Take this all with a grain of salt because i'm sure that opinions vary, as well as people's personal data. Also, for what it's worth, i've always been skeptical of the IM.com data for IMOO. It doesn't seem that there is any way it's accurate.

Both courses had almost zero flats, but here's why how they differ. While both courses have very few flat spots and tons of hills, the IMOO course has very short, tight rollers that bleed into one another. This is beneficial because if you hit the downhills with some effort (vs. coasting) on the IMOO course, you can knock out substantial amount of each uphill relying heavily on momentum gained from the downhill. However, herein lies the key difference between IMOO and IMMT. On average. the hills at IMMT were longer and steeper. The overall impact of this on your legs is less time with lower effort and ultimately more leg abuse. Additionally, despite the last 5 miles before T2 of the 70.3 and Ironman having an overall negative elevation gain, the final climb leading into that has an overall positive elevation gain and takes a very hefty toll on your legs just prior to starting your run.

Last comparison, the roads. The roads in IMMT were amazing. I felt like I was riding a tour stage that had just been freshly paved. I don't know what they do or how they do it. But the asphalt was smooth as butter.

My personal opinion is that IMMT is a tough course even though my personal elevation data says IMOO bike is tougher. Of course this is starkly different from the data provided by Ironman. So again, take this all with a grain of salt. And I've only 70.3 IMMT bike (a single loop of the IMMT bike course) versus IMOO. Ultimately I would have much more fear of the IMMT bike course over the IMOO bike course.

Here's my personal data from each race recorded on my Gamin 500:

IMOO Bike:
Elevation Gain: 7,182 Ft.
http://connect.garmin.com/modern/activity/372808668


IMMT Bike (WC Course, elevation gain x2):
Elevation Gain: 3,107 Ft. (6,214 Ft.)
http://connect.garmin.com/modern/activity/585406395

Here's the data from IM.com:

IMOO Bike:
Elevation Gain: 2,890 Ft.
http://www.ironman.com/...elevation%202014.pdf


IMMT Bike (WC Course, elevation gain x2):
Elevation Gain: 2,952.76 Ft. (5,905.52 Ft.)
70.3:
http://www.ironman.com/...lo%20an%20v6%202.pdf
Ironman:
http://www.ironman.com/...lo%20an%20v6%201.pdf

Pretty much agree with the post above. Raced IMMOO in 2010 and IMMT in 2013. Both are challenging courses but are really different in terms terrain of the bike course. hat last climb before the turn and then again before T2 at IMMT is tough on the legs, where as I think it the accumulation of the small rollers at IMMOO that can get you if you aren't careful. IMMOO also has a lot more turns that just slow you down overall, IMMT has some turns with a few 180s but overall fewer 90 degree turns.

IMMOO = shorter rollers with lots of turns on some pretty crappy roads
IMMT = longer, consistent climbs and nearly perfect road conditions

It's tough to say one is more difficult that the other, they're both tough, but overall I think I enjoyed the IMMT course more.

At MT I used my brakes exactly three times per lap; once at each U turn. Basically every hill at MT is followed by a straight descent right into the next hill. WI has turns everywhere, some of which are at the bottoms of some of the biggest hills so you lose all your momentum. I think WI is harder.

Thanks Chris, and thanks to the two other posters as well.

I've done IM Moo numerous times, so I'm very familiar with that bike course. And I totally agree...there are a number of hills that you don't get to convert into downhill momentum due to turns.

Looking forward to IM MT.

Spot

---

___________________________________________________
Taco cat spelled backwards is....taco cat.