|Winter Warmer Area
|Access Fund still owns Golden Cliffs property; soon to be transferred to Jefferson County MORE INFO >>>|
This is a great climb immediately to the right of Solar Panel. Start up an easy face, to a prominent thin crack which takes TCUs. Above this crack, you will see a roof with one bolt on it. I gave it an S rating, as the pro between these two points is hard to come by, besides a few tricky nut placements. Above the roof the climbing eases to a two-bolt anchor.
Wires to #4 Friend.
|Photos of Franklin's Tower (originally submitted as G-Spot) Slideshow
Jim on the tricky-to-protect start.
Fun, engaging climbing.
|Comments on Franklin's Tower (originally submitted as G-Spot)
|By L. Hamilton|
Apr 6, 2002
It's only 5.8 but more serious than the Golden Cliffs standard -- be careful if this is your limit. The moves felt more "trad-like" than typical GC edging, too. All of which makes this a good small adventure.
|By Guy H.|
From: Fort Collins CO
Jan 11, 2010
rating: 5.8 5b 16 VI- HVS 4c R
Unless you brought a quiver of RPs, this is an R rated lead. There is only one bomber piece of gear in the first 35ft.
|By Mark Pell|
Mar 1, 2013
I put up this route in 1994, and the correct name is 'Franklin's Tower.' It has however come to be known over the years as 'G-Spot' while its much harder companion to the right which shares a common top belay is now known incorrectly as 'Power of Tower.' The right-hand route is the true 'G-Spot', so everyone make that correction in your personal guides if this kind of thing matters to you. There was never any such climb as 'Power of Tower' which I think would be a lame name anyway. Check the comments for 'Power of Tower' for more information on what is actually the true 'G-Spot' route. So remember - the 5.8 on the left is 'Franklin's Tower' (named by a Deadhead friend from Boulder who was listening to concert tapes at the base of the route), and the much harder route on the right is the real 'G-Spot,' and there is NO 'Power of Tower.' Got it? Read it again to make sure. This confusion apparently resulted from a problem with Peter Hubbel's notes as he was editing his 1995 guide to Boulder sport climbing. Thanks for this opportunity to confuse everyone even further.
|By the Ascender|
From: . . . CO
Feb 17, 2014
rating: 5.9 5c 17 VI HVS 5a R
Sand-bagger delight. Solid 5.9, esp. if you're shorter. Gear: wish we had some Lowe-balls and RPs. . . bring smallest Aliens. This climb should be rated "S". Neat route that felt like desperate Eldo 5.9.
(Source: weak climber with solid past.)