Bastille | Northcutt Start, missing pin: replace with a glue-in bolt?

Having just followed this pitch a month ago for my first time, it felt like a climb that would be a decent one to try leading after seeing my leader fall on the solid pin twice (me being a 5.10 eldo leader on a good day). With no fixed pro there, it would certainly change my calculus of whether or when to try leading it. So a bolt would be more in character with how the route was a month ago in my opinion than leaving it without fixed pro.

If you do place a bolt, it would seem unecessary to place it directly into the crack and would only provide an opportunity for freeze/thaw cycles to have more impact on the integrity of the bolt. I assume glue-ins are designed to be placed in a drilled hole, so it should be placed how the manufacturer designed it. I don't think having it 6 inches away from the crack would change the character of the climb significantly

I vote for a bolt to be added on the face to replace the piton. It’s the direction we’re moving as a climbing community. 

Danny Gilbertwrote:

Option 4! If that can't be approved, option 1! 

I would prefer to clip a bomber fixed piece. If that is is unpalatable for some reason, I would prefer to have nothing so that I could place that 21 offset and have some type of understanding of my risk. Clipping a piton that falls out every 3 or 4 years will not clarify the risks for anyone that doesn't know this place and this route well. They will likely assume it is solid, like I did last time I climbed this in 2021 right after it got replaced. Sounds like a bad assumption to me now.  

Having also whipped on the previous ring piton (yes, actually whipped…), I pulled the move up and around the corner and slipped right off the slab (eye roll).

On subsequent ascents, I’ve placed more small cams in that section, and I echo Danny’s point: either install a reliable bolt in solid rock, or leave it as-is and let the leader make their own risk assessment with the available gear.

Every time I've climbed Northcutt, I've treated the pin as a solid, reliable piece. Given that the crack is unlikely to hold a pin well, I personally feel that a bolt provides the most substantially similar experience. If a bolt isn't approved, I'd echo Danny and Jason that climbing parties need to decide for themselves whether they're comfortable with a small cam or running it out. 

Daniel Shivelywrote: 

I do not and have not known anyone that claims a difference between fixed pins, or bolts.

Look up some of the nonsense about replacing ancient pins with bolts at Cathedral Ledge in New Hampshire, where it's been taken to an absurd level.

Marc801 Cwrote:

Daniel Shivelywrote: 

Look up some of the nonsense about replacing ancient pins with bolts at Cathedral Ledge in New Hampshire, where it's been taken to an absurd level.

I’m thankful for the years that I enjoyed climbing at Cathedral/Whitehorse (mid to late ‘90’s). I bet many of the old pins would yield to modern pro there too. Even in the ‘90’s it was common and prudent to back up fixed pins with available gear placements provided by modern gear.  It’s weird, to me, that it’s often assumed that because fixed gear existed at one time, fixed gear should always be replaced. Like I said upthread, gear and techniques constantly evolve. Why is it objectionable for the method used to protect a climb to evolve too? I value a diverse spectrum of routes from casual sport routes to more thought provoking and cerebral (often gear protected) climbs. In my opinion, not every climb needs to be “safe” for all climbers.

Daniel Shivelywrote:

I’m thankful for the years that I enjoyed climbing at Cathedral/Whitehorse (mid to late ‘90’s). I bet many of the old pins would yield to modern pro there too. Even in the ‘90’s it was common and prudent to back up fixed pins with available gear placements provided by modern gear.  It’s weird, to me, that it’s often assumed that because fixed gear existed at one time, fixed gear should always be replaced. Like I said upthread, gear and techniques constantly evolve. Why is it objectionable for the method used to protect a climb to evolve too? I value a diverse spectrum of routes from casual sport routes to more thought provoking and cerebral (often gear protected) climbs. In my opinion, not every climb needs to be “safe” for all climbers.

I (and I bet most long-time trad climbers) fully agree with this. I personally enjoy thinly protected trad routes more than your average climber, and generally tend to seek out the more cerebral routes myself. 

I just think the ethic becomes pretty murky when the argument turns into "let the climbs become more dangerous with time..." 

All apologies for blowing up this thread. I'll let it go back to the issue at hand...

Eldo might be unique in that the reason ACE exists is to avert bolt wars and find consensus while curating the fixed hardware in the canyon. The process has held up reasonably well over the years. Also, the climbers that love Eldo really love Eldo.

v Choss Pirate: if only there were someone out there who regularly places and destructively tests these sorts of anchors and, like, posts videos...Paging Mr Jenks @HowNOT2

Seems to me like y'all are missing the obvious path forward here! Pound a railroad spike in there! Bomber and easy to tie-off!

In all seriousness, I feel like a glue-in bolt in the crack is the money, but do share concerns about how that would be executed effectively without making a mess. Greg, I trust ya, but would be curious to see a test example in junk rock outside of the canyon, and feel like that would be something that could sway a lot of the naysayers in this thread and/or ACE. If the choice is between a bolt in the clean face and natural gear, though, I prefer natural gear. The character of a route is allowed to change without bolting it or replacing fixed gear, and if a route becomes more serious with time, then I think it should be allowed to. Psyched about this dialogue though!

Todd Rwrote:

I (and I bet most long-time trad climbers) fully agree with this. I personally enjoy thinly protected trad routes more than your average climber, and generally tend to seek out the more cerebral routes myself. 

I just think the ethic becomes pretty murky when the argument turns into "let the climbs become more dangerous with time..." 

I agree with both of you. My philosophy has always been that a route's safety should be what the FA party experienced. If a pin rots out, sure, use modern pro - if that option exists. Otherwise, replace it with bolt for longevity. The problem I saw when I used to climb at Cathedral was a dogmatic hold on "traditional" ethics and not replacing critical pins where no other options exist (along with not recognizing that pins and bolts *are* traditional forms of pro). 

Before anyone gets their shorts/panties in a bunch, this has nothing to do with retro-bolting; just 1 for 1 replacement of fixed pro where nothing else works.

Tradition: (n.) Peer pressure from dead people.

Option 4 looks good to me. I'm all for replacing old mank with good hardware. IMO its possible to do so and not drastically change the overall commitment and character of a route. Superslab's first pitch comes to mind. Just one good bolt will do where there's like two or three ancient pins. 

I've been talking to a lot of the older FAs in my own local area (Sandia Mountains) regarding hardware replacements and my impression is the older generation is generally fine with bolts replacing pitons. The FAs know climbing protection has changed and most times they are surprised the piton hasn't been replaced already, and even more surprised to be asked permission.

I've heard numerous times that the FAs didn’t return to climb their routes again or only came back after 20-30 years. They were placing protection the day of the FA to protect their party, they were not thinking about us climbing the route in 2025.

So often, the FA stories are that they were climbing ground up with bigger approaches behind them and unknown climbing ahead of them. Pitons were placed where possible because they were faster and they were always racing sunset. They used 1/4” bolts on faces where they couldn't place pitons.

I'd guess if the ASCA posted a national survey asking these two questions, we'd have a good consensus that hardware stewards can use as guidance for piton replacements. I believe there will be a lot more consensus than gets conveyed in these type of threads.

• Should we start replacing pitons with bolts where there is not adequate alternative protection?
• What is your measurement for what constitutes adequate protection?

Can we have more discussion about the practice of placing a bolt *in* a crack? A few other people have brought up concerns with the non standard nature of such a placement and I too am concerned that over the course of decades freeze thaw and crack movement could shorten the life span of a glue in. Is there any evidence that these concerns are unfounded?

I understand that the ACE charter is worded in a particular way but I don't think that a standard bolt placement 6in from the crack would change the character of the route in any significant way compared to one in the crack. I suppose it's the letter of the law vs the spirit of the law.

Since the pin placement is so shallow, I think the assumption is the glue-in in this spot will have its hole drilled into solid rock.  It might not be a “perfect placement” but it will likely be 10 times stronger than the pin.  It will also avoid the pin scar being used as a new hold.  

The glue would end up as an ameboid shape filling both the drilled hole and branching sideways a bit. It would have a great interference fit with both the surrounding rock and the twisted leg bolt. Despite freeze/thaw I would bet that it would do fine for many decades. No real way to know, and no controlled way to test the theory. 

However, I'm starting to lean more towards the #4(b) option I mentioned up thread. If you look at the photo with my thumb beside the nut tool, I think the drill bit could go in on that rust spot just to the right of the nut tool at an angle straight along the viewing axis of the camera. The bolt would be very near to the crack, but not following the same angle as that original placement. It would bisect a blunt arete and be in solid rock, but the eye would be in essentially the same place as the previous pin.

(talking as an outsider, I have not climbed the route) #4 makes the most sense: 

You wanna use the bolt? Clip the bolt. You wanna wriggle in some tiny offset piece? Skip the bolt, just put in your piece (or not: use both!) 

Bolt in the crack does not sound very elegant. It keeps the appearance of a pin, while not being a pin, as well as being potentially weaker than a bolt. Worse of all worlds except "vibes" aka "keeping the character of the route" which we're not doing in so many other ways, as we're climbing with incredible pro, shoes, and the rest of our gear when compared to Northcutt and friends had to manage with. I don't think a lot of us wanna go back to even dressing like that style except for Halloween. 

Option 5:

Epoxy the piton scar so that it can’t be used as a hand hold. Drill a new hole next to the old one and bang a new pin in there. 

Ideally the new hole for the pin won’t be quite the right size so leaders have some doubts about the safety of the gear. As was the case with the old pin.

Jack Langewrote:

Option 5:

Epoxy the piton scar so that it can’t be used as a hand hold. Drill a new hole next to the old one and bang a new pin in there. 

Ideally the new hole for the pin won’t be quite the right size so leaders have some doubts about the safety of the gear. As was the case with the old pin.

The  old pin in 2024 or in 1959?

IMO, this is one of the worst suggestions.

Pitons were great in the 50’s & 60’s. As each piton fails, I’d personally be fine with them being replaced with bolts. Sooner or later the character of the rock will change with successive piton placements. Heck, bolt ladders like the yellow spur would be less of an eyesore with a smaller number of bolts vs the current stack of rusty pitons. That said, I’m generally not in support of adding bolts where climbs went free for decades.

Back in the day we didn’t wear seatbelts. We didn’t do it because it was the right way, and we didn’t do it because it built character.  We did it because that’s the way driving was done. Either way you can always choose not to clip if it really makes you happy.

Gregger’s desire to keep it weird is right on. 

Why not place a 1/4” stainless steel bolt on the face nearby.

I am happy to provide the tiny bolt in an effort to keep everyone safe-ish and generally uneasy.  
Let Eldo be Eldo.