Anyone have anything they'd like to rant about?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Roxtar

It's hard because you have it wrong. Sorry.
When you come to a yield sign and someone else is there you have to STOP and let them past. That's the definition of yielding.
You're describing what to do when no one is there which isn't applicable to this.

A yield sign determines who has to stop when two users meet. Not who has to slow down.

Same with the yield triangle. It states when a biker meets a hiker, the biker must stop and allow the hiker to walk past.
It doesn't mean the biker slows down and waits for the hiker to let HIM pass.

---

So are you advocating for more signage that breaks down this process of slowing, acknowledging, and engaging other users, then conducting a delicate ritual of signals and plumage to establish who passes who? Have fun explaining that to people.
Or are you advocating some Lord of the Flies shit where one’s personal belief of efficiency dictates who gets out of the way for who?
Or are you advocating that bikes should rule the roost and all other users must be on the lookout for rapidly descending riders at all time?
Or maybe should we take this simple suggestion triangle that was created for safety reasons and use that as a general, initial guide to interactions with other users…and then once all parties have demonstrated control of their bike, feet or animal we can communicate as humans and figure out if we want to follow the sign’s suggestion or proceed otherwise? It’s a bummer that bikes kinda get the short end, but from a safety perspective, it makes sense.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

One more item after this weekend for the triangle sign. If I stop say thank you if you are on an e bike. You don't have to acknowledge me otherwise, but if you are on your silent motorcycle, say thank you.

As it currently works, when a hiker and a cyclist are moving toward each other, the cyclist is required to move off the trail and let the hiker pass.

Do any of you do that? Then you're not compliant with the yield triangle.

NMJoe is literally the only person I've ever ridden with who complies with that. He stops, moves over, and tells them to proceed.
Everyone else I've ridden with slows down while the hiker moves over and then slowly proceeds (Excepting special circumstances like an elderly walker or something of that nature).
I'm just saying that is the logical way it works so why not make it the rule?

Issues like stravassholes and endurbros aren't really a part of the equation since they're gonna do what they want anyway. :nonono2:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by joetron

So are you advocating for more signage that breaks down this process of slowing, acknowledging, and engaging other users, then conducting a delicate ritual of signals and plumage to establish who passes who? Have fun explaining that to people.
Or are you advocating some Lord of the Flies shit where one’s personal belief of efficiency dictates who gets out of the way for who?
Or are you advocating that bikes should rule the roost and all other users must be on the lookout for rapidly descending riders at all time?
Or maybe should we take this simple suggestion triangle that was created for safety reasons and use that as a general, initial guide to interactions with other users…and then once all parties have demonstrated control of their bike, feet or animal we can communicate as humans and figure out if we want to follow the sign’s suggestion or proceed otherwise? It’s a bummer that bikes kinda get the short end, but from a safety perspective, it makes sense.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

---

WTF?
Where did I say any of that?

Know what? Nevermind.

This thread delivers thx joetron and roxtar!

And f u canada1 for your discriminatory slant against ebikes.

Sent from my SM-S908U1 using Tapatalk

We’ve had this discussion elsewhere on this forum.

joetron has it right[emoji122][emoji122][emoji122]

Roxtar, you and toast (and others on tgr) are so far wrong on this.

As soon as full face, armor-wearing strava bro brah is given right of way on multi user bidirectional trails all hell is gonna break loose. Christ theres so much entitled behaviour and disrespect from this type of rider already even when the rules are sign posted at almost every trail intersection directing downhill bikers to yield.

Why is it so hard to chill your vibe and ride under control so as not to kill or maim other trail users. Fuckin ‘merica!

Go ride your boring roller, jump, banked turn one way downhill trails if you want to let it rip like that. Just dont fuck it up for those of us who’d rather be riding old school, natural rock, root and interesting trails that we happily share with others.

Dont be a dick!

Rant over….

Tangential rant related to multi-use trails:

WTF is wrong with some dog walkers? The dog owners who freak out, yank on leashes, or yell at their dogs as soon as bikes come into view. They then say something along the lines of, "Fluffy doesn't like bikes!" Well no shit, if you freak out, scream, and yank on his collar every time he sees a bike, of course he's going to not like bikes. Every time we pass one, we slow down, stop, and try to say hi and pet the dogs. That way dogs learn that bikes = scritches & pets. The good owners are the ones who give pupper treats when he behaves nicely when another trail user (bike or otherwise) passes by.

This thread is making me think that the best proposal is to only only bikes to ride at night. Problem solved!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dcpnz

We’ve had this discussion elsewhere on this forum.

joetron has it right[emoji122][emoji122][emoji122]

Roxtar, you and toast (and others on tgr) are so far wrong on this.

As soon as full face, armor-wearing strava bro brah is given right of way on multi user bidirectional trails all hell is gonna break loose. Christ theres so much entitled behaviour and disrespect from this type of rider already even when the rules are sign posted at almost every trail intersection directing downhill bikers to yield.

Why is it so hard to chill your vibe and ride under control so as not to kill or maim other trail users. Fuckin ‘merica!

Go ride your boring roller, jump, banked turn one way downhill trails if you want to let it rip like that. Just dont fuck it up for those of us who’d rather be riding old school, natural rock, root and interesting trails that we happily share with others.

Dont be a dick!

Rant over….

---

Look at every single trail network anywhere in North America that's considered to be a mountain bike mecca. They're full of natural rocky, rooty, interesting trails that are (either by rule or by convention) directional. Plenty of those places also have extensive networks of hiking only trails, and then plenty of multi-use trails that aren't conducive to high speed hooliganism.

Lots of other trail networks can learn from those examples. Acting like every non-flow trail works great as multi-direction, multi use is delusional.

Well, when you and Roxstar achieve directional utopia then you can advocate for changing the triangle. Meanwhile, don't be a dick.

You people need to go ride your bikes where there are less people....no wait keep doing it exactly how do you. Ride busy trails, busy times and bitch.

It's not a rant unless you want to take half of it back.

Wanna ride around the stroller mom's going uphill on the flow trail? Do it.

Wanna come unglued on Larry Long Travel for Enduroing your techy climb? Do it.

More signs aren't the answer. What ya gonna do when they tell you you can't do you?

Ya'll are just one step away from penning strongly worded letters in your NBs.

Sent from my Turbo 850 Flatbrimed Highhorse

Every human, horse, goat, goat fucker, and snake should yield to the trail builders. So everyone out of my way! [emoji16]

Just an analogy.
Bikes are in the minority. Just like minorities are in the minority all over the USA. As it sucks for them, it also sucks for us (albeit in a vastly more superficial way and it's completely bullshit to suggest it's at all similar except for the sake of this forum slap fight).
Screaming about trail "rules" being unfair isn't likely to get us anywhere. Is the man gonna take trials away from hikers because they're perceived as rude and dangerous? Not in a million years. Is the man gonna do that to us? Very good possibility. Is a hiker likely to crash out of control into a biker and cause bodily harm? Unlikely, but we god damn well know that the reverses is completely possible. And even if you think you're not a hazard, the ambulatory masses do. The burden is on us my friends. Everywhere. Every time. Every scenario where we are sharing terrain.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dcpnz

We’ve had this discussion elsewhere on this forum.

joetron has it right[emoji122][emoji122][emoji122]

Roxtar, you and toast (and others on tgr) are so far wrong on this.

As soon as full face, armor-wearing strava bro brah is given right of way on multi user bidirectional trails all hell is gonna break loose. Christ theres so much entitled behaviour and disrespect from this type of rider already even when the rules are sign posted at almost every trail intersection directing downhill bikers to yield.

Why is it so hard to chill your vibe and ride under control so as not to kill or maim other trail users. Fuckin ‘merica!

Go ride your boring roller, jump, banked turn one way downhill trails if you want to let it rip like that. Just dont fuck it up for those of us who’d rather be riding old school, natural rock, root and interesting trails that we happily share with others.

Dont be a dick!

Rant over….

---

You're muddying the water with issues that don't belong here by bringing up irresponsible riders who couldn't care less about any rules of trail etiquette.
Do you really think changing the yield triangle will change their behavior in any way? They don't care now, they won't care then.
Dicks gonna be dicks.
Hell, do you think they would even know if it did change?

I noticed no one argued that they currently actually do yield to hikers did you? Do you currently pull over and wait for hikers to walk past?
Every time.
Because that's what the current yield triangle dictates.

The yield triangle only affects those who choose to abide by it. For those of us who do, changing it to reflect what actually happens on the trail (talking about responsible riders here) only makes sense.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Foggy_Goggles

You people need to go ride your bikes where there are less people....no wait keep doing it exactly how do you. Ride busy trails, busy times and bitch.

---

Yeah, I mean, everything I'm talking about only applies to crowded trails where user conflict is a legitimate problem. If you're off on some backcountry trail where you may or may not see another person, clearly none of this matters.

My point isn't that there needs to be a change to the 98% of trails where user conflict is a total non issue. My point is that the other 2% of the trails, that realistically see 99% of the use, need a management scheme that's more thoughtful than just kinda dumping every user onto the trail willy nilly and letting them sort it out themselves.

So much drama out West

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by buttahflake

So much drama out West

---

Right?
You should discuss this with your neighbors over tea.
:FIREdevil

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Roxtar

As it currently works, when a hiker and a cyclist are moving toward each other, the cyclist is required to move off the trail and let the hiker pass.

Do any of you do that? Then you're not compliant with the yield triangle.

---

I mean... I generally do this. If the hiker insists, motions, whatever, I will continue riding. It's actually not that hard.

Hows about, if its a hiker built trail then hikers have the ROW. If its a MTB built trail, MTB has the right of way. If you dont know who built the trail, give way to the other user. Seems simple to me.

What about if elk built the trail and motos burned it in but are no longer allowed?

Reminds me of the saying, if you run into ten assholes a day, maybe you are an asshole?

"Management Scheme"? We can't even fix potholes. Maybe something like Trail Ambassadors Without Borders. You could do fundraising on NPR, buy some whistles and floro vests! Trailsigns with QR codes documenting the rules, do shifts at the trailheads, maybe some potluck round tables with all the user groups.

501c3, BOD, website, go big!

Sent from my Turbo 850 Flatbrimed Highhorse

The trail networks I've built are used by walkers frequently and I always yield to them. I'm just stoked to see people out on trails I've built. Just be nice and not a stravahole.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jackstraw

The trail networks I've built are used by walkers frequently and I always yield to them. I'm just stoked to see people out on trails I've built. Just be nice and not a stravahole.

---

You ever run across hikers who tell you that bikes arent allowed on the trail you built?

I have lol.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by californiagrown

You ever run across hikers who tell you that bikes arent allowed on the trail you built?

I have lol.

---

For them:

https://media.giphy.com/media/FNMXxC...RYuj/giphy.gif

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Foggy_Goggles

Reminds me of the saying, if you run into ten assholes a day, maybe you are an asshole?

---

Yep, if you are consistently running into assholes out on the trails, you might be an asshole.

my bike is so creaky lately. when i get above 300 watts it is relentless. not sure if the xtr cassette is the source but i have pretty much chased every other possibility to no avail.

the real kick in the pants is that yesterday someone thought i was on an e-bike due to the constant sound. i guess stumpy evos are a little portly down low.