Tom Fralich wrote:rhyang wrote:I get the impression there are about 8 pitches that rate 5.7 - 5.8; the rest sound like 4th/easy 5th. Sandbag ?
Yes, that sounds about right. I didn't find it to be a sandbag...pretty honest 5.7-5.8 and the gear is good.
I didn't do it, but I understand that the traverse start is not that obvious. The direct start is very obvious, has excellent climbing, and is well protected. I didn't think it was any harder than solid 5.9. I would try to do it with the direct start if you can.
I think the route is pretty stout for 5.8. I'd say it's 5.8 if you're a solid 5.9 climber. I'm thinking pitch 5, the traverse into and the long crack might feel pretty hard to a 5.7/8 climber. Add a pack, some altitude, and it's going to feel more stout than some garden variety 5.8. Also a couple of pitches higher, the pitch is only 5.7 but it's on really loose rock with pretty lousy pro in spots. It felt considerably harder than your average 5.7 pitch because a lot of the big obvious holds looked they would bust off in your hands. Definitely a don't fall pitch. At the time I thought that maybe the pitch wasn't as bad as it seemed, but when my partner--who's done a ton of stuff in the Sierra, Tetons, Winds, Bugaboos--followed it, he commented on how sporty and loose it felt.
I saw your recent trip report for the N. Arete of BCS and I thought Clyde was WAY harder. Same rating but no comparison in terms of difficulty or commitment. That's just me though. I'm far more conservative these days. Don't get me wrong. It's an awesome climb. There's just a much greater chance of really getting hurt on it than some other Sierra 5.8s.