McFlow trails and the decreasing diversity of trails

[Elbo]

I was just watching old MTB videos on YouTube I used to watch as a teenager and realised I've been noticing a steady decline in creativity when it comes to trail building. I've never really been inspired by McFlow trails. You know the ones I'm talking about: turn, grade reversal, lose 3m elevation, gain 1, artificial rock speedtrap, turn, repeat. Sure they're fun to ride and its great to have more trails but they're incredibly predictable; once you've ridden one, you've ridden them all.

Videos like NWD 3 never represented the mainstream of MTBing, just like Danny Macaskill videos don't these days. But videos like NWD pitched MTBers as either awkward social outcasts or super nice but slightly odd individuals, who became obsessive over the trails they created. Kind of like surfing, before Gidget.

Goat tracks, creative lines that embody something of the builder, trails whose names emerge from folklore, and rides that end in bush bashing, they're the things that still get me excited about riding mountain bikes. Not the highly polished, designed within an inch of its life, 1m wide benched singletrack that has recently become the norm.

I feel like there is less diversity in trail building now. Part of the creativity has been swallowed in red tape and outsourcing design. Has MTBing lost something with all the bureaucracy that has led to the current glut of McFlow trails? What is our image now?

Link to part of NWD3: [video]https://youtu.be/x6d1LBvwVQo[/video]

 

[johnny]

I'm kind of liking it.

I don't have a DH bike anymore, just an AM and a few rigids. The flow trails at Stromlo are great fun, I like to go fast these days without having to plow. I do miss DH and the more gnared out and challenging stuff but I'm pretty happy with fast, flowy, floaty trails where the berms are almost wall rides and the drops so smooth sometimes you're not sure when you actually land.

Although I feel you on the creativity. The footage of the flow trail I've seen from Thredbo is more boring than a drill to the forehead. it's just back and forth the face of the slope and that's it. No features, no variety no journey - just going through the motions. A good fast, flowy trail that mixes things up and has a bunch of sneaky lines all over it is stupid fun to my old legs and only semi-capable ride.

 

[MarioM]

I have been looking , finding and riding the most technical single tracks . I used to hate these and prefer groomed XC courses but the harder i push in the gnar the more i want but I think the XC race bike is at its limits on the stuff I have been riding . Get back onto groomed track and its all ho hum . I agree build tracks that are challenging instead of groomed .

 

[rowdyflat]

Couldnt agree more Elbo.
I think its to appeal to all the new riders as there has been an explosion of mtbikers + some arent v experienced.
Its all the outsourcing of track building some may not even be mtbikers .
I may get howled down but Buller which was a corporate build has 1 or 2 shockers with horrible corners.
If I want some real excitement I ride tracks that I have built.

 

[pharmaboy]

Call me crazy, but I've never been bored riding a mountain bike off road. When we go riding most of the time it's away from std mountain biking areas so trails are a mix of moto single track, built by one person and double track, so built trails are the occasional and much fun.

I also find flow trails are about speed - anything ridden fast is fun, so I suppose as my engine has got faster I can make more fun out of trails without many turns.

There is a law in trail building though - you will always piss off some riders whenever you build something or change something .

Also, keep in mind that a lot of changes are necessary to keep the trail sustainable for the number of riders, so busy managed areas almost always get the features described above to keep them operating - eg slowing a corner or moving the apex to stop washing out.

And another thing - if you ever slide your rear tyre, you are part of the the problem not the solution

 

[Haakon]

Any flow track can be technical if you're going fast enough. It has its place - its just another style to add the to choice we're spoilt with now.

 

[Pastavore]

I find i have plenty of variety in my local trails. I only ride xc on a hardtail, but you yangs, wombat, yarra trails, castlemaine, lakes entrance all have quite different characters.

 

[Shadow Puppet]

Completely agree Elbo.

Stuff like this just doesn't inspire me https://m.facebook.com/flowmountainbike/photos/a.280919802002018.64017.278392755588056/814602938633699/?type=1&source=48

Mountain biking is being dumbed down for the masses.

 

[steve jobs' pancreas]

I like it all, but being a noob that opinion probably doesnt really count.

TBH I find riding down my driveway challenging.






























Fuck you, its pretty steep !!!

 

[Dozer]

I'm driven by the old school philosophy; find a natural line and groom it enough to ride it with obvious shaping for obstacles. I prefer to ride the terrain without manipulating too much but having said that, I recently built a short descent that is bike park wide and well groomed primarily for trail bike use. It's fun but very predictable and requires more upkeep.
I see nothing wrong with a place that is funded and has trails built for flow as long as there's trails for the guys seeking a run of the terrain. I like variation and find that if the trails built by guys with a bit of history in their riding style then yeah, it's bound to be awesome.
It isn't relevant to the thread too much but I've come across a couple of instances where XC style riders have found a descending area near their skinny, squared off flat trails that they've decided to build a line on in the interest of some downward facing thrills and yeah, nah........leave the shaping and direction of descending trails to the experts who actually ride that stuff. You don't know what you're doing and you're probably too pompous to learn the building techniques.. :hand:

 

[Mywifesirrational]

Another meh for flow trails here, they have their place and certainly can be used by a broad range of skill levels and bike type, hence their popularity. But it seems to me this is at the expense of interesting and challenging trails.

I'm going to pick on Copperhead at buller (again).

Could have been an awesome flow trail, but the entire top section is shit, the fire road section is down right dangerous and the bottom bit is actually really good fun not matter what bike you are on (as long as your willing to ride through the shit first).

They used gravel on hardpack, slipperiest shit you can put on a trail, I understand it's for durability and we were told it would wear in, but 3-4 years later it's still shit to ride on. Seen a lot of pointless crashes from beginner to intermediate riders because of the surface - the trail is meant to be aimed at this cohort, especially on XC to trail bikes with less capable tyres.

Off camber, blown out corners covered in loose gravel, makes it really hard to maintain speed and 'flow', hence more skilled people can't make the trail more fun for them because the poor maintenance or more likely initial design was shit.

The fire road section, there has been and will be more serious injuries through here, the low side of road has the trail drop away, it's off camber, covered in gavel and has humps as you enter which unload the suspension and you lose grip without warning. Seen some massive crashes through here.

Bottom section is really good fun and is the definition of flow, good surface, nice tight bermed corners and a nice rhythm sections with some sneaky pro lines thrown in.

Point of reference, I love Travs diamond, boulder and Junction tracks at youies. Lots of interesting and challenging sections and lines.

 

[johnny]

They used gravel on hardpack,

Well that's got to be one of the dumbest things I've heard in a long while.


I think the rise of flow trails is probably closely correlated to the rise of All Mountain bikes and Enduro......., which I still can't define.

My Remedy is perfectly suited to flow trails (that means fast, not overly techy trails that include doubles, drops, bermed out corners, obstacles that are ride-able at speed, floaters, fast off cambers, etc.). It can do XC but is too bulky and heavy to do it well. It can do DH but is too light and can't be ridden with confidence. There are heaps of bikes like this these days - I'd probably even bet that AM bikes are experiencing greater sales growth than any other kind of MTB right now. That may then drive the usage of flow trails.

Also, if a trail is going to be groomed to the point where it's more like a footpath than a bush trail then it has to be fast, real fast. If its smooth and groomed but at normal speed then its basically a kid's/beginner's trail.

 

[rowdyflat]

OK mywifesirrational said it but I was referring to the hyped up" Flow track" Copperhead at Buller = the worst track, the most wasted opportunity ever.
The corners are sharp + crap must have been built by someone who hates mtbikers .
Its alleged to have cost $200,000 + built by machines + looks like it.

 

[bikesarefun]

All for flow trails. Provided they're done properly: with big jumps and minimal braking required.

 

[Mywifesirrational]

OK mywifesirrational said it but I was referring to the hyped up" Flow track" Copperhead at Buller = the worst track, the most wasted opportunity ever.
The corners are sharp + crap must have been built by someone who hates mtbikers .
Its alleged to have cost $200,000 + built by machines + looks like it.

That's the bit that makes me sad, the money wasted vs the potential of this track.

Still could be awesome, but more than a few sections need a complete redesign or rebuild, and piss the gravel off. Also why dont flow trails have 50 sensible table tops on them or more alternate pro / A lines?

the DH parts Stonefly, Epic and even sections of Gang Gangs are far superior, but then they didn't cover those in marbles and actually built/designed the corners to maintain speed / flow.

 

[Elbo]

I'm driven by the old school philosophy; find a natural line and groom it enough to ride it with obvious shaping for obstacles. I prefer to ride the terrain without manipulating too much but having said that, I recently built a short descent that is bike park wide and well groomed primarily for trail bike use. It's fun but very predictable and requires more upkeep.
I see nothing wrong with a place that is funded and has trails built for flow as long as there's trails for the guys seeking a run of the terrain. I like variation and find that if the trails built by guys with a bit of history in their riding style then yeah, it's bound to be awesome.

I've always been of the opinion that the best trails can be built using nothing more than a fire-rake and a whippersnipper.

I question the impact IMBA standards have had on MTBing. Sure, the 'bench, cut and flow' philosophy of trail building has legitimised the sport in the eyes of the relevant authorities. But at the same time, we've also shoehorned ourselves into a position where we agree the only sustainable type of trail is a 1 metre wide elongated pump track.

I understand there's a delicate relationship between sustainability, the environment and the amount of traffic a trail sees. I think well groomed flow trails have a place in areas that see high traffic, as this gets more people riding and the trails are built to cope with different skill levels of riders, so maintenance is less of an issue.

I think johnny's point about the growth of the AM/Enduro market is a good one. These bikes are designed for fun, not necessarily for racing, and that's what rising's always been about for me. But I worry that we're losing the creative licence over trail building, and that freedom to create or ride other people's creations has always been a big part of why I ride.

 

[jrewing]

All for flow trails. Provided they're done properly: with big jumps and minimal braking required.

Jumps... Don't mention that word. The fun police that build trails hate that word.

Legal Trailbuilders please build more jumps please. Big fast ones with long landers

Lawyers and insurance plebs- go die

 

[Dozer]

I question the impact IMBA standards have had on MTBing. Sure, the 'bench, cut and flow' philosophy of trail building has legitimised the sport in the eyes of the relevant authorities. But at the same time, we've also shoehorned ourselves into a position where we agree the only sustainable type of trail is a 1 metre wide elongated pump track.

Grrrr, I hate the IMBA theories and the support it receives. There philosophy is treated like gospel but it's done nothing for me. We don't need IMBA.

 

[steve jobs' pancreas]

I really like riding different tracks and I'm happy to jump in the car and travel to try something different.

I predominantly ride OMV but thats coz I can ride there from home, and to be honest I cant believe how lucky I am to live near such a great track with flow stuff and techy stuff and a climb that I still find a challenge.

But I'll jump in the car and ride wylde where I feel I can get some flow going and really grind the hills or awaba or ourimbah where there is a good mix and feels like a longer OMV to me. Looking forward to a stromlo trip, soon i reckon.

Rode manly damn the other day for the first time and struck obstacles I never encountered before, walked some rode some.

Being a noob in a sport like this is fucking tops. Mtbing aint quite surfing where I can remember in detail the first time I rode on the open face of a wave 35 years ago but fuck me if it aint close.

Enjoy the rides and mix it up, ya living the dream !!!

 

[deadbudgy]

I don't 'get' flow tracks for mountain biking the same way I don't 'get' terrain parks for snowboarding. I love these sports because they allow a personal interpretation of natural terrain. Its a form of creative expression. Some of the new trails coming on line now, like the Wylde trail in western sydney, are almost like riding a footpath that has been bull dozed through the bush. Fun to ride once or twice but thats it.