Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner
1 - 20 of 25 Posts

·
Evil Jr.
Joined
·
6,859 Posts
I don't have any problems with those guidelines. Kinda sucks (a bit) if you're a downhiller but overall, it has IMBA written all over it. Nice work Mark! :thumbsup:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,875 Posts
Woot woot bring on the high alpine epics. Parks Canada will lead the way and the provincal parks will hopefully follow.

I hope they don't get hung up on building TTF's and focus more on the natural alpine trails.
 

·
Evil Jr.
Joined
·
6,859 Posts
shirk said:
I hope they don't get hung up on building TTF's and focus more on the natural alpine trails.
There are so many good ones already out there (once you get up there). Yoho comes to mind almost right away! :thumbsup:
 

·
namagomi
Joined
·
2,884 Posts
:cool:

XC/AM is the right choice and where most riders exist. Real DH on unmaintained/controlled courses would be sketchy and higher maintenance?

Interesting that they'll allow trail features, but what are the Canada building codes covering such features? I really think the should play up the natural features.
 

·
Team NFI
Joined
·
5,303 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
electrik said:
:

Interesting that they'll allow trail features, but what are the Canada building codes covering such features? I really think the should play up the natural features.
Well we need to seperate the whole TTF issue into 2 seperate discussions. For oibvious reasons. Those 2 being,

A. TTF's for crossing creeks, and such. Like how ladder bridging was originally started. To deal with wet ground, little creeks, and so on. The stuff that the majority who have not seen and do not understand because it is lumped into B.

B. TTF's that are there simply for the fun of it. This is the version of ladder bridge that is in the various vids and youtube clips. Which is what the majority of people have seen who are not mountain bikers.

If this is not kept seperate it will be like it is now in Ontario. Where even a ladder bridge which is 6 inches above the ground to allow water to run off. It is deemed evil and ripped out. The section filled with rock and gravel which drains even less.
 

·
humber river advocate
Joined
·
6,395 Posts
Enduramil said:
Well we need to seperate the whole TTF issue into 2 seperate discussions. For oibvious reasons. Those 2 being,

A. TTF's for crossing creeks, and such. Like how ladder bridging was originally started. To deal with wet ground, little creeks, and so on. The stuff that the majority who have not seen and do not understand because it is lumped into B.

B. TTF's that are there simply for the fun of it. This is the version of ladder bridge that is in the various vids and youtube clips. Which is what the majority of people have seen who are not mountain bikers.

If this is not kept seperate it will be like it is now in Ontario. Where even a ladder bridge which is 6 inches above the ground to allow water to run off. It is deemed evil and ripped out. The section filled with rock and gravel which drains even less.
ttfs can be anything. rock/wood ramps for landing and take off, enhanced natural features
such as step ups/drops/gaps, reverse grades, etc... a bridge, is well just a bridge and has standards. of course people still like/build the big a$$ features like this.

http://www.dropmachine.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=33638&start=15

there is a problem building ttf in ontario out of dimensional lumber... and that's rot/insects.
in the end you have to treat the wood. cedar helps, but it still needs treatment. if you look at old bridges/structures (in the humber area there are quite a few), you notice that the ones that withstood the test of time have been creosoted/tarred cedar. creosote is not the best for the enviroment and almost all of those structures have been damaged by fire. the cribbing method works way better, needs less maintenance, and blends into the enviroment and can provide habitat for animals/plants...
 

·
ups and downs
Joined
·
15,599 Posts
A common reason that TTF's are considered complaint worthy by land managers is that hikers on a MTB trail come across a ladder bridge or something that is difficult or impossible to navigate on foot and has no bypass, so as often as not they end up being removed because they aren't walkable by a person on foot. In a large trail network where many trails intersect and some are developed for hikers and some for MTB use, it's almost a guarantee that a hiker can enter an MTB trail at an intersection, either knowingly or unknowingly.
 

·
Evil Jr.
Joined
·
6,859 Posts
singlesprocket said:
of course people still like/build the big a$$ features like this.
Yep, pretty safe to say this won't be showing up in downtown Banff any time soon. :D

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
332 Posts
im impressed, they appear to have come a long way in a short time...
 

·
namagomi
Joined
·
2,884 Posts
rockyuphill said:
A common reason that TTF's are considered complaint worthy by land managers is that hikers on a MTB trail come across a ladder bridge or something that is difficult or impossible to navigate on foot and has no bypass, so as often as not they end up being removed because they aren't walkable by a person on foot. In a large trail network where many trails intersect and some are developed for hikers and some for MTB use, it's almost a guarantee that a hiker can enter an MTB trail at an intersection, either knowingly or unknowingly.
Escalator to nowhere!



Or in our case, skinny to nowhere!
 
1 - 20 of 25 Posts
Top