In reply to Chris Craggs:
Hi Chris, currently in Spain so not got the guidebook to hand to give absolute specifics. We ordered the new guidebook just prior to our Scandinavian trip last year, as we've come to expect, a very nice looking (if rather expensive) Rockfax publication. Poring though the guidebook prior to departure we soon came across a number of typos, but the odd one or two can be forgiven in a guidebook of this size. Later, in Lofoten it didn't take long before more typos and errors became apparent...... It became a bit of a joke as we seemed to find something on just about every crag we climbed, we debated if this was a draft version that had somehow made its way to the printers rather than the final but in the end decided it was probably just insufficient proof reading and trying to meet a deadline for the printers so as not to miss that seasons climbing trips. Either way not really acceptable....
Anyway the two specifics, one on Gandalf crag, where the route has from memory been identified on the topo as being the route to its left. This caused two separate parties confusion in the short time we were there, one who thought they had previously done the route but not according to the new guidebook and another who started up the incorrect route, which has a much bolder start.
The other notable was on Svolvaer where something has obviously gone wrong in the topo lines/number markings.
On various popular routes information and descriptions were wrong in places. Given this is a second edition and was supposed to be a collaboration with a local based climber this was disappointing and surprising. Talking to a couple of local climbers they also said many of the errors in the original guidebook have been carried over despite being well known about. One example suggests large cams required for the top pitch of a route, nothing bigger than a 2 required, glad we spoke with a local and didn't drag a 4 or 5 up. On another route a pitch description states something like climb the groove and pull through the bulge above, except there isn't one! Viewed from the road a shadow on the rock could be interpreted as a bulge. On Ant Pillar we did the "worthwhile" 2 or 3? pitch extension, to use a Rockfax expression Bag of Shite, loose rock and scrambling with only a few metres of decent climbing in total, how this could be recommend is beyond comprehension when there's so much good climbing about.
All in all we had a great trip and the guidebook errors gave us something to discuss and joke about on the wet days. Rockfax holds itself as being at the forefront of guidebook development and has definitely raised the bar in terms of presentation, however, attention to detail and substance are equally important especially when we the climbing community are after all paying good money for these guidebooks.