|
braxtron
Aug 1, 2004, 9:06 PM
Post #1 of 24
(2951 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 9, 2003
Posts: 67
|
Bad directions/maps or good, detailed ones? A plethora of route pictures and topos, or not? Would GPS coordinates be helpful?
What do you like to see, what do you NOT like to see, and what would you like to see more of in a climbing guide book (that is specific to a particular area with multiple sections/rocks)? Just a curiosity question...Thanks!
|
|
|
|
|
texasclimber
Aug 1, 2004, 9:57 PM
Post #2 of 24
(2951 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 19, 2002
Posts: 821
|
I'd like to see a guidebook that splits up trad and sport climbs. The Falcon guidebooks suck I think b/c of this blending of all route types. Unfortunatly, Falcon guides are the only guides for some areas.
|
|
|
|
|
musicman
Aug 1, 2004, 10:00 PM
Post #3 of 24
(2951 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 16, 2004
Posts: 828
|
i would like to see a new version of the A.F.Canyon/RockCanyon book out soon. even thought apparently it should be out 'very soon' it drives me crazy to get on a climb that is next to the .9 and have it end up being a harder one then i was expecting because new routes have been put up since then, that book better be out soon. the '95 (maybe'96, not sure) book is a little on the old side.
|
|
|
|
|
climbingnurse
Aug 1, 2004, 10:14 PM
Post #4 of 24
(2951 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 30, 2003
Posts: 420
|
Most annoying thing I've come across in a guidebook:
In the Seneca Rocks guide the pictures of the rock are in black and white and the topos are drawn over in light red ink. Makes it impossible to see. It's the most utterly worthless guide I ever hope to use.
|
|
|
|
|
xanx
Aug 1, 2004, 10:18 PM
Post #5 of 24
(2951 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 6, 2002
Posts: 1002
|
i gotta say i'm not a big fan of the New England Bouldering Guidebook just put out by Tim Kemple... the boulder problems are described by a letter system, with photos of the boulder with letters at different points and then under hte problem description it will say "Try Again: A, B, E" or something like that to show you where to start/finish ect... but i just think its confusing.
the new Gunks Bouldering Guidebook by Ivan Greene is great and easy to use tho.
its just an organization issue i guess...
|
|
|
|
|
camhead
Aug 1, 2004, 11:54 PM
Post #6 of 24
(2951 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 10, 2001
Posts: 20939
|
good topic, yo.
a few gripes. Don Reid's guidebooks to Yosemite (aid and free) suck major donkey dick. Poor indexing of routes, terrible directions, and barely any discussions of climbing history.
Also, Dave Bingham's new City of Rocks guide could be a lot better. TERRIBLE grammar, several indexing errors, and one page that is printed twice. This does not even include moronic and insensitive comments such as "for this route you may have to clean some pesky cliff swallow nests." Now THAT should piss off some land managers.
Aside from the fact that he down-grades a lot of my best sends (the horror!), Dave Bloom's new guidebook to Indian Creek is the SHIZZIT. Lots of history of the area, little sub-articles by climbers, detailed beta regarding access, gear, and approaches. wooooord.
|
|
|
|
|
lordjim
Aug 2, 2004, 12:11 AM
Post #7 of 24
(2951 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 16, 2003
Posts: 575
|
John Bronaugh's guide to the RRG is a great one. Histroy of the region and of the routes, good directions to the crags, overview maps that show the location of the crags, and one thing that I love but didn't realize it till I bought a guide that didn't have it, spiral binding.
Chirs Watford's Dixie Craggers atlas is another good one. It shows the general lines on the cliff faces.
|
|
|
|
|
gambler
Aug 2, 2004, 12:49 AM
Post #8 of 24
(2951 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 2, 2002
Posts: 85
|
I like the Rockfax series,such as the Rifle guide by Dave Pegg entitled "Bite the Bullet"....it has those cool icons,such as the flexing bicep indicating powerful or burly moves and the bag of crap icon indicating routes that are less than stellar!
I hate those books that say....starts 15' left of route X...route X starts 20' left of route Y....etc,etc
|
|
|
|
|
gambler
Aug 2, 2004, 12:52 AM
Post #9 of 24
(2951 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 2, 2002
Posts: 85
|
Props to Marty Karabin for his Queen Creek guide...well written and researched for its history and geology and has lots of photos of the routes.
|
|
|
|
|
berserk
Aug 2, 2004, 1:58 AM
Post #10 of 24
(2951 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 15, 2003
Posts: 59
|
That's a tough question to answer short and consisely.
I LIKE:
1) Good access description
2) Lots of history, both for the area and specific climbs.
3) Start of routes described independently of other climbs (not 2m left of etc....
4) Good pictures, both topo and cool action photos to accompany the guide
5) Short and concise route descriptions
6) In terms of gear, a simple sport vs trad vs mix is enough in my books. OK to state how many bolts, but nothing more
7) Indexes
I DISLIKE:
1) Confusing access descriptions
2) Lack of history. That makes it look like the author really doesn't know the area or haven't bothered to talk to the most active climbers of the area.
3) Bad topo-pictures. If they're bad, it's better not to include any.
4) Too detailed route descriptions, especially involving specific gear placements e.g. use a #1.25 SLCD in diagonal crack at 3m then a #2 in the next slot. This is really BAD, and ruins any onsight attempt.
5) Wrong descriptions (Obvious really)
There's soo much more to say, but I'll leave at that for the moment.
|
|
|
|
|
bilias
Aug 2, 2004, 2:59 AM
Post #11 of 24
(2951 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 24, 2004
Posts: 104
|
Horrible access descriptions for the first-time visitors to the selected area.
|
|
|
|
|
johnhemlock
Aug 2, 2004, 4:03 AM
Post #12 of 24
(2951 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 10, 2004
Posts: 311
|
I despise crappy Zapruder film quality black and white photos of the crags. The old Vedauwoo guidebook has the best crag photos, in my opinion. Also of dubious worth are etch-a-sketch renderings of the crag covered in so many x'es it's impossible to distinguish the lines.
I like guidebooks with some historical and geographical perspectives. The Jackson / Ortenberger Teton guide and Toula's Yellowstone Peaks guide are great examples of this. I wouldn't want to carry either one of them very far but they're great for dreaming in the offseason.
|
|
|
|
|
johnhemlock
Aug 2, 2004, 4:05 AM
Post #13 of 24
(2951 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 10, 2004
Posts: 311
|
In reply to: I like guidebooks with some historical and geographical perspectives. The Jackson / Ortenberger Teton guide and Toula's Yellowstone Peaks guide are great examples of this. I wouldn't want to carry either one of them very far but they're great for dreaming in the offseason.
Sorry, I meant Tom Turiano's Yellowstone Peaks book.
|
|
|
|
|
petsfed
Aug 2, 2004, 4:27 AM
Post #14 of 24
(2951 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 25, 2002
Posts: 8599
|
Correct names, first ascent information, and clear, high contrast photos/topos. The opposite would obvious be a major gripe. Also, consistent grading and "sharp end research" on the part of the author is always handy. If the only person to have led the route says its a classic, don't just take his word on it. I find it odd that everybody (myself included) says that Lucille is classic, while the number of people to successfully climb it can be counted on two hands.
I like to see the "local projects" in a guide book. That is, if its a rite of passage to lead a certain route, indicate as such. If there's an open project indicate as such. Maybe some unlikely hardperson can come in and get that monkey off the local community's collective back. Iwant to know if a route is popular, or seldom repeated. I want to know if the locals do a route by moonlight, naked, or solo. These are important parts of the local character.
I like to see good maps and major land marks pointed out. In the case of granite face routes, sometimes you can't tell one from another. So the "20 feet left of X" standard is necessary. Just use that one landmark throughout. Not "20 feet left of X which is 15 feet right of Y."
I want to see some editorializing in the guidebook. I know of two different (and recently published) guidebooks for Vedauwoo. I've got one, I'll get the other, but I prefer my old Kopischka book, if I can get away with it.
|
|
|
|
|
braxtron
Aug 2, 2004, 5:46 PM
Post #15 of 24
(2951 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 9, 2003
Posts: 67
|
Bumpin' this back onto the front page...
|
|
|
|
|
calfcramp
Aug 2, 2004, 6:05 PM
Post #16 of 24
(2951 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 10, 2003
Posts: 391
|
I don`t like hand drawn pictures of the cliff. Do they mean this crack? or that crack? Prefer photos.
Like having # of bolts indicated for each route AS WELL AS the height of the route in feet or meters or whatever. (Gives an idea of runout...)
Would like to see more geological description. What kind of rock? What kind of event created the cliff? Why are the huge chunks of rock tumbling off it?
Better maps of how various crags link together with footpaths.
I only own 2 guidebooks, but these are my gripes/suggetions.
Oh yeah, more photos would be nice....
SPIRAL BINDING. Allow to lay flat! That's a good one...
|
|
|
|
|
xclimber47
Aug 2, 2004, 6:13 PM
Post #17 of 24
(2951 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 13, 2004
Posts: 54
|
I Use the Horst guides for entire states, which are nice because they have lots of climbing spots in one book, however, my main issue is just finding what routes are what. I always end up spending a while walking back and forth trying to figure out what route looks like a "5.9 arete" or something. Then again, i'm not sure how to fix that... close up photos? more description?
|
|
|
|
|
sspssp
Aug 2, 2004, 6:19 PM
Post #18 of 24
(2951 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 2, 2003
Posts: 1731
|
I like a "star" system vs a "recomended route" system. A guide book that only gives a list of a few recommended routes, what about all the others? A route that is not recommended, may be good, average, bad, horrible--there is no way to know. So I prefer a 1 to 5 star system where every route gets a quality rating.
Extraneous information (such as history etc) is ok for a small guide book, but for a big book it just makes the thing, bigger, more expensive and heavier. Imagine if Reid had given extensive history, approach and a general discussion for every Yosemite climb. You would be lugging a telephone book around. I realize there is the piracy issue, but I really like the SuperTopo e-books. All the interesting extras don't add weight. For the route(s) you want to do, it is easy to print (and carry) a single page color topo.
I would like to see a system that is a little more sophisticated than just R and/or X. More along the lines of "is this a good climb to be pushing the grade" or is it more "better be really solid at the grade." There are plenty of routes that do not get an R rating, but they aren't the things to be trying repeated red point attempts on. Similarly, if the R is at a low enough grade of climbing (versus the crux) it may not be a big deal.
|
|
|
|
|
gfw123
Aug 2, 2004, 6:21 PM
Post #19 of 24
(2951 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 7, 2004
Posts: 19
|
I haven't been climbing that long, but I have looked at a few different guide books for the Seattle area. I really like the updated Exit 38 and Exit 32 guide books:
http://www.deceptioncrags.com/
The nice clear photos help a lot on routes that cross other harder routes on the way up. As a new-ish sport climber I really look to the bolt count and quality rating (how 'fun' the climb is). What I would also like it a mention of how long a rope you need for each route. As you get experienced I am sure it is not a big deal, but, again, as a new-ish climbing I come across a tall tall climb and often think my 60m rope is way short. Of course, it never is I am told. :)
For some climbs that are not on heavily traveled trails, GPS coordinates would be great. Also, detailed photos and descriptions of trail turn off points has been very helpful.
I have not seen this mentioned before, but the guide book should be made of sturdy construction. My guide books take a lot of abuse as I use them outside in dirty, hot, wet (sometimes) conditions. The more they resist being torn and damaged the better.
Places for log entries of the climbs I have done are also good. Helps keep me honest. :)
|
|
|
|
|
climbaholic
Aug 2, 2004, 10:19 PM
Post #20 of 24
(2951 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 20, 2003
Posts: 34
|
I'm actually a fan of the Rossiter's hand drawn topos in the Boulder and Eldorado guidebooks. I think it is often easier to determine a route from these than from a grainy photo.
I think some of the newest guidebooks are excellent. Supertopo puts a ton of information into each topo so a photocopy of the page is all you need for a long route. The new Vedauwoo guide is beautiful, with color photos and some great history -- plus it is reasonably priced. And the new Indian Creek guidebook is a work of art...it has so many great photos that it would be just as comfortable on the coffee table. Take a look at these to see how good a guidebook can be.
|
|
|
|
|
ldsclimber
Aug 2, 2004, 10:58 PM
Post #21 of 24
(2951 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 27, 2002
Posts: 90
|
I really like the idea of GPS quordenents used in the New Bouldering Guide for J-tree.
I like history behind classic routes. ie Tahquiz Open Book, FA Royal Robbins, First 5.9 in America.
Airiel views are nice also.
Facts about the type of rock in the area. Kudos to Marty in his Queen Creek Guide.
Quality pictures do wonders.
I really apprecieate the warning on Sandbagged routes.
|
|
|
|
|
ikefromla
Aug 2, 2004, 11:20 PM
Post #22 of 24
(2951 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 23, 2002
Posts: 1216
|
the McQuade/Leavitt/Ryan guide to Vegas area limestone entitled Islands in the Sky is an example of a great (sport) guide. the only thing that could make it better would be bolts marked on the topos... OH, and maybe even MORE great photos. I like guides that get you psyched to climb at an area, and good photos do just that for me.
|
|
|
|
|
drector
Aug 2, 2004, 11:38 PM
Post #23 of 24
(2951 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 1037
|
It sucks when the map shows a section of rock below the bridge and the hand drawn picture of the rock shows the bridge in the background BELOW the rock.
Other than that, any guide book that contains easier routes and top-rope climbs is a winner since I like to take my eight-year-old daughter climbing.
Dave
|
|
|
|
|
ikellen
Aug 3, 2004, 8:46 PM
Post #24 of 24
(2951 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 13, 2003
Posts: 393
|
I loved Marty Lewis' guidebooks for the eastern sierra areas. they are good, but dont have any extra garbage, they just tell you what you need to know.
|
|
|
|
|
|
