Differences Btwn Class 3+ & Class 4 Hiking

[Mike P.]

I know Dave M has been to Switzerland a couple of times, I've driven through it & hindsight what it is, should have spent a day or 1/2 a hiking in area of Julier Pass, the pass was 7700 feet with a couple of 9 & 10K peaks looking easy to climb.

I'd also recommend Stelvio National Park in Italy near the Swiss & Austrian border. high peak in area is Ortler, 12,905 & a glacier trek. A few others in area are too but several are not & are 8900 - 11,000 feet. The park has a good map. I've already planned some trips there again & I won't be back for another 10 - 12 years!

Zugspitze, highest in Germany is non-technical from Reintal Valley, small section up high has cables for Via Ferrata travel but on that side, only a couple of spots felt exposed while holding onto the cable. (The Hollental valley on the other hand, I thought I'd die there.)

 

[sierra]

having done a decent amount of routes out west Ill chime in. Good info about class ratings so i wont repeat that, but keep in mind exposure plays no part in a routes ratings yet can play a big part in a routes degree of difficullty for some. You can have a class 3 route with alot of exposure that would scare the bejesus out of you and a class 4 route that goes easier. Imo class 4 routes can be soloed but you you should be very proficient on rock because as stated before a deathfall is possible ie. Pyramid in CO.
Loose rock is another concern, a class 3 can be on solid rock can not to bad or the rock can be rotten or loose and make it quite harder to climb ie. North maroon peak CO. verses Longs Peak CO.

 

[thuja]

I'm planning some hikes in the Alps & west of the Mississippi, and want to get as challenging as possible without getting into technical climbing- I'm guessing either Class 3+ or Class 4.

So to give me a feel for using a Class 1 - Class 5 rating system, what would the following rate:

Any other info which can make this a little clearer will be welcomed.

There really isn't any such thing as a third class trail. Class II, max.

3rd and 4th class are hard to define precisely and definitions change with region, with guide, with individuals, whether or not they are supposed to. To my way of thinking, 3rd class is postentially exposed, but most reasonably competent and experienced people will not use a rope. It can be scary stuff, particularly down climbing. Lots of people die in the mountains on 3rd class routes or approaches, because it is not protected.

4th class, good climbers will often "solo" or free it, but it is definitely terrain where most people and parties will use a rope, but not use chocks or other formal protection. Sometimes it just means there aren't any good protection opportunities and the lead has to run it out. Sometimes it means you are slinging trees or the like. It's easy climbing, but an unprotected fall will kill you or injure you badly.

My advice to you, speaking of guidebooks I know in WA, is figure you can do class II as an unroped scramble, and you'll just have to see about the III. Maybe, maybe not. The Olympic guidebook tends to rate stuff lower than the Beckey Cascade guides. I imagine this kind of inconsistency is common across the west. And, oh yeah, take guidebooks with a grain of salt. Not everything in them is accurate particularly the "mere" class II and III stuff which the authors may not have done themselves and may regard as trivial and boring.

 

[forestgnome]

So in theory the Bondcliff trail, five miles of class 1 or 2, should be rated class 4 (or at least a 3, anyway) because of that one step just below the top on the south side of Bondcliff

Yesterday, I hiked up that section without hands. I'd rate this trail a Class "A"

Happy Trails

 

[sierra]

one again class 3 has nothing to do with exposure. Class 3 means you must use your hands to climb, further more when speaking of class 3 routes, you would say you climbed them not hiked them, thats the difference.

 

[Jeff-B]

There really isn't any such thing as a third class trail. Class II, max.

Well, you have obviously have not hiked/climbed Huntington's Ravine or Mt Tripyramid North Slide in New Hampshire. These two "trails", as listed in the AMC White Mountain guide book, are perhaps the exception for 3rd class examples, and fine ones too at that!

Having climbed many 3rd class routes in the Sierras, I can honestly say these two NH climbs can hold thier own challenge rated as such.

 

[thuja]

Well, you have obviously have not hiked/climbed Huntington's Ravine or Mt Tripyramid North Slide in New Hampshire. These two "trails", as listed in the AMC White Mountain guide book, are perhaps the exception for 3rd class examples, and fine ones too at that!

Having climbed many 3rd class routes in the Sierras, I can honestly say these two NH climbs can hold thier own challenge rated as such.

I have been up Huntington, if not the Tripyramid route. And it would be very misleading as a guide to what is considered "3rd class" in NW guidebooks. People should not assume they can get up a "3rd class" route in the Olympics or Cascades because they can get up the Huntington ravine trail. Maybe they can; maybe they can't. It depends on them and on the route in question.

I am not competent to comment on ratings in either Colorado or the Sierras; things might be different there.

 

[dms]

Thuja, I have had the good fortune of climbing Olympus and Shuksan in WA. IMO, there is absolutely no comparison of the effort/exposure involved in doing those peaks with either Huntington Ravine or N. Tripyramid.

 

[Jeff-B]

I have been up Huntington, if not the Tripyramid route. And it would be very misleading as a guide to what is considered "3rd class" in NW guidebooks. People should not assume they can get up a "3rd class" route in the Olympics or Cascades because they can get up the Huntington ravine trail. Maybe they can; maybe they can't. It depends on them and on the route in question.

I am not competent to comment on ratings in either Colorado or the Sierras; things might be different there.

Agreed.
As in a similar example would be; to NOT consider a 5.10 technical climb on Cathedral Ledge in NH to compare with a 5.10 big wall climb in Yosemite.

My point is, the few Class 3 examples of difficulty to try in NH, for anyone interested, is the Huntington Ravine Trail and Mt Tripyramid North Slide.
Do those and then add another 5K elevation rise, with the same "problems", to compare with western peak Class 3 climbs ....and then you get the idea.

If in the Sierras and Co., add factors for high altitude climates of 13K ft.+ as well.

 

[giggy]

yea - and unless your used to the thinner air, (most here are not cuz we do a week or 2 jaunts out there), class 3 would be harder at 10K+ then at 4K here. I just got back from mount shasta where shoveling snow at 10K for water required taking a break to catch my breath every few seconds............so probabaly safe to not assume if you can do huntington ravine trail here its not a given you could do a sustained class 3 route in the rockies, cascades, etc.... with the same ease. I can't think of any class 4 stuff - but i am sure its there, there has to be some on the headwalls of washington, adams, great gulf, etc.. its just off trail.

 

[lx93]

The overall message that I'm getting is that even at Class 3+, I'd do well to have some technical gear and a partner w/ some technical climbing experience, and at Class 4 it'd be stupid not to have either of the above, right?

 

[giggy]

others will chime in - but my take would be for class 3, gear should not be needed and probably be more of a problem than its worth as the rope will probably get stuck everywhere, etc.... climbing w/ a rope on long routes is time consuming and can be more dangerous - check out Tmax's hood report, we had to make a call on whether to rope up or not. its not an easy call - and in the end we decided not to - it was the right call b/c we all came back and for a technical route, it was easy, for a hiking route, it was hard - (if that makes sense) - but the chance was there for one of us to take a fall and then your at the bottom of the glacier if your unroped, if your roped, the chance is all 3 go down if the anchor blows and nobody self arrests. (i know your doing rock, but the same thought process is there)

- class 4, again, if sustained and really exposed, then maybe you would want pro/rope, class 4 is "easy climbing" - but its climbing - not hiking. You really need to judge it when your there and ask yourself what the impact of the a fall would be, if your falling 3 or 5 feet, then maybe its worth the risk if a short section, if your going to tumble 200 feet and your not that comfy on rock, then maybe some pro would be smart.

- i guess my suggestion would be, try finding a route with some minimal class 3/4 that way your not on that terrain too long. I have more skills on snow and ice than rock as well -so maybe someone else can help with the class 4 rock. AND - I don't know you or your skills, so maybe doing something tougher would be fine.
hope this helps- have fun

 

[DougPaul]

The overall message that I'm getting is that even at Class 3+, I'd do well to have some technical gear and a partner w/ some technical climbing experience, and at Class 4 it'd be stupid not to have either of the above, right?

Seems a good approach, at least for your first time or two. Even if you don't actually need the technical skills, the judgement that comes with them (particularly if one leads) can be very useful.

A case in point: a led hike up a slide in the DAKs. The leader had native talent, but no explicit climbing experience. He shot up a short exposed difficult slot without giving it a second thought. A number of the party members had difficulty and then stacked up in the slot, so that if one fell, others would go too. (Think bowling pins.) The leader just waited for the followers--I stayed out of the pileup (self preservation...), looked around, found an easier route, and helped others up it. My climbing backgound (including some teaching) gave me the skills to asses the situation, realize that it was too hard for some of the others, and to find an easier and safer route.

In general, a climbing background will help you asess the difficulty of a route, help you routefind, and give you moves which can make it easer to get past specific obstacles. Risk assesment and managment is also part of leading any climb.

Doug

 

[TCD]

I've been following this thread closely. An important point that I saw is that Class 1 and 2 are more like hiking, whereas Class 3, 4, 5 are more like climbing, and therefore are an altogether different activity.

Some of this discussion is speculative, from folks that don't have climbing experience, and some of it is educational, from folks that do have climbing experience.

lx93,

DougPaul is right on in his most recent post. Understanding climbing is very kinesthetic and visual, and experience based. That is, it's a subject that is extremely unsuited to text explanations, despite a lot of good info here.

For kinesthetically and visually learned activities, there is NO substitute for experience. A climbing course with a qualified local school or guide, and a few trips on moderate Class 3-5 terrain with a safe, experienced leader will ENORMOUSLY increase both your knowledge and confidence prior to venturing out onto Class 3 or 4 terrain on your own. If you have time and resources to fit those activities in prior to your trips, it will be worth the investment.

TCD

 

[sierra]

TCD makes a great point that ILL second. In fact, after years of hiking in the Whites I had decided to try some big peaks out west. BUt I started rock/iceclimbing here in the Whites first. I studied rock/iceclimbing for a few years until I was fairly proficient ie. lead 5.10/ grade3+WI before I went out west. Once out west these skills proved invaluable, for I could scramble routes unroped up to grade 4 with confidence and safety, without the technical training I would have had a much harder time.
AS giggy pointed out as well, most of this stuff is at altitude as well, looking down steep stuff in hunningtons is one thing, the same moves at 13,500 ft or higher is a whole another thing.

 

[giggy]

some great info here, I will also add that over the years, I have taken 3 climbing/mountaineering courses from guides - and it was invaluable. Better off learning the proper way before getting into/onto tough terrain.

 

[sierra]

good point giggy, I didnt climb with a guide for years I was self taught. If I where to do it all over, I would have started with a guide, you can learn more in 4 days from a guide then you can learn in quite some time on your own. Its worth the money, just make sure its a good school, not some cowboy ( Ive been there too).