|
onamission116
Mar 10, 2003, 5:57 PM
Post #1 of 8
(2152 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 24, 2003
Posts: 60
|
I'm headed to the valley this summer for free climbing and maybe a wall. For those of you who have climbed there and in New Hamshire (cathedral, rumney, etc.) how do the two areas measure up as far as ratings? Is YV just as stiff or moreso? I've heard NH is pretty stiff in gen, but have never climbed anywhere else so I don't really know. I was hoping to see where I might measure up, so I don't jump on a 5.8 that turns out to be 5.12R! :shock: Thanks for the beta
|
|
|
|
|
tim
Mar 10, 2003, 6:58 PM
Post #2 of 8
(2152 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 4, 2002
Posts: 4861
|
granite routes on Cathedral are comparable to those in Yosemite.
the only thing that MIGHT trip you up is the preponderence of wide/offwidth sections on many Yosemite climbs. nonetheless, I have climbed a fair amount at both Cathedral/Cannon/Whitehorse and Yosemite/Tuolumne, and find them to be on a par.
5.9+ routes in Yosemite will usually be easier than the ones at Cathedral Ledge, though ;-) Bring extra hand- and fist-size pieces and have fun.
|
|
|
|
|
spiffdog
Mar 10, 2003, 10:00 PM
Post #3 of 8
(2152 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 18, 2002
Posts: 59
|
Yosemite does offer one difference in terms of stone. Cathedral doesn't have glacier polish. Scary stuff! I would agree on the general equivalence of grading up to the 5.9 level. I recommend Nutcracker, Commitment, Bishop's Terrace, and a drive up to Tuolumne Meadows to get on West Crack and Regular Route on Fairview Dome. If you have some more time for Tuolumne, Aquaknobby on Pywiack is a fun 5.8/9 with just enough run out to keep it real.
-Spiff
|
|
|
|
|
dsafanda
Mar 11, 2003, 1:14 AM
Post #4 of 8
(2152 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 6, 2002
Posts: 1025
|
why is this in "Aid Climbing"?
Anyway, spiffdog is right on. The relatively featureless and polished granite that is typical of Yosemite is rather unique and takes a little getting used to. The grades are like those everywhere else in the world. Some routes will feel soft, other will feel right on and some are sandbags. I think it's more a question of technique than grades. Finger cracks, hand cracks, off width or friction face climbing will all feel very different in terms of difficulty depending on your strengths and weakness'.
|
|
|
|
|
cobra652004
Mar 11, 2003, 1:49 AM
Post #5 of 8
(2152 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 30, 2003
Posts: 143
|
Speaking of route difficulties varying with location, I've been told the Gunks, in general, are rated pretty low compared to other places. Has anyone else heard this/actually experienced it?
Thanks
Brian
|
|
|
|
|
moeman
Mar 11, 2003, 2:07 AM
Post #6 of 8
(2152 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 1, 2002
Posts: 1417
|
I really hate sandbaged routes. Almost as much as I hate absurd inconsistencies in grades from gym to gym, but thats a whole different story
|
|
|
|
|
arsenalcrater
Mar 11, 2003, 2:17 AM
Post #7 of 8
(2152 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 28, 2002
Posts: 147
|
Yes, the craggin' in Yos can be "slippery". The popular routes can be quite greasy with chalk...especailly as the temps rise. Bishops Terrace is a great route, so is Nutcracker. Higher up in the park (T-Meadows), the West Crack of Daff Dome is super fun..open book is a hoot and the Phoebos/Demoes (sp?) can offer some fun excitment....and for some backcountry shinanigans, don't forget Cathedral Peak!!! Have fun!!! I just talked to my roomate, who has climbed at Rumney and the Gunks. His comparison was like this....., "Its all the same....you know.....just like running white water. Yo are running water or you are climbing rock....there is rock and water everywhere. Everyone will have a different opinion on what it is like and how to run/climb it." Just his two cents worth.....we are all enjoying a good buzz right now....take it all with a grain of salt....but it seems like sort of good wizdom in my impaired state. Cheers everybody, the bbq is ready and the beer run is inevitable!!!
|
|
|
|
|
bvb
Mar 11, 2003, 3:08 AM
Post #8 of 8
(2152 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 3, 2003
Posts: 954
|
hey moeman, actually, the "john wayne never wore lycra" quote was a quip kauk delivered at the march, 1986 bouldering comp at mount woodson. he smoked the field that day, wearing blue jeans, in stark contrast to the plethora of hideous mid-80's lycra tights to be seen on all the other male competitors. neil cannon was a particular embarrassment that day -- he changed into a new pair of lycra tights about every 45 minutes. clothes horse preening for the cameras.
anyway, kauk's remark was a pretty funny jibe at the lycra crew, fer sure.
|
|
|
|
|
|
