Welcome! Log In Create A New Profile Recent Posts
Half Dome from the Four Mile Trail to Glacier Point, Yosemite National Park

The Moon is Waxing Gibbous (90% of Full)


Advanced

Re: Cloud's Rest vs. Angel's Landing

All posts are those of the individual authors and the owner of this site does not endorse them. Content should be considered opinion and not fact until verified independently.

Cloud's Rest vs. Angel's Landing
June 16, 2010 02:07AM
I love hiking, love summits. Hate heights. Actually, heights are fine, it's the falling off heights that is the problem.

The most exposed (none roped) place I've been is Cloud's Rest -- beautiful. I was a bit uncomfortable, but not bad -- I just followed my husband and didn't look over the side at a couple of places. I'm thinking about doing Angel's Landing in Zion and maybe investing in a harness to clip in (kind of like Half Dome). I know it's chain vs cable and I don't expect to need to hook in often but the "step of faith" and a couple of other stops look really terrifying. Obviously Angel's Landing is a much shorter/easier hike. I'm not at all concerned about the physical difficulty -- it's just the thought of going down 1200 vertical feet and 0 horizontal feet that's a bit daunting.


Any thoughts?
Thanks!
Catherine
Re: Cloud's Rest vs. Angel's Landing
June 16, 2010 06:57AM
The thing about the Angel's Landing chain is that it is not one continuous chain. It is also very tight against the rock in some areas, so it might be difficult to use a harness. I'm not completely sure, though.

I was a little bit queasy when it came to the heights involved with Angel's Landing. The best advice I found was to keep the eyes on the ground ahead and to keep one hand on the chain for maintaining balance. For me, the rest was just a bit of determination. The payoff at the end of the trail was so terrific that the trip back down seemed easier. Observation Point is a good alternative. The trail is a lot less exposed and the view gives you a look down on Angel's Landing and Zion Canyon.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/16/2010 07:00AM by bbb.
avatar Re: Cloud's Rest vs. Angel's Landing
June 16, 2010 09:54AM
You could easily get to the top of Clouds Rest without ever getting within 20 feet of any place with serious exposure. It would be impossible to get to the top of Angels Landing without exposure.

The hike up Angels Landing is generally easier, but Utah is typically much warmer during the summer months. By noon, I found it was almost 100 deg F, although I left early in the morning, taking the first shuttle from Springdale to Zion Canyon. It's 2.5 miles from The Grotto to the top of Angels Landing, and the first 2.0 miles is completely paved.

I frankly wouldn't recommend getting harnessed. Some of the chain sections are fairly well spaced and a few lie against the rock. Here's a pretty good photo essay of the hike:

http://www.citrusmilo.com/zionguide/angelslandingpix2.cfm

If you insist on getting harnessed, you probably don't want to snap a carabiner right into the chain. You might want something more like a wire loop.
Re: Cloud's Rest vs. Angel's Landing
July 13, 2010 11:46PM
Thanks for all your advice. I climbed Angel's Landing on the 3rd of July. Hot as all get out (due to timing, we hiked it in the middle of the afternoon). Surprisingly, the only bit that was particularly disturbing was the flat bit at the very end. I felt comfortable the rest of the way. Maybe it's because I've done Cloud's Rest and other hikes. But Angel's Landing was way over-hyped in my opinion.

The Narrows (which we top down hiked on July 4th) deserves it's rather sadistic reputation. Beautiful, but that water is cold and you really do hike on silt-slicked bowling balls for miles.

Thanks again!
Catherine
avatar Re: Cloud's Rest vs. Angel's Landing
June 16, 2010 05:13PM
Quote
subflexa
I love hiking, love summits. Hate heights. Actually, heights are fine, it's the falling off heights that is the problem.

Then don't fall!

Seriously, I would think that a harness on Angel's Landing would be more trouble than its worth. Unlike Half Dome, where it can be said that there is an "up" cable (on the right as you go up) and a "down" cable (again, on the right as you go down), where there are chains on Angels Landing, as I recall there is only one chain for people going on both directions.

I would hate to think of what would happen when nervous harnessed climbers, one going up and one down, had to get around each other on the Angels Landing trail. I think that you would be better off without.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/16/2010 05:15PM by eeek.
avatar Re: Cloud's Rest vs. Angel's Landing
June 17, 2010 08:15AM
Quote
Bearproof
Seriously, I would think that a harness on Angel's Landing would be more trouble than its worth. Unlike Half Dome, where it can be said that there is an "up" cable (on the right as you go up) and a "down" cable (again, on the right as you go down), where there are chains on Angels Landing, as I recall there is only one chain for people going on both directions.

I would hate to think of what would happen when nervous harnessed climbers, one going up and one down, had to get around each other on the Angels Landing trail. I think that you would be better off without.

It's not one continuous chain either. There are a lot of places along the ridge where there are no chains. I guess I don't see the sense when some of the chains are only about 6 feet long.
Re: Cloud's Rest vs. Angel's Landing
June 17, 2010 02:39PM
I agree with the others that trying to clip into the chain on Angel's is more trouble than it's worth, and in fact, could actually cause problems. If you are really scared of exposure, then don't go. I found the trip up Angel's pretty easy, to be honest.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login