they might’ve been hills… every step felt like 100 with a 75 lb pack on your back… then again, the Peaks were over 1,500 feet over Lake Superior, which was down below…
---
### Author:  [@SmackFu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SmackFu)
#### Post date: [January 13, 2001, 12:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hill-or-mountain/49786/3 "2001-01-13T00:31:50Z")
For the UK, from [About.com](http://www.geography.about.com/science/geography/library/faq/blqzmtnheight.htm):
> [@](#):
>
> In the United Kingdom, a mountain must be over 600 meters (1969 feet) or over 300 meters (984 feet) if it’s an abrupt difference in the local topography.
I also found another cite [somewhere else](http://surveycentral.org/AdvStats/6318.html) that generally agrees with that by saying “a mountain is considered to project at least 300 m (1000 ft) above the surrounding land, whereas a hill is generally considered to be less than 300 m high.”
According to this second definition, your final question’s answer would be no.
---
### Author:  [@mangeorge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mangeorge)
#### Post date: [January 13, 2001, 1:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hill-or-mountain/49786/4 "2001-01-13T01:11:47Z")
you can’t be too choosy. So you call Camelback Mountain (hill actually) a mountain. At 2,700 ft. it is, after all, 100 ft. taller than Squaw Peak. 😃
I went there to visit my brother a while back. They’re _really_ proud of that hill, so if you’re ever there, don’t tell them any different. 😉
Peace,
mangeorge