multi pitch routes

Everything and anything to do with climbing in Squamish.
Dru
Senior Member
Senior Member
Posts: 396
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2007 2:00 pm
Location: Chillidog

Post by Dru » Fri Feb 08, 2008 2:59 pm

Is the blasting done?

Brendan
Posting Maniac
Posting Maniac
Posts: 714
Joined: Mon Mar 20, 2006 7:36 pm
Location: North Shore

Post by Brendan » Fri Feb 08, 2008 4:56 pm

Dru wrote:Is the blasting done?
you mean... you don't know?? :shock:

User avatar
Cloudraker
Full Member
Full Member
Posts: 164
Joined: Fri Dec 17, 2004 10:00 am

Post by Cloudraker » Fri Feb 08, 2008 6:09 pm

Brendan wrote:
Dru wrote:Is the blasting done?
you mean... you don't know?? :shock:
They're almost done but there is one big hunk of stone that they haven't been able to remove. The final blast should be coming soon....


Image

hafilax
Junior Member
Junior Member
Posts: 73
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2007 12:56 pm
Location: East Van.

Post by hafilax » Fri Feb 15, 2008 4:41 pm

I did the NN Arete a few years ago. At the time the crux pitch felt like hard 9-10a but I wasn't the strongest or most experienced climber at the time. I definitely wouldn't put it at less than 9.

It is a fun route for what it is. The climbing is pretty crappy up until the last couple of pitches. It has the best chimney I've climbed and coming out of the 'birthing hole' is hilarious. All that and you completely circumnavigate the Chief. Not a bad day's outing.

bradley3297
Senior Member
Senior Member
Posts: 233
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2007 8:51 am
Location: squamish

Post by bradley3297 » Fri May 23, 2008 8:34 pm

i recall the split pillar being upgraded to 10b due to Sandbagging. havent heard it called 5.9.
Bradley

Brendan
Posting Maniac
Posting Maniac
Posts: 714
Joined: Mon Mar 20, 2006 7:36 pm
Location: North Shore

Post by Brendan » Sat May 24, 2008 9:33 am

bradley3297 wrote:i recall the split pillar being upgraded to 10b due to Sandbagging. havent heard it called 5.9.
that's cause it is .10b, according to every guidebook. in reality, there's not one move which is harder than .9 tho... that's what people mean when they call it a 5.9!
the climbing is actually quite boring, kinda like driving to Smith Rock. long and uninteresting (unless you run it out to amuse yourself). the sword is 4x better! and the bolt ladder is pumpier!!

bradley3297
Senior Member
Senior Member
Posts: 233
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2007 8:51 am
Location: squamish

Post by bradley3297 » Sat May 24, 2008 9:58 am

reminds me of a little testis. climbed that. its rated 10 b/c yet the moves felt much easier
Bradley

itsonlyadream
Junior Member
Junior Member
Posts: 28
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 11:08 am

Post by itsonlyadream » Sun May 25, 2008 7:54 am

bradley3297 wrote:i recall the split pillar being upgraded to 10b due to Sandbagging. havent heard it called 5.9.
Strange link-up, NN Arete to Split Pillar, but recall:


Split Pillar FFA 1975 (Eric Weinstein and Darryl Hatten)

probably did not have cams, definitely no sticky rubber, so long cracks were harder when gear was nuts, hexes, or pins, without getting into what harder means

Anders Ourom
Senior Member
Senior Member
Posts: 328
Joined: Thu May 18, 2006 10:38 am

Post by Anders Ourom » Sun May 25, 2008 4:18 pm

Eric and Daryl graded the Split Pillar 5.9 when they did the first free ascent in 1975. With the possible exception of a move low down, it probably is 5.9, although quite sustained and strenuous. It is similar to many Yosemite cracks that were climbed in the 1960s and early 1970s, and also graded 5.9.

There may have been an element of bravado in such grades, but in those days before "relaxed fit" jeans, grade inflation was resisted, and 5.10 was considered a pretty stout grade.

They had EBs (non-sticky), and I vividly remember Daryl telling about their hexcentrics being wedged between crystals i.e. not very solid.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 49 guests