Denver Climbing City?

I am confused about the food scene complaint. I have had many good meals here at fair prices. Denver has several Michelin star restaurants. If you want small portions on small plates with somewhat dubious ingredients you can find them but I prefer something different. Several real good Pho and Indian restaurants. 

These Colorado people (mostly midwest and east coast transplants) are delusional and trying to justify living in a "mountain city". Yes you can see the mountains if you look west in the distance through binoculars. 

I used to live in Denver and now live in the Springs. In my experience, Denver metro is closer to decent climbing (~1hr or less to Clear Creek, Boulder Canyon, eldo) but all these areas are usually pretty crowded. The climbing within an hour of the Springs (Red Rocks, North Cheyenne Canyon, Garden of the Gods) is choss or old school or both. But the Springs is 1.5 hours to Shelf Road which has great fall, winter, and spring sport climbing. It's also close to lots of excellent stuff in the South Platte. 

Springs is slightly cheaper and has less traffic. I've never really hit ski traffic heading west on 24. There are not as many excellent restaurants or nice climbing gyms but we have a few. Daily views driving around are way prettier in the Springs. Denver has all the city amenities but it is a bit more expensive and has way more traffic. I do miss the easy access to concert venues and the variety/size of the gyms.

Patrik wrote:

Why everyone talkin' skiin' and traffic? Isn't this supposed to be a website for climbing? So, here's the deal. Colorado has two nicknames in the climbing community: "Crowderado" and "Chossorado". If it ain't crowded, it's chossy. If it ain't chossy, it's crowded.

Traffic is apocalyptic all the time.  It's worse during ski season.  

I have never understood the "crowded" complaints about Colorado crags. I have climbed plenty of nice rock without crowds, even on weekends on the front range. There are so many crags, if one is crowded, just walk or drive another 10 minutes and you'll find another 100 routes... People seem to congregate at the same crags and on the same routes so I find it pretty easy to avoid the hordes.

Chad Miller wrote:

and anything within an hour of Denver will be crazy crowded with ungodly traffic.

The traffic in I-70 heading west will be an apocalyptic nightmare every Friday - Saturday. On Sunday the apocalypse heads east back to Denver  

  

Whuuuut?  Sure I 70 is a legit nightmare fri-sun, but nobody needs it to access any good climbing even on weekdays.

Furthermore, we had some amazing solitude a few weekends in a row.  

Please carry on how the front range sucks.  You are doing a great service.  I hope to wait in line for ottos route when I get older and weak. 

Hey Henry, that's cool you're considering moving out here. I moved to Denver (Park Hill neighborhood) last year from Seattle. In short, I like it. But honestly I try to escape Denver to go to Boulder or Golden as often as possible, cause that's where the climbing is! When I moved out here I was mainly a snowboarder, but with the I70 junk show I mainly just rock climb now. If skiing is important to you, I recommend looking elsewhere - I70, unfortunately, really is that bad. It's a shame, since the skiing is good especially at A-Basin.

That said, I LOVE the climbing on the front range. The access is unparalleled. There's a lot of variety - sandstone conglomerate in eldo and the flatirons, boulder canyon granite, clear creek gneiss, gneiss/schist in RMNP, south platte granite etc. Not to mention Vedauwoo is a 2.5 hr drive, Indian Creek 6.5 hrs, black canyon 5 hours. I commute to Lafayette so I'm able to get out after work to eldo, bocan, or even clear creek consistently April-October when the days are longer. The after-work climbing access is what really sets Denver apart, for me. It's pretty sick to be sitting at your desk at 3pm, then be shitting your pants on the sharp end in eldo at 4. Working in Aurora would make it tough to climb after work, if you're looking for that (but not totally unreasonable). Ignore people's comments on here about crowds - like any place else, the classics can get crowded but veer even a little off the beaten path and you'll have the place to yourself. 

I'd say, if at all possible, try to land as close as possible to Golden or Boulder. Unless of course urban life is your thing, stick with Denver. The gyms are great in the city too.

Come check it out sometime! Would be happy to link up for a few pitches. Cheers and good luck-

Austin

Austin Blum wrote:

 The access is unparalleled.

Simply not true at all. 

grug g wrote:

Simply not true at all. 

Grug, would you agree that the after work access is very very very good, if not "unparalleled" 

Sam Bloch wrote:

Grug, would you agree that the after work access is very very very good, if not "unparalleled" 

The after work access from Denver is "mid". Commuter traffic 3pm+ is horrific. 

But its all perspective - if you are from the midwest or east coast it probably seems great. 

grug g wrote:

The after work access from Denver is "mid". Commuter traffic 3pm+ is horrific. 

But its all perspective - if you are from the midwest or east coast it probably seems great. 

Interested to hear you name a western or west coast major city with the sheer quantity and variety of high quality climbing areas within an hour of the city like Denver has. And yes, I know everyone out west says Vegas is king. Any others? 

Fern Gully wrote:

Interested to hear you name a western or west coast major city with the sheer quantity and variety of high quality climbing areas within an hour of the city like Denver has. And yes, I know everyone out west says Vegas is king. Any others? 

Denver is perfectly fine, but outside of that and Vegas, there is also SLC, Reno, Tucson, Sacramento and even Albuquerque. 

Fern Gully wrote:

Interested to hear you name a western or west coast major city with the sheer quantity and variety of high quality climbing areas within an hour of the city like Denver has. And yes, I know everyone out west says Vegas is king. Any others? 

Relevant thread where this is debated at great length. 

https://www.mountainproject.com/forum/topic/120995670/top-10-best-us-large-cities-for-climbing

How you define "major" city makes a big difference. I recall that there was some back and forth on whether Reno and Chattanooga were big enough to make the list, or relegated to a separate mid-size cities list.

There are people who complain about the mountain access from Denver, which I guess you would if your expectation and reference point is Ouray or Mammoth. People also complain about the urban amenities of the city, which I guess you would if your expectation and reference point is NYC or Chicago. But Denver isn't NYC, or Ouray. It is an imperfect compromise between those two things. It doesn't optimize for either, but if you need a decent amount of both (city; mountains), it is one of the better US options. SLC and Vegas being the other main contenders for big cities, plus various few smaller cities. 

Just don't go in with the fantasy that Denver is going to be some mountain Shangri-La. 

The debate between SLC and Denver being the better climbing city is irrelevant.  The comparison is Grass Valley vs Aurora.  Grass Valley is simply a nicer place.  Aurora is urban sprawl bounded by heavy industry and agricultural super-blocks.  There is TONS of climbing accessible from there. It’s awesome, varied, and high quality.  Don’t believe the haters! But the gauntlet of traffic and distance is perhaps the most significant of any city in The Front Range.  I wouldn’t make that move unless it offered major improvements in other areas of life.  Perhaps it’s a major financial promotion, alloys you to buy instead of rent, be close to family, escape a toxic work environment etc.

If you do go for it, you don’t necessarily have to live in Aurora.  Parker, Elizabeth, Castle Rock, and Lone Tree would all be viable commuter options that allowed more straightforward access to climbing.  

As for CoSprings, it’s definitely better than Aurora, but the local climbing isn’t.  Deeper into the mountains the South Platte and Shelf Road are stellar, but the foothill's of CoS don’t offer the goods.  

Personally, I would live in Colorado Springs before Aurora, and Grass Valley before either one.

Also, the commute between the Springs and Aurora would be nightmarish. The stretch between the Academy and Larkspur is often a parking lot, and going over Monument in the winter during inclement weather can be rather exciting. 

Caleb wrote:

The debate between SLC and Denver being the better climbing city is irrelevant.  The comparison is Grass Valley vs Aurora.  Grass Valley is simply a nicer place.  Aurora is urban sprawl bounded by heavy industry and agricultural super-blocks.  There is TONS of climbing accessible from there. It’s awesome, varied, and high quality.  Don’t believe the haters! But the gauntlet of traffic and distance is perhaps the most significant of any city in The Front Range.  

This is a very good point. Having lived in several of the usual "cities that are decent for climbing", I find that where exactly you live within each city can be just as important as which overall metro area you're in. What makes living in the Denver metro appealing as a climber is more about the proximity and convenience of the climbing, rather than standout quality of any of the crags. If you're in the far eastern side of Denver you start to lose that proximity and convenience, so the appeal of the area is diminished.  

There's also the local environment of the town itself. How nice is the city/town life? Fact is, for your typical  working stiff, you're in town more days than at the crag, so hopefully that in town environment is nice. Grass Valley is a really nice town - an enjoyable place to be on any random weekday. Aurora, less so.

I lived in the Vegas area for a bit, and it's a great climbing city, but these details ruined it for me. Based on work location I was over in Henderson (further from most of the climbing), and due to work I was there in Henderson 4-5 days each week. While I really liked the days I was out climbing, realistically most days each week were spent in a bland suburban sprawl that I didn't enjoy. It didn't balance out. Aurora life may have similar issues. Even if you can drive an hour on the weekend to good climbing, you're still spending most days in Aurora. 

Greg D wrote:

Whuuuut?  Sure I 70 is a legit nightmare fri-sun, but nobody needs it to access any good climbing even on weekdays.

Furthermore, we had some amazing solitude a few weekends in a row.  

Please carry on how the front range sucks.  You are doing a great service.  I hope to wait in line for ottos route when I get older and weak. 

I dunno. I’ve never had to wait of any climbs on the Western Slope.  Uni, Rifle, Escalante, The Monument,  just show up and climb.  

I doubt you could even handle the approach to Otto’s.    J/K

Also, back in 2018 my fat ass broke off one of the fins at the top of Otto’s so it’s now around a .10a. 

Chad Miller wrote:

 
Also, back in 2018 my fat ass broke off one of the fins at the top of Otto’s so it’s now around a .10a. 

Good to know.  That finish was pretty stiff as it was.  Is it still protected by drilled pins?

The western slope definitely has a lot to offer. Very different than the front range. 

I live in Arvada and have been in the area for over 5 years. Was in Bend before that. I find Denver to be an amazing place to train, but not to spend all my time. There are a select few places with outstanding routes like RMNP / Lumpy, the Platte, Eldo, and The Black Canyon. And you are in striking distance of The Voo and and Moab. But i have found myself consistently on the road 4+ months of the year for the past three years so that I can climb in truly world class places. The climbing in Colorado simply does not compare to places like Yosemite, Squamish, JTree, Gunks, etc. Sure there are great routes here and there but for the most part it is of a different caliber. Where Denver really shines is it's world class access to decent climbing, pretty much year-round. As long as you are living on the west side of the city or in a suburb like Arvada, Wheat Ridge, Golden, etc you can be climbing some pretty good stuff within 20-40 minutes of driving with minimal approach. And the gyms around the metro area are pretty dang good too. I've been mostly everywhere at this point, and I haven't really considered leaving Denver. There is a lifetime of climbing in different styles to train on. And when I'm craving real splitters or walls I just hit the road or get on a plane. Also, I can only speak to the trad climbing, but once you are climbing at the 5.10 level, crowds on routes are much less of an issue and I can pretty reasonably hop on what I want when I want. Even at busier crags like Eldo. 

Greg D wrote:

Good to know.  That finish was pretty stiff as it was.  Is it still protected by drilled pins?

The western slope definitely has a lot to offer. Very different than the front range. 

WCCC replaced all of bolts in 20017(not exact on the date).  All but two bolts were replaced in situ with glue ins. If I recall the pins on pitch 3 are still there.