|
ben87
Apr 4, 2006, 1:18 AM
Post #1 of 9
(892 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 26, 2004
Posts: 229
|
My partner and I want to take a 4-day climbing trip during the last weekend of april. We're not likely to be in top shape. What we want most is FUN - getting in lots of moderate climbing in a desert playground. We also place a high premium on keeping logistical hurdles to a minimum since we're both taking time off from busy jobs and we want to spend as much time as possible actually climbing.
My first idea is Red Rocks, my second idea is J-tree. Red Rocks seems to win in terms of sheer accesibility. It also wins in versatility - my partner would definitly like to climb some sport - and scope. Maybe J-tree comes out on top for solitude and splendor...? Airfare prices might also put J-tree ahead.
Does anyone want to make the case for j-tree - or any place else?
|
|
|
|
|
cosmiccragsman
Apr 4, 2006, 1:34 AM
Post #2 of 9
(892 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 7, 2005
Posts: 778
|
Go to Red Rocks!!! (one more chance for me to find a campsite at JT :lol: :wink: )
Have fun wherever you go.
Cosmiccragsman
|
|
|
|
|
whatsupdoc
Apr 4, 2006, 2:00 AM
Post #3 of 9
(892 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 19, 2002
Posts: 312
|
In reply to: My partner and I want to take a 4-day climbing trip during the last weekend of april. We're not likely to be in top shape. What we want most is FUN - getting in lots of moderate climbing in a desert playground. We also place a high premium on keeping logistical hurdles to a minimum since we're both taking time off from busy jobs and we want to spend as much time as possible actually climbing. My first idea is Red Rocks, my second idea is J-tree. Red Rocks seems to win in terms of sheer accesibility. It also wins in versatility - my partner would definitly like to climb some sport - and scope. Maybe J-tree comes out on top for solitude and splendor...? Airfare prices might also put J-tree ahead. Does anyone want to make the case for j-tree - or any place else?
The climbing at both places is stellar.
If you want to climb longer multi-pitch moderates with 1/2 hour to 1 hour approaches, descents, etc then head to Red Rocks. You also have the option of sport cragging here.
If you just want easily accessible single pitch moderate routes (there are some multi pitch routes but most are single pitch) with lots of variety then head to J-tree. Just be sure to read a guidebook and get a little familiar with the area before you come here and pick out some climbs you want to do, as the place is HUGE and finding your route can be more difficult than you think, thus decreasing overall climbing time.
RR obviously has more night life, but also more city hassles. RR is a whole hell of a lot easier to get to.
Have fun.
|
|
|
|
|
kovacs69
Apr 4, 2006, 2:05 AM
Post #4 of 9
(892 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 16, 2005
Posts: 607
|
They both are wonderful in their own ways.
You can't go wrong with either though.
Couple of things to keep in mind.
Red Rocks altitude can be a bitch if you live at or close to sea level and are not in good shape. I found this one out the hard way.
Red Rocks has longer climbs...that's a no brainer. If you are looking for long multi-pitch climbs then go to Red Rocks.
If you like sandstone go to Red Rocks...If you like granite go to J-Tree.
J-Tree is easy on the legs and lungs. The approaches can be long but usually they are flat.
J-Tree you can do lots of climbs right off your car bumper.
The camping at J-Tree is outstanding.
Airfare shouldn't be a problem since you can get to J-Tree from Vegas. Vegas is only about 2 1/2 hours away from J-Tree.
There is also lots of sport at J-Tree so don't rule it out because of sport vs. trad.
JB
|
|
|
|
|
builttospill
Apr 4, 2006, 11:51 AM
Post #5 of 9
(892 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 8, 2004
Posts: 814
|
I'm surprised the 2000 feet of elevation in Vegas made that much difference. I suppose Red Rocks is higher than Vegas proper, but still.....I'm surprised. I felt a difference when running at 4,600 feet instead of 700 or so like at home on the East coast (when I moved to Utah), but I wasn't climbing then. I guess it could make a difference.
|
|
|
|
|
phaedrus
Apr 4, 2006, 5:24 PM
Post #6 of 9
(892 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 24, 2002
Posts: 3046
|
phaedrus moved this thread from General to Regional Discussions.
|
|
|
|
|
kovacs69
Apr 5, 2006, 2:36 AM
Post #7 of 9
(892 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 16, 2005
Posts: 607
|
Although Vegas only sits at 2000 ft Red Rocks sits at about 5000ft at the base. Most people don't realize that the entire drive to red rock is uphill.
JB
|
|
|
|
|
jdouble
Apr 5, 2006, 3:32 AM
Post #8 of 9
(892 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 15, 2004
Posts: 564
|
Red Rocks. Vegas breaks the tie.
|
|
|
|
|
justthemaid
Apr 5, 2006, 5:19 AM
Post #9 of 9
(892 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 11, 2004
Posts: 777
|
Personally, I hate crowds, I hate traffic, I hate casinos, I hate tourists, and I hate the 13 mile campground, so Red Rocks wasn't so good for me.
Although there is tons of stellar climbing at Red Rocks, the negatives outweighed the positives in my case. If two of your 4 days are a weekend, I would avoid Las Vegas like the plague, and head for J-tree.
If you like sandstone, and lots of multipitch, and don't share my "hates" then you might like Red Rocks better.
|
|
|
|
|
|
