Anchors atop FFD

Post by **Steve** » Thu Mar 31, 2005 2:09 am

So who put the anchors atop Five Finger Discount?
I hated the idea of having anchors up there, but that argument has been played out long ago. I climbed up to those things today and backed off, they looked bogus. Both had the 'wiggle flex' thing going on when I clipped draws on 'em. Both had threaded studs with the stud just barely passing through the nuts. And the right hanger wasn't flush with the wall, the sleeve showing behind the hanger. I'm no bolting expert, but I didn't feel that they were all that great. I traversed over and used those 15 year old jobs above Motha.

Post by **J-Rock** » Thu Mar 31, 2005 2:56 am

This is yet another reason why the CAC needs to get the anchor replacement database up to date... and why we need responsible reporting of such upgrades... and why we need to keep track of such things... etc. etc. The database is ready, but it is no good without continued support (and input) from those "in the know".

Post by **Wes** » Thu Mar 31, 2005 3:06 am

I will tell you what anchors suck and need to be moved: The ones on GI. Totally kills the best move on the route (the mantle onto the ledge). They should be on the ledge, or even better, at the top out.

FFD anchors make more sense to me. The traverse is kinda dumb, and takes you right over top of two other routes.

Wes

Post by **J-Rock** » Thu Mar 31, 2005 3:18 am

When I climbed GI route there were no anchors. We topped out and then rappeled down over Super Slab. I did enjoy that top-out onto the ledge just shy of the short scramble to the top and it was my favorite part of the route also.

Post by **t bone** » Thu Mar 31, 2005 3:32 am

Your right on about GI Wes, the mantle caps the whole route off.

Post by **haas** » Thu Mar 31, 2005 3:38 am

I know they see little traffic, but the anchors for both Camp and Store are shotty as hell.

Post by **Ascentionist** » Thu Mar 31, 2005 1:04 pm

Wes wrote: FFD anchors make more sense to me. The traverse is kinda dumb, and takes you right over top of two other routes.

Wes

You can build a bombproof anchor at that point and its not like there is loose rock on the ledge. Are we going to baby everyone out there? Put up rails and plastic guards on all the sharp trees? Kill all the pesky snakes and fumigate the entire region to do away with the bugs?

Or better yet, why don't we just pave the entire base of Roadside Crag? It would cut down on the erosion right?

If the anchors are shoddy they need to go.

Post by **Ascentionist** » Thu Mar 31, 2005 1:09 pm

Wes, don't take that as an attack. I only mean to make a point, not to offend.

I think FFD is kinda unique (or was). If its too much trouble to build an anchor and traverse when you're finished then ther eare tons of other routes that don't require that kind of setup.

Its getting to where no one has to know how to build a solid anchor around here. Newbies need to be able to learn to place directionals, build belay anchors and dela with those kind of situations. Just clipping bolts on the top of every climb teaches you nothing.

Post by **Wes** » Thu Mar 31, 2005 1:13 pm

Ascentionist, It is roadside. There is plenty of loose rock up there. There are convence anchors on every trad route there now. Why keep this one route different? Really.

Wes

Post by **Eric** » Thu Mar 31, 2005 1:21 pm

I agree it isn't that hard to build an anchor at the top of FFD, but putting anchors at the top wouldn't make it any different then some of the other popular trad routes at Roadside e.g. Roadside Attraction, Synchronicity. Especially since just about every other route at roadside has bolted anchors at the top. I have seen all kinds of clusterf**ks people have set up trying to toprope that route for their buddies. Frankly I am kind of glad to see some anchors there, but I agree that if they are there they should certainly be safe.