Looking at photos of the alps lately has evoked this question: What is generally conceded to be the hardest major summit in the Alps and sees relatively few ascents because so?

I don't know the answer, but I would submit that Aiguille Blanche de Peutérey is hard and seldom climbed. It does see a fair number of ascents, I'm sure, but it's also in an area with one of the highest concentrations of climbers in the universe. One should also take into account that mountains with a reputation for being difficult tend to attract lots of climbers.

In the Eastern Alps I would nominate Torre Trieste, which. once again, is in a popular area. However, there are other summits that are seldom visited and that may vye for the title: Pan di Zucchero, Burèl, Cima d'Auronzo.

One could also consider the great faces instead of the summits. Then the east face of Mont Blanc, the north and east faces of Grades Jorasses, the north face of Eiger, the north Face of Matterhorn, the northeast and northwest faces of Pizzo Badile, the northwest face of Civetta, the south face of Marmolada, the west face of Sass dla Crusc, the north face of Agner, the north faces of Cima Grande and Cima Ovest di Lavaredo, the east faces of Cima Tosa and Crozzon di Brenta...

I think La Meiji was the last peak of its height 13, 068 ft in the Alps to be climbed

Hi

I'm new in this forum!

Do you mean peaks seldom throdden or also great walls of mounts which can be easily summited through other routes?

I can tell you that in Dolomites, my favourite area, the less climbed peaks are those belonging to the massif of Croda dei Toni, some summits of Pale di San Lucano just like Thrid Pala and Spiz di Lagunaz, many summits in the group of Feruc; Piz Serauta in the Marmolada group and Torre Trieste in Civetta.

bye

Depends on how you measure difficulty.

In his book "The Alpine 4000m Peaks" Goedeke calls. A. Blanche "the most difficult independent 4000er in the Alps."

That has more to do with commitment however than pure technical difficulty, which is IV or around 5.6. Add remoteness and bad weather and you're looking at a pretty serious undertaking.

Now consider, the Dent du Geant, one of the most popular 4000m peaks, largely because of the fixed ropes festooning its face that allow any idiot to climb it. Without the ropes, Goedeke writes, the Dent is "one of the hardest alpine 4000m peaks."

That might be true, but skipping the fixed ropes, the climbing is still only around V or 5.8 and not that hard even in mountain boots. But that would still be the easiest way up.

Of peaks with a normanl route of AD I think any of the lines on the North East face of the Weisshorn would qualify.

Some where only first climbed in the 1980s and have seen only a few repeats since then and only one female has ever climbed any of the newer routes.
Given global warming this is one that will become impossable in the next few years.

Not that the route is technically hard it is just rare to find it climbable and the way down climbable as well at the same time. either one is too icy or not icy enough.

cheers

A. Blanche should be the hardest normal route.

Weisshorn, A. Verte, Matterhorn and Taeschhorn have also difficult normal route.

But these are only the major mountains in their area. But there are trabants and pillars which are more difficult than any normal route of the alpine 4000s.

For example:
Grand Capucin or Pilier des Trois Pointes both ~3.850m and grade VIII or TD+
or Central Freney pillar

The hardest alpine route in the alps?!
Maybe the Japanese diretissima through the Rote Fluh in the Eiger North Face. A wall in the wall. The first ascent took 15 days.

The hardest climbing route is definetly NOT in the Dolomites, it´s "Des Kaisers neue Kleider XI" of Stefan Glowacz in the Kaiser Range Austria.

Sebastian Hamm wrote:Grand Capucin or Pilier des Trois Pointes both ~3.850m and grade VIII or TD+ or Central Freney pillar

True, the Tacul "trabants" (satellites) have some very hard routes, but the Swiss route and "O Sole Mio" to Grand Capucin, as well as the Hagenmuller-Koenig direct route to the Pilier des Trois Pointes are "only" 6b according to Piola.

Sebastian Hamm wrote:The hardest climbing route is definetly NOT in the Dolomites, it´s "Des Kaisers neue Kleider XI" of Stefan Glowacz in the Kaiser Range Austria.

I wouldn't be so peremptory. Bellavista on Cima Ovest by Alex Huber is rated 8c, while Glowacz's route--certainly an amazing feat and a milestone--is, from what I've read, 8b+.

brenta wrote:I wouldn't be so peremptory. Bellavista on Cima Ovest by Alex Huber is rated 8c, while Glowacz's route--certainly an amazing feat and a milestone--is, from what I've read, 8b+.

Yeah, right! It´s also a hard route. I have only remebered his winter ascent of Bellavista.

Nevertheless a German did it first

The book Alex Huber "Senkrechte Horizonte" is absolutely amazing!

aber was meinst du?

bin dankbar er nicht franzosiche oder italienische war

If you do the peak by these routes, do they rank as the hardest?
http://www.alpinist.com/doc/ALP18/newsw ... hm-bullock
http://www.alpinist.com/doc/ALP18/newsw ... mont-blanc

The west face of the Dru has been re-climbed after the huge rockfall in June 2005
http://www.alpinist.com/doc/ALP18/newsw ... ce-climbed

The most difficult 4.000 m peak in the Alps is the Pilier du Diable (4.067 m).
difficulty: D+
It is a single-handed UIAA summit and has no easier route.

The UIAA list includes Corne du Diable (even though it violates the topographical criterion), but not the Pilier, which is a different summit. It is true, though, that the easiest route to Corne du Diable is D/D+ and is quite committing at that level of difficulty. Then again, Aiguille Blanche de Peutérey looks even more intimidating to me, even though the (seldom repeated) standard route is only AD. While the French scale (F,PD,...) takes into account the level of commitment, it is not perfect in that respect. AD is the rating of Arête des Cosmiques and of the Midi-Plan traverse, but getting to the top of Aiguille Blanche is quite a different matter.