UKC

Just been sent a guide for the Mt. Cook regionand just trying to get to grip with the grading system. I understand that the Ewbank system is used for the technical crux but then there is the Mt Cook Grade, which if I'm not much mistaken is a bit like F though to ED. Would this be correct and if so what would be a reasonable comparison of the grade breakdown? Tah...

In reply to mike kann:
There are some comparison charts out there, but bassically you'd have to look at the route and the descent and see what you think. Right thats the bleeding obvious stated... MC grades evovlved speciffically for the mc area and were, until recently, used in places such as the Darrens where thry aren't appropriate. I was arguing for the adoption of the euro two part grading when i was there and this has been adopted in the Darrans (this is coincidental - nothing to do with my pursuasion). One of the problems with the MC grades is that it has been decided that certain faces or mountains can't have anything harder than an MC5 on them, so you will find that 5 covers all maners of things.
Think of the situation in Scotland where V was anything from IV,6 to VII,8.
Another thing to consider is that prob over 90% of alpine routes hane never had a second ascent. One Kiwi mate put this figure closer to 99%.
Anyway, if you find the grades a bit confusing do new lines and then you can grade them however you want.

In reply to James Edwards: Aha. So the guidebook really is just a guide-book! To give you ideas! Interesting. No wonder I couldn't find a comparison easily... So basically the system is 1 to knarled - knarled being routes them which you need to be flexible so as to kiss your ass goodbye and or damned strong so you can pull the mountain down to you...

In reply to mike kann:

Actually it's 'gnarled' but yes, basically James' statement of the obvious is really the only useful approach, though talking to locals (if they'll talk to you) about recent conditions can be useful. But as James also says, quite a lot of routes don't get done. I'm not sure I'd put it at 99%, but tbh I'm not one to know (is anyone? that's part of the problem). I guess if you counted every route in the book and then undertook the impossible task of collating ascents for each, the unrepeated number might be very high, but by doing that you're including a lot of routes that you may not want to do anyway. So while statistically interesting it may be practically irrelevant. Like anywhere a minority of routes attract the majority of traffic, either due to access, safety, brand-power (Cook, Tasman, Aspiring) etc.

Probably more interesting is the number of routes that probably *are* worth doing, or *look* that way, but don't get repeated. This number is quite a bit smaller than the overall number of routes in the book. In this category I (personal armchair choice only) would put: east side Malte Brun, west side Tasman, Sheila Face of Cook, Whataroa/Spencer sides of Elie de Beaumont, and some smaller stuff up around the Maud & Grey glaciers west of D'Archiac (maybe). Non-easy access is the crux in most of these examples. Plus, it's a fat guidebook considering the number of currently active alpinists in NZ

Have an ask over at mountainz.co.nz

D

In reply to mike kann: It'd be something like 1 = F, 2 = PD, 3 = AD, 4 = D, 5 = TD, 6 = ED1. Roughly. As others have said, the approach and selecting the right tactics for the route, weather and conditions are likely to be the crux.

Whilst many routes don't get climbed much the popular routes will see plenty of traffic and it should not be hard to find out about conditions for areas like the Grand Plateau, Tasman Saddle and the West Coast Neves.

In reply to mike kann: I climbed the following routes around Mt Cook: Sheila Face of Mt Cook, Central Buttress. I'ld say was TD. Difficult route finding through crevasses on the Upper Empress Shelf on the descent.
West Ridge of Mt Cook, D or D+, similar to the frendo spur (inc bivvy on low peak) but with a more difficult descent!
Porter Col, Mt Cook, D. Exposed to serac fall.
Hicks/Dampier and Dingle/Button on Mt Hicks - AD, but with either a 12 hour killer approach or a 1.5 day approach split at gardiner hut.
Couloir Route on Mt Footstool - PD, 3 hour approach to bivvy hut.
Vervoorn/White Buttress on Mt Nazomi, D+/TD. We didn't summit so can't comment for sure but it seemed straightforward.

The routes I did all compared along the lines of 1-6 = F-ED, with much longer approaches and less help available in the event of something going wrong.

Also walked up to Plateau Hut on Cook with some friends who were climbing the Linda, I don't recommend it (the walk).

In reply to mike kann:
Likewise - we walked up to Plateau and then the normal route on Cook up the Linda glacier in 2001.
I would give the walk up about Pd and the route about Ad, maybe Ad+. I think this is Grade 3 in the Mt Cook Guidebook.