Tod Posted July 2, 2001 Share Posted July 2, 2001 With all the talk of the North Face of Mt. Maude and Smoker’s beautiful report, I too had to go check it out. I wanted to get in there for a while and Sunday (7/1) couldn’t have been a better day. Since the trail is short and direct, I chose to forego carrying in the extra weight of bivy gear and went from trailhead to trailhead. I left my vehicle at 5am. The approach was very straightforward. There was huge difference in snow quality between west side of Seven Finger-Maude col and the east side. The east side did not have the firm hard snow that Smoker described. On occasion my crampons would ball up on the traverse, but other than that, not a problem. The traverse to the base of the North Face is great. As long as you are accustomed to steep faces, it is a breeze and by far the shortest/quickest way to the base of the North Face. I could see it getting a little hairy in the month as it melts out, but it the traverse is definitely in shape… The climb up the face is stellar. The last couple hundred feet has some ice, which made for the crux of the climb. With a second tool handy, it was a breeze (though it didn’t seem necessary). I reached the summit 6.5 hours after leaving the car (including a one hour break at the col to play with a VERY friendly marmot). The descent down the gully system to the northwest is certainly the way to go. Very direct, and if the snow is soft enough in the gully (if it’s still there) you can glissade parts of it. It took me 45 minutes to get down the gully and back to the base of the west side. Since the climb didn’t take as long as I was expecting and I was now standing at the base of both Maude and Seven Finger Jack, I took the opportunity to head up and summit Seven Finger Jack in the late afternoon. All in all, the total time from car to car after climbing N Face of Maude and the standard route on Seven Finger Jack was 13 hours. One of the best solo outings in awhile…. Jim, I don’t think you need to make any changes to the route description other than you may want to list it as a 1-2 day ascent instead of 2-day ascent. It is a stellar route and very worthy of your book. Tod Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smoker Posted July 2, 2001 Share Posted July 2, 2001 Nice TR Tod It's not suprising the snow was softer. It's been warmer temps. great time car to car with both summits. Sounds like you picked a better gully than we did. With that kind of power your about ready for a day trip up Rainier! Smoker Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tod Posted July 3, 2001 Author Share Posted July 3, 2001 I think the difference in the gulley that you went down and the one I went down was this: I probably went down the same initial gulley that you did, the one that is to the west (left) of the 8,900' bench on the north ridge of Maude. About 300'-500' down the gulley there is a split in the gulley. The main gulley goes down to the left, and if you hop over a slight ridge to the right you will find another gulley that takes you down to the bottom very quickly. This gulley on the right isn't necessarily obvious, but it is not hidden... Does that sound familiar to what you went down? Your TR was great and very inspirational. Certainly helped get me out to that location. Thanks... I've often thought about Rainier in a day, I've done a few other peaks such as Glacier in a day (Seattle to Seattle in 24 hours), but I am not sure if I want to rush up to 14,411' like that. Maybe sometime, but no plans at this time.... Tod Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YoungBoySimon Posted July 10, 2001 Share Posted July 10, 2001 On Sat., 7/7/01, my wife Kirsten, Erik Snyder, and I climbed the N. Face of Maude in a day. We left the car at 7:15 a.m., and returned to the car at 7:45 p.m. No speed record to be sure, but still a great day with beautiful weather. We used the Seven Fingered Jack/Mt. Maude col approach, which worked fine. Much faster and shorter than the traverse around Marmot Pyramid that friends and I used last summer to climb the Entiat Icefall. Kirsten, Erik, and I stayed as high as possible from the col, downclimbing a bit, then traversing at about 7,900 ft. toward the N. Face. We never dropped below 7,650 ft., and eventually intersected with the face. The face face itself was not difficult climbing. We never needed crampons as the snow was soft, but we did rope up with a 30-meter rope, and Kirsten and I used short third tools in addition to our regular ice axes. Staying high on the traverse also meant exposure to rock fall, so helmets were appreciated. All in all, a very good route, and worth doing as a one- or two-day trip. John Sharp Bellevue Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tod Posted July 10, 2001 Author Share Posted July 10, 2001 Nice climb isn't it. Great TR. How was the top 100-200 feet? When I was there it was a little bit of ice. I am wondering how much melted out in a week.... Also, I am curious what your decent was... Tod Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erik Posted July 10, 2001 Share Posted July 10, 2001 tod, only last bit was icy, and we deceided to move onto the rock they last to avoid hassling with crampons.... the decent we followed was a special one. follow south side route till you get to the huge scree slope and go down. once we reached a waterfall/cliff we traversed west through trees and brush back to the basin. we bush wacked a fiar bit, but that is because we missed the obvious trail. excellent day climb! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr._Blister Posted July 10, 2001 Share Posted July 10, 2001 Tod: The top 100 feet or so is still hard snow/alpine ice. We were a bit bored of snow climbing by that point so opted for a rock band to the left of the central snow/ice ramp to the top. The rock was pretty good, mostly 4th class with a move or two of 5.0. From the summit, we went down the opposite side, down the big mellow scree field which is the most common ascent I believe. Part of the way down you bear right and continue down scree. At the bottom of the scree field it cliffs out, so we went right and found bits of trail with the occassional bit of bush to fight through. Eventually, we made it down to Leroy Basin at 6,000'. This was pretty much the same way we came down last year. It seems there are numerous ways off the mountain, none of them particularly hard. Is that your impression too? John Sharp Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rodchester Posted July 10, 2001 Share Posted July 10, 2001 I was there on sunday a.m. and decided not to climb it. (So did another guy who was solo) The snow was very sloppy and we post holed in places. The temps were really warm. It did not go below freezing on Sat. night. I would say under those conditions it was doable, but no protection and very sloppy. If it dips below freezing over night to harden it up I would say it would be a great route. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr._Blister Posted July 10, 2001 Share Posted July 10, 2001 Alex: We actually did not camp in the lot, but instead drove from Bellevue on Sat., leaving at 4:00 a.m., and returned to Bellevue at midnight. Long day for us and the babysitter! The crux was probably the last part of the drive . . . Like Rochester, we had a real warm day which as I think I mentioned above, obviated the need for crampons. Sloppy, but not dangerous it seemed. I think this route will see much more traffic now with the new Nelson/Potterfield book and favorable reports such as these. And as Alex mentioned, Leroy Basin is just beautiful right now with tons of flowers. Cheers, John Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex Posted July 11, 2001 Share Posted July 11, 2001 On Monday, my friend Maurice and I went in to climb this in a day car to car as well, inspired by these reports. We left the car at 3am, reached Maude-Jack col at 8am after a long slog on scree, which sucked. Mo had a round of rot-gut going and the route didnt look particularly inspiring to me, so we actually didnt climb it, though we saw Erik, John and Kristins tracks...in fact we probably saw you guys camped out in a minivan in the parking lot when we left in the early morning hours....? Anyway, that basin is beautiful with lots of wildflowers, and we enjoyed lounging and snoozing at Maude-Jack col, scrambling up the N Ridge, and the views really are great! Back to the car by 2pm. This really is a one-day climb from Trinity, Cheers, Alex Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tod Posted July 12, 2001 Author Share Posted July 12, 2001 Alex: Your report of the route not looking so great is not the first I've heard. When I was up there I ran into someone I knew who went to check out the route but him and his friend backed off after the route looked melted out. In reality, you can't really see the route from the col. You have to go one or two soft ridges over on the traverse in order to see the route. It seems that the only danger right now in soft/warm conditions is rockfall from above. Other than the postholing may get a bit cumbersome, the potential for avalanche or other hazards seems very low. Mr. Blister: I watched a few people head down towards the descent route you described, but it seemed a little out of the way so I tried the West Gulley descent that is accessed from the North Ridge. After leaving about 1/2 hour after two parties heading down the standard descent, I was able to beat them down via the West Gulley descent. It's by far much quicker if your ready for a steep but moderate gulley. Tod [This message has been edited by Tod (edited 07-11-2001).] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.