Login with Facebook
 ADVANCED
P-Wall
Select Route:
Black Streak S,TR 
Dark Side of the Moon T,S,TR 
Direct Exposure T,S 
Dyno Dogs S 
Energy Crisis T 
Epidural T,S,TR 
Flinging Moss at the Molson Belay S,TR 
Free For All (Variation) S 
Garden Party S 
Hanging Teeth T 
Impacted Stool Crack T 
Indecent Exposure T,S 
Jump For Joy T,S 
Knee Surgery S 
La Leche S 
Leapin' Lizards T,S 
Letterman T 
Oh My! T,S,TR 
Out of Hangers S 
P-Crack T 
P-Wall Direct T 
Poor Man's Cave (variation) T 
Poor Man's P Crack T,S 
Pump Floyd T,S 
Route Canal T 
Rusty's Cave T 
Slime and Dine T,S 
Sofa King Great T,S 
Spring Route T 
Squeeze Job T 
Stage Fright T,S 

Impacted Stool Crack 

YDS: 5.9 French: 5c Ewbanks: 17 UIAA: VI ZA: 17 British: HVS 5a

   
Type:  Trad, 50'
Consensus:  YDS: 5.9 French: 5c Ewbanks: 17 UIAA: VI ZA: 17 British: HVS 5a [details]
FA: Richard Harrison
Page Views: 1,917
Submitted By: Kristin McNamara on Jan 1, 2001

You & This Route  |  Other Opinions (16)
Your todo list:
Your stars:
Your rating: -none- [change]
Your ticklist: [add new tick]
Your opinion of this PAGE:    [0 people like this page.]
BETA PHOTO: Revised photo of P Wall. Note the added bolts and...

Description 

Stout lead. The bottom is low angle (and mostly soloable for 5.9 leader) and is the start for P Crack as well, but instead of heading left, go up.

Protection 

1 manky bolt plus 1.5"-2.5"


Comments on Impacted Stool Crack Add Comment
Show which comments
Comments displayed oldest to newestSkip Ahead to the Most Recent Dated May 28, 2012
By Bob Hill
Feb 9, 2004
rating: 5.10a 6a 18 VI+ 18 E1 5a

This is the best, and most honest, hand crack in the Morros that is on legally accessible rock. I say that it is honest because you really need to know how to set solid hand and foot jams - there's no faking it like on P-Crack. For me it is both thumbs up and thumbs down jams, but it will depend on the size of your hands. My personal variation is to traverse from the top of the crack over to Out of Hangers and on up to those anchors. It is probably 5.10a to go this way and slightly run out between the routes. Now if only that crack were just a little bit longer...
By M.Morley
Administrator
From: Sacramento, CA
Jan 23, 2005
rating: 5.10c 6b 20 VII 20 E2 5b

Traversing right to join P-Crack may be 10a, but climbing straight up to the anchor after the crack peters out (as indicated in the photo) is decidedly difficult and should be considered a very serious undertaking on lead. There is a single bolt above the crack, but the crux occurs a good 20-25' above. The crack itself is perhaps 5.9.
By Bob Hill
Jan 24, 2005
rating: 5.10a 6a 18 VI+ 18 E1 5a

Indeed, to go straight up and out of the Stool Crack is very serious climbing. A good way to go that I am fond of is to trend left after the crack ends to the "Out of Hangers" line and finish up at those anchors. This is probably .10a or so. As Mike indicates, the crack itself is straight-in, 5.9 hands. If done as described above, this is an excellent rock climb.
By JP.8d
From: Menlo Park, CA
Apr 3, 2007

I felt this route to be burlesque for 5.9. While the crack itself is short, it is full value. And yes, heading straight up to the anchors after clipping the bolt would be very serious. If you popped from high enough up, you would have a one way ticket to splatterville as the slab beneath the crack is low angle.
By Richard Shore
Feb 20, 2011
rating: 5.10+ 6b+ 21 VII+ 20 E3 5b

there are now 3 bolts on the face above the crack, making the direct finish a more sane lead. Crux is a few feet above the third and final bolt, and THIN. 5.10+
By Slater
Feb 25, 2011

"making the direct finish a more sane lead"

That seems to miss the point. Did the FA party (Richard Harrison) do this? Or do we all get to now add bolts wherever we want to?
Many routes on Bishop are not "sane" but why does that give someone the right to add bolts? What if someone thinks there should be 4 bolts? or only 2? Where does it stop and who gets to decide? These are rhetorical questions obviously.

Whoever is adding bolts, please stop. You're being immature.
By Jon Hanlon
From: SLO
Feb 25, 2011
rating: 5.9 5c 17 VI 17 HVS 5a

I was pretty irritated when somebody added bolts to Harlots Slot, and renamed it. In my opinion, when somebody adds bolts to an existing TR, they are retrobolting an existing climb...not doing a first ascent. Many climbers feel that a TR is fair game for bolting and renaming, I do not. I think retrobolting TRs is unacceptable and a little pathetic, but not everyone agrees. mountainproject.com/v/californ...

The difference with the retrobolting of Impacted Stool Crack is that this was not a TR. This is an established lead with a ballsy finish. No different than a dozen other routes at Bishop. Nearly everyone agrees (except for the bolter and a few others) that retrobolting established lead lines is intolerable.

So, who thinks they have the right to alter existing lead climbs at Bishop by adding bolts?
By Richard Shore
Feb 27, 2011
rating: 5.10+ 6b+ 21 VII+ 20 E3 5b

This was my first time climbing at Bishop Peak, and I've never altered or added bolts to a route - I'm just reporting the facts here, gentlemen. If the bolts were added without the FA's consent, they should be removed. (I'll admit to clipping them happily though)
By Slater
Mar 1, 2011

Richard, nobody said you did it.

Whoever is needs to stop please.
Bishop Peak has a lot of tradition and history.
It isn't anyone's place to rewrite it and bring these routes down to their level. They are what they are. If you don't like it, top rope them... or climb somewhere else.
By gary ohm
From: Paso Robles
Mar 5, 2011

This is an interesting discussion. Mr Slater and Mr Hanlon, I'd love to meet up with you guys some time at Bishops. I'd like to get some old school insight there.
Do you still get out there often?

I'm new to the BP area, so I don't have the historical feel that you fellows do, so for me everything is just as it should be.

I do know that someone is spending a tremendous amount of time, effort, and probably money to replace old bolts and hangers there to keep everyone safe.

I think this is a good thing.
By Tyler Alves
From: South Lake Tahoe, CA
Jan 7, 2012

Gary, I think the problem here is a distinct difference between REPLACING manky bolts and ADDING new bolts. Without permission from the FA party, this practice is not welcome at any area I've climbed at.
By Jim Reynolds
Jan 19, 2012

I led this again recently with the desire to see what the climb was like before the 2nd and 3rd bolt were added. I must admit, i felt like an idiot skipping the second bolt and chickened out, clipping the last bolt.

Personally i would love the route with just bolt 1+3, but the rock shouldn't be bolted to just my comfort level (unless i'm on the FA.) In conclusion, I agree that all the added bolts should be chopped, even if it turns the direct route into 5.10X or whatever.

Obviously, as other have described, if you wanted to climb the crack that bad, there are other ways to do it and avoid the run-out. Hell, chuck a mallion on that first bolt and you could just do the crack and rap.
By Ryan Nevius
From: The Range of Light
Mar 31, 2012
rating: 5.9 5c 17 VI 17 HVS 5a R

Originally a line I had avoided due to the runout after the crack, I noticed the "new" bolts and decided to give it an onsight attempt. Perfect (albeit short) crack! As for the climbing above the crack...it still felt no harder than 5.9. Maybe the mental security of clipping the bolts lowered the mental grade? Either way, I don't agree with the retro-bolting.
By FrankPS
From: Atascadero, CA
May 28, 2012

The "new" bolts above the crack have been removed. The one just above the crack is still there. Noticed this today as I top-roped the climb.