Lindsey Analogies

[ECF55]

I have been intrigued by Lindsey for a long time and I finally put eyes on it when we were driving up from Taos to Alamosa earlier this summer. It's an striking peak that stands just to the east of the rest of the Blanca massif. Super impressive.

I have also been intimidated by the pictures of Lindsey posted by folks. The summit push looks either really loose or quite airy, depending on the route.

Are there good analogies for Lindsey's gully and ridge?
(a) How does the gully compare to Sneffels South Slopes or Long's Trough? Is it looser/steeper/dirtier than Sawatch talus (e.g., Princeton)?
(b) Would you consider Lindsey's ridge a step up from Kelso Ridge or Sneffels SW Ridge? Are there any other summit ridges that are better analogies (Castle, Wetterhorn, or Wilson Peak)?

I really really don't enjoy loose, terrible gullies, so if I ever set up a Lindsey hike, I would be inclined to attempt the Ridge up (and maybe gully down).

This hike looks like an involved day, but the stats are surprisingly not as daunting (8.5 miles, 3500 feet) as some other peaks that I have attempted (Longs, Sneffels SW Ridge from Blue Lakes, Antero Browns Creek, etc.). Thanks in advance.

[jenndizzle]

Lindsey's gully/standard route is a DISASTER. I did that once and bailed because my partner was really struggling on it. We went back this summer and did the ridge route and c4 climb at the crux wall - WE LOVED IT! Super fun and mostly stable. We were so stoked that we added on Iron Nipple 13er on way down. I have no clue why the gully is the standard route instead of the ridge. Gully WORSE than Long's trough and WORSE than Princeton. Ridge from my perspective is WAY EASIER and MORE STABLE than Kelso. Haven't done Sneffels yet, so no info there. We took the ridge and c4 crux route up and down, had a blast, gully would be TERRIBLE going down. Good luck, go for it! I can send you photos if you want

J

[daway8]

Per the route description, the standard route is really only intended to be done with snow in it, but for some reason it's not actually listed as a snow climb (possibly because the gully still isn't good even with snow).

I would just totally ignore the existence of the gully - it's not worth your time considering. The ridge is really not that bad. Crux looks intimidating as you approach but once you start up the moves soon become obvious.

Much easier route finding than Sneffels SW Ridge and the climbing is no harder than Kelso Ridge. If you did those routes you'll be totally fine on the ridge for Lindsey.

[Cygnus X1]

Agree that the ridge route is the way to go. Plus, if you get to the C4 and don't feel comfortable with it, there's a C3 bypass to climbers left.

[Wentzl]

+1 for the Ridge camp.

Done Lindsey twice, two different ridge options up and both times down the gully.

Nothing about the ridge harder than either of those you mention, Kelso or Sneffels. Difference being you may take a little more time to figure it out, but know it is there and find it.

The gully down is sort of fun, much more so than S Slope of Sneffels. Plenty of loose stuff for scree surfing. Suffer fest up, but fun down.

[Ed_Groves]

Lindsey's northwest ridge route is awesome. You gain maybe 900 feet on the ridge and the class 4 crux is not too difficult to find your hand and foot holds. However, your movement across the ridge can be airy at times if you have to make corrections to get to the proper places on the route. Those are probably the pics that give you pause. I had one spot where I was not going to end up where I wanted to go a few feet ahead of me and I essentially took the short route to get there which was hanging off the side with 3 or 4 inches for my feet and nothing below. Hand holds were good and I easily crossed the spot but I am pretty comfortable with exposure. You should be able to find your way along the ridge and avoid spots like this if you choose. Also, as mentioned above you can take a class 3 route to the left at the crux rather than the 4th class crack.

If you are coming to Colorado from lower elevations, there are some characteristics about the approach to the ridge that it might help you to know. Almost all of the elevation gain comes in three big gulps. You hike 1.2 miles or so on fairly flat ground, cross a creek, and then work your way through a maze of trees and social trails to reach the first real elevation gains of the hike. At this point you have gained only around 200 feet of elevation. Over the next half mile you will gain approximately 900 feet or so and the hike is loose in places. And the elevation gain continues after you complete another creek crossing. After gaining about 1600 feet you will be ready for the easy hiking that crosses the basin. Once you reach the other side of the basin and start upward to the saddle you will again be gaining a lot of elevation in a short distance. Once at the saddle and with 2600 feet of gain completed, you will climb the ridge and gain the last 900 feet in maybe three quarters of a mile, if that.

The way the elevation gain is spaced out will wind you if you are a flatlander and aren't acclimatized. Take your time and pace yourself. You probably won't be as fast on this hike as you have been on others with similar mileage and elevation gain stats.

[nutella262]

I did Lindsey via the ridge route by myself last summer and I was the first one on the peak that day by several hours. Not much of rock climber but I had a blast. I would do it again over Kelso (also very fun) and Long's (meh, long day) if only for the absence of front range crowds. Definitely agree with another poster that the ridge has some spots that feel airy, even after the crux, but mostly just a reminder to keep paying attention. One of my top 3 14ers.