What's the best guidebook (in English) for Aconcagua? In stores, I've seen Secor's and one published in Europe (with a dark-blue cover), but I haven't done more than flip through them. Are there others?

The book by Mauricio Fernandez is also available in English and is widely available in Mendoza (Argentina). Check ou the cover of the Spanish version here: http://www.camptocamp.org/books/143341 or here: http://www.summit-mza.com.ar/

Harry Kikstra's book "Aconcagua - Summit of South America" is fairly good. It covers both the Normal route and routes on the Vacas Valley side.

The Secor one sucks, ditto on Harry Kikstra.

There are some book reviews in the SP Gear section.

Aconcagua - A Climbing Guide, Secor

Aconcagua: Highest Trek in the World, Jim Ryan

I haven't read Harry's book, but Ryan's book is better than Secor's IMO.

Thanks for the feedback. Looks like the Ryan book is the way to go.

I recommend the RJ Secor book.

I've heard a lot of folks say it isn't good, but in my opine, after two trips there I would say it is very accurate.

Plus, it is small enough to take with you if you want to.

It covers everything you need to know.

Look it over at your local bookstore or library if in doubt.

I have nothing to compare it to, but if you want the low-down on where to go, where to get a permit, how to get mules, what to expect on the trail, etc, then it is what you want. The version I am familiar with is at least 10 years old. I would think if there are more recent editions that they would be at least as good. He also has a Mexico Volcano guide that is excellent.

I did see some comments above stating that they didn't like the fact that the photos were not in color. Not a factor for me.

divnamite wrote:The Secor one sucks, ditto on Harry Kikstra.

Hi, not sure if you think 'Harry Kikstra' (me) sucks as well as Secors book or if you agree with the previous poster saying it is good, but in case of the former: care to let me (the author) know why?

Always open to suggestions which might improve the 2nd edition. Check the guidebook's page on 7summits.com or Amazon.com for some comments and reviews from other climbers who have bought/read/used it.

All 3 books mentioned are different. Secors book offers the best info if you do not want to climb the normal routes, as he mentiones almost all routes, which of course results in a very short description per route, including the normal routes.

The other guidebook is also much broader, I liked the description of other mountain in the Andes.
Mine is purely focused on the 2 normal routes (with a mentioning of the Polish Glacier as well). We wrote this as there was nothing dedicated out there and I still think there is no other. Definitely not on waterproof paper, spiral bound and only 112grams/3.6Oz.

Cheers,
Harry

LOL, sorry for the confusion. The Secor one is not very good, a bit outdated. Yours is good. I don't remember if your book mentioned the camp 2.5 (20,000) at the end of the Polish Traverse or not. If it doesn't, then it should.

hehe, no worries

From the book:

At the end of the snow/ice field you have to take a few steep steps
until you reach the rocky track leading up to the campsite at about
6200 m. Follow the tracks leading up the slope in front of you (with
Independencia refuge on top), and within a few hundred metres
this route merges with the Normal Route.

Not every body uses it, but maybe I can make the camp more clear for the next edition, thanks for the note.
Cheers,

Harry

Ah, never mind then. When we were there in January, several guiding companies are using that camp. If I am to do it again, I would move my tent up to that camp to save myself from a long summit day. Getting water might be a problem unless you are willing to trek a bit up or back down for snow.

Also, there are more options with camps than I thought. I didn't use your book later until someone from another group showed it to us.

1. There is a camp below the penitentes to camp 1 (15,000?). People could've use that one instead of going all the way back to basecamp.
2. When coming back down from camp 1 to basecamp, you don't have to go back down the penitentes. There is/was a steeeep scree trail on scree next to the snowfield, it could've save us a lot of time coming down because we had to constantly stop and let people to come up.
3. A better back-up route information. I think your book was better than Sector because yours show several options once getting around 17,500 where climbers can go up to camp 2 or traverse to other campsites via different routes. Sector's book doesn't show that, and climbers can't have a back up plan.

While I'll probably never go back there, I hope the newer version can give more information like that to help independent climbers.

divnamite wrote:1. There is a camp below the penitentes to camp 1 (15,000?). People could've use that one instead of going all the way back to basecamp.

It is not always there, early in season there are also penitentes there and if not, it might be too close to the slope beneath camp one, and descending climbers might kick some rocks loose, so I would not recommend it. As the slide down from camp 1 to here can take just 5-10 minutes, it is better and safer to camp in camp 1 instead.

divnamite wrote:2. When coming back down from camp 1 to basecamp, you don't have to go back down the penitentes. There is/was a steeeep scree trail on scree next to the snowfield, it could've save us a lot of time coming down because we had to constantly stop and let people to come up.

Yes, I also advice this in the book (chapter: descent):

Aconcagua Guidebook wrote:"Descending from Camp 1, stay to the right of the snow if it’s still
there, using the scree directly below. Leave camp without crossing
the snow field or river; follow the steep scree curve down to the
right, running all the way to the base of the snowfield which you
might have to enter for a small stretch. It’s a steep but feasible slope.
(If you are descending after your fi rst carry to Camp 1 it makes good
practice for descending the Canaleta on summit day.)"

divnamite wrote:3. A better back-up route information. I think your book was better than Sector because yours show several options once getting around 17,500 where climbers can go up to camp 2 or traverse to other campsites via different routes. Sector's book doesn't show that, and climbers can't have a back up plan.
While I'll probably never go back there, I hope the newer version can give more information like that to help independent climbers.

There is quite a lot of info stuffed in these 96 pages , I have tried to show and describe all variations within the normal routes, but welcome any additions or changes.

Thanks in advance,
Cheers, Harry

I liked Harry's guidebook as it's accurate and easy to take with you on the mountain under all conditions (heavy waterproof paper).
Used it successfully this February o the Polish Traverse and everybody of the team wanted to study it.

Proud that a guidebook from a lowlands author is the most favourite guidebook for Aconcagua (and Kili + Denali?)!

Thanks Olaf, appreciated. Yes, I am very happy with Denali as well, and have received very positive comments from people using it.

I did not write the Kilimanjaro guidebook, it was already out, written by my friend and publisher/editor, Jacquetta Megarry (www.rucsacs.com , she also wrote guidebooks for about all the hiking trails in the UK and Ireland and more).
It was in a different format though, currently she is rewriting it for the new format. I did not write for it, but she went on 2 expeditions with my company to get the info for the book, so I still feel proud

Just out is the 3rd book I wrote in the series, about Everest: see http://7summits.com/everest/guidebook.php which I think turned out great. Same format, different content and tone, as needed for Everest...
Cheers, Harry

I never read Harry's book, but the best route descriptions I got were off the web although I don't recall where. They might have been on Rudy Parra's web site.

As for the camp at 20,000', there was no water anywhere near there when I was there. It was a low snow season so there was very little snow around. I remember a small snow field between there and the 19.2 camp (Polish side), and a larger one below it on the ridge that was about 30 minutes to climb from the snow to the camp. (That was on the opposite side of the ridge from the normal route). In any case, it looked like a pretty crappy spot to camp. I would much prefer to stay at the 19.2 camp and have to climb the extra 800' on summit day.