Trail Rating definitions

[headhunter]

Christian,

Not sure if you are aware of Dirtopia but it has some of the features you are looking for. http://www.dirtopia.com/wiki/Main_Page

I've been to Dirtopia a few times looking for various types of info, but I'll have to spend a little more time over there looking at trail ratings and descriptions.

Thanks!

Christian

[headhunter]

I'll jump in here just for kicks

Bear in mind that the USFS "3 tier" rating system (which is an International standard, Greg, Doug and I didn't make it up after a night with Jose Cuervo) is driven by the "L" word - Liability (get your mind out of the gutter Kurt!)

We're looking for the "recreating public" to have a "go/no go" guage when they approach the entrance of say, John Bull, in say...their bone stock AWD mini van, that the sales puke swore on a stack of all that's holy was a "real off road vehicle (BTST, didn't get a t-shirt).

We're NOT trying to offer a detailed description of what exactly the trail is going to encompass - and anyone that thinks it's even possible to maintain signage at that level needs to seriously check into some rehab

Your best source for detailed, up to date information on what trail difficulties are is what you're looking at right now - the 'Net.

Hey Jeff,

I didn't mean for this to be a slam on the 3 tier system used by the USFS. I've used that system quite successfully for skiing over the years.

I wasn't really even thinking that it would ever be feasible for a comprehensive system to be adopted by the USFS to provide info to the public. Since things change quickly, it would be too much to keep up with and would also be twisted by a litigious society into something that would be a diservice to us all.

What I was after was a system that we could develop that would help us all get a better idea of what to expect from a trail if we'd never been on it. This would be a system by the people for the people. It would be updated by anyone over time.

It's just a quest for a better mouse trap.

Christian

[Mitch]

Jeff,

I thought that some tequila was involved in those decisions, hmmm....... Just shows what I know. Too funny.

Mitch

[Old Fart]

Christian, I didn't consider it a slam - I've been monitoring folks trying to come up with a better system for a while now (think dialup BBS at 2400B)

Mitch, lately it's been rum......

[Mike]

Mitch, lately it's been rum......

Just remember...
"Time flies when you're having rum."

[headhunter]

Christian, I didn't consider it a slam - I've been monitoring folks trying to come up with a better system for a while now (think dialup BBS at 2400B)

Mitch, lately it's been rum......

I bet this discussion was taking place at 300B too!

Eventually, we'll come up with a system that at least the people we know might like.

Now...pass the rum!

Christian

[Old Fart]

Just remember...
"Time flies when you're having rum."

Ahh, I see you've been on our annual Parrothead cruise.....

[headhunter]

I'm back to looking for pieces to a trail rating puzzle. It may ultimately take a combination of many systems with the ability to add people's personal input in real time as trails change with weather and use.

I'm interested in knowing what you think of a system that takes into account both the vehicle and terrain in separate guides. Additionally, I think you could add a sort of "adjustment scale" to the system where you have three levels of driver ability (Novice, Intermediate & Advanced) that slide you up or down by one level on the guides, but I may be over complicating things.

At Expeditions West, I found another attempt at a rating system that uses in combination both a Trail Rating Guide and a Vehicle Rating Guide.

The Trail Rating Guide is on a "1 - 5" scale, but with half steps. This makes it a bit more like a "1 - 9" scale. I like that within the guide they link to some specific trail descriptions with pictures as typical examples.

The Vehicle Rating Guide is on a "1 - 4" scale with half steps.

Trail Rating Guide:
http://www.expeditionswest.com/resou...ail_rating.htm

Vehicle Rating Guide:
http://www.expeditionswest.com/resou...cle_rating.htm

For the sake of convenience and because links tend to change over time, I've reproduced "most" of that info below in this post.

Here is their Trail Rating Guide (without their pictures, some slight reformatting, but including their links for context):

1 - Improved / Graded Dirt Road: [COLOR="DarkOrange"]Passable by most standard vehicles[/COLOR], excluding vehicles with low hanging body panels, or are designed for on road sport driving with ultra low ride and tire section height.

1.5 - Graded Dirt Road: [COLOR="darkorange"]Still passable by most 2wd vehicles[/COLOR], however caution is required and lower speeds may be necessary for vehicles with less clearance. Small rocks (less than 5”) may be embedded in road surface. Sufficient room for passing on most of the road. Some steep grades possible. AWD required if road is wet or icy.

2 - Formed Track: [COLOR="darkorange"]Not passable by standard passenger vehicles.High clearance preferred, AWD preferred.[/COLOR] Steep grades present, larger rocks embedded in trail (less than 7”). Some loose trail surfaces and shallow water crossings possible. A spotter may be required on the most challenging portions to prevent body damage on vehicles with less clearance. Sand and dry washes may challenge available traction requiring lower air pressure on some vehicles. Trail may be narrow and require backing to allow other vehicles to pass. (Example Trails: Temporal Gulch, AZ / Red Canyon, CA)

2.5 - Rugged Track: [COLOR="DarkOrange"]Not suitable for 2wd vehicles, or low clearance cross over vehicles. AWD required, Low Range preferred.[/COLOR] Rutted, crossed axle terrain possible, with loose, steep climbs required. Deep sand possible. Some rock crawling possible on loose rocks up to 8” in diameter. Some larger rocks may be present, possibly requiring a spotter to negotiate. Small ledges possible, with larger embedded rocks present. Water crossing to 12” possible. Loose surfaces will be present, with tight clearance, smaller margin for error, and the possibility of body damage. Within the capability of any high clearance stock SUV or truck. AWD cross-over vehicles will struggle and may suffer damage due to lack of low range gearing. (Example Trails: Chloride, AZ / Chiricahua's, AZ)

3 - Formed Trail: [COLOR="darkorange"]High Clearance SUV or Truck required with low range gearing.[/COLOR] Trail will be very rough and heavily eroded, with large, loose rocks present and steep, loose climbs requiring good traction and driver skill to negotiate. Wheel placement critical. Skid plates required, along with larger tires (31”+) necessary to prevent damage. Deeper water and mud crossings possible. Parts of the trail may be entirely in a wash, with loose sand and large rocks present. Possibility of rock ledges, and severe crossed axle obstacles. Good suspension articulation required to maintain traction. Rear limited slip differential or traction control system recommended to limit trail and vehicle damage. (Example Trails: Chivo Falls, AZ / Calcite Mine, CA)

3.5 - Rugged Trail: [COLOR="darkorange"]High Clearance SUV or Truck required, taller suspension and tires recommended.[/COLOR] Few stock vehicles capable of completing the trail without damage. Very large rocks exceeding 12” present throughout trail requiring a spotter or heavily modified vehicle to traverse. Very loose and cambered climbs present, also heavily rutted requiring good suspension travel. Tall ledges present requiring good clearance or rocker panel protection. Little margin for error, and possibility of body damage. Tires must be 31”+ with aggressive tread and strong sidewalls. Lower tire pressure, skid plates, and limited slip or traction control required to prevent vehicle or trail damage. Rear locking differential and 32”+ tires recommended. (Trail examples: Rubicon Trail, CA / Martinez Canyon, AZ, etc.)

4 - Challenging Trail: [COLOR="darkorange"]High clearance modified vehicle required.[/COLOR] Not within the capability of a stock vehicle without damage. Trail likely in river or wash bottom with very large rocks present. Deep mud possible requiring aggressive tires and higher speeds. Water crossings in excess of 24” possible. Heavily rutted and crossed axle terrain present, with large ledges and very steep hills with embedded and loose rocks. Body protection required to prevent damage, with good skid plates and stronger (or spare) steering components necessary. Winching and extraction possible. 32” tires, rear locking differential and flexible suspension required. 33” tires and front locking differential recommended. (Trail Examples: Golden Spike, Moab Utah / Lower Woodpecker, AZ / Fordyce Creek, CA / Sledge Hammer, CA)

[CENTER][COLOR="Red"]The Following Rating are outside of the scope of this web site[/COLOR][/CENTER]

4.5 - Extreme Trail: [COLOR="DarkOrange"]Heavily modified vehicle required.[/COLOR] Extreme rock crawling, with very large ledges present requiring winching for shorter wheelbase (SWB) vehicles. Body and drivetrain damage likely. Very cambered terrain may cause roll-over's. Water crossings may be hood high, and mud will be very deep and heavily rutted. Vehicles will require heavy modifications. 33”+ tires required, along with front and rear locking differentials in upgraded axles. 35-37” tires recommended. Winch required on SWB vehicles. Roll cages or full metal roof required. Driver must be experienced. (Trail examples: Die Trying, CO / Axle Alley, AZ / Upper Helldorado, UT)

5 - No Trail!: [COLOR="darkorange"]Custom vehicle, very experienced driver required.[/COLOR] Competition level vehicles on insane terrain with frequent roll-over's and drivetrain damage. Full custom vehicles with massive axles, 37”+ tires, cutting brakes, very low gears, 1 ton drivetrain, and custom chassis.

[CENTER]Important Terms[/CENTER]

Definitions:

Road: Frequently graded and wide, with moderate grades and good traction surface. Bridges over water crossings. Typically a named road, backcountry byway, scenic byway, etc.

Track: Infrequently graded and will be narrow, with fewer places for passing. Less traffic and more rugged surface typically requires AWD and some clearance. Often leads to mines, camping areas, points of interest. Designated as numbered forest roads, two track, etc.

Trail: May never have been graded. Typically in wash and river bottoms on very rugged surfaces. Trails are driven mostly for recreation and to access remote scenic locations and primitive camping. Requires high clearance SUV or truck with low range gearing. May be a numbered trail (or adopted trail), and can be abandoned mine trails that have grown difficult with time. These trails are popular for their challenges, though many offer great scenery, abandoned mines, etc.

Here is their Vehicle Rating Guide:

1 - Most passenger cars, mini-vans, etc.

1.5 - Tall wagons and 2wd trucks. All cross-over SUV’s. AWD Preferred:

• Hyundai Santa Fe
• Subaru Outback
• Nissan Murano
• Buick Rendezvous
• Saturn Vue
• Lexus RX330

2 - Taller wagons, some 2wd trucks (with traction device), taller AWD SUV’s.:

• Honda Pilot
• Mitsubishi Endeavor
• Toyota Highlander
• Ford Explorer
• Acura MDX
• GMC Envoy / Chevrolet Trailblazer

2.5 - 4wd SUV’s and trucks with low range gearing. Some AWD (without low range) SUV’s with traction control system and good ground clearance.

• Land Rover Freelander
• BMW X5
• Isuzu Rodeo
• Dodge Durango
• Mitsubishi Montero Sport
• GMC Canyon
• Volvo XC90
• GMC Yukon
• Toyota Sequoia
• Jeep Liberty

3 - High clearance SUV’s and trucks with low range gearing. Traction device may be required in some models (noted). Vehicles should not have running boards.

• Land Rover Discovery II (with center differential lock)
• Land Rover Range Rover
• Toyota Land Cruiser / Lexus LX470
• Toyota 4runner / Lexus GX470
• Mitsubishi Montero (with traction control)
• Isuzu Trooper (with G80 limited slip)
• VW Touareg (with rear locking differential and air suspension)
• Nissan Xterra (with traction control)
• MB G-wagon (three locking differentials)

3.5 - Very high clearance SUV’s and trucks with good skid plates, long travel suspension and a locking differential.

• Hummer H2
• Hummer H1
• Toyota Land Cruiser FJ80 (with dual locking differentials)
• Jeep Wrangler and Unlimited (with D44 option and limited slip)
• Toyota Tacoma (with TRD package and locking differential)

4 - There are no production SUV’s or trucks capable of traversing this rating of trail without a very experienced driver, or terrain specific to the capabilities of the vehicle. For example 4.0 rated trails in Moab have been traversed in Hummer H1’s. The Jeep Wrangler Rubicon could be argued for this category as well, but suffers from poor ground clearance (for this trail rating).

[CENTER]Important Terms [/CENTER]

All Wheel Drive (AWD): All wheel drive vehicles do not typically have low range gearing, and may utilize a viscous coupling unit or electronic or hydraulic clutch packs to distribute power to the front and rear axle. All wheel drive is designed to be driven on all road surfaces, with improved traction on wet and icy roads. The vehicle may have a provision to lock the center differential which improves trail performance by permanently engaging both drive shafts, with power split 50/50 to front and rear axles. AWD is not to be confused with part-time 4wd. Some SUV's (like the Toyota Land Cruiser) have full time AWD, low range gearing for rugged terrain, and a center differential lock for the ideal combination of selections.

Full Size Vehicles: Full size vehicles are classified as having a track width exceeding 65”, and include full size trucks and SUV’s like the Tahoe, Expedition, etc. While these vehicles are very capable and have generous capacities (excellent for expedition travel), they will struggle in tighter trails and will require larger tires to accommodate their poor brake over angle and greater width. A full size vehicle should adjust the trail rating by (.5). For example a trail rated in the expedition guide as 2.5 should be considered a 3.0 for full size vehicles. In addition, the brush rating should be adjusted to the next higher as well.

Limited Slip Differential (LSD): A LSD only "limits" wheel spin to one axle shaft of a differential by utilizing a series of clutches or cone shaped gears. A LSD is a great improvement over an open differential, but does not lock completely and is most effective in sand, mud and loose surfaces. LSD's are least effective in rocky and heavily rutted terrain where tires are likely to leave the ground. Sometimes referred to as Posi-traction.

Locking Differential: A locking differential mechanically engages both axle shafts at the differential carrier, preventing wheel spin to an individual shaft. Both tires will turn at the same speed. Locking differentials can be full-time or driver selectable (like the Toyota Electronic Locker)

Long Wheel Base (LWB): LWB vehicles are classified as having a wheelbase in excess of 120". LWB vehicles will perform well on steep climbs and ledges as the front tires often clear the obstacle before the rear tires need to climb it. LWB vehicles will suffer on tight trails and may require rocker panel protection to prevent body damage.

Part-Time 4wd: Part-time 4wd systems are typically found on trucks and most traditional (body on frame) SUV's. Part-time 4wd systems do not have a center differential, and when engaged should not be driven on dry pavement as the front and rear drive shafts are mechanically engaged, and lock power front and rear equally. There is no differentiation to allow for smooth turning on pavement.

Short Wheel Base (SWB): SWB vehicles are classified as having a wheelbase of less than 100". SWB vehicles perform well in tight, rocky terrain. SWB vehicles will also be less stable on steep climbs and ledges.

Traction Control: Traction control is an electronic system utilized to limit individual wheel spin by applying brake pressure to the wheel to slow it down, and reapply power to the stationary tire. They use signals from sensors at the wheel hub to determine wheel speed, and a series of complex algorithms to compute the amount of brake pressure required. These systems are marginally effective, although a great improvement over open differentials.

So, what are your thoughts?

Christian

[headhunter]

Here is another system that I thought looked pretty good from the Colorado Association of 4 Wheel Drive Clubs.

Their Road and Trail Ratings can be found here:

http://www.hightrails.org/rd_rate_co.html

I've reproduced most of the info below for convenience and because links tend to change over time.

1 - Easy - Graded dirt road. Dry, or less than 3" water crossing depth. Gentle grades. 2WD under all conditions except snow. No width problems, two vehicles wide.

2 - Easy - Dirt road. Dry, or less than 3" water crossing depth. Some ruts. Slight grades, up to 10 degrees. 2WD under most conditions. Rain or snow may make 4WD necessary. Usually one and a half to two vehicles wide.

3 - Easy - Dirt road. Rutted, washes, or gulches. Water crossings up to 6" depth. Passable mud. Grades up to 10 degrees. Small rocks or holes. 4WD recommended but 2WD possible under good conditions and with adequate ground clearance and skill. No width problems for any normal vehicle. Vehicle passing spots frequently available if less than two vehicles wide.

4 - Easy - Rutted and/or rocky road. No shelves but rocks to 9". Water crossings usually less than hub deep. Passable mud. Grades moderate, up to 15 degrees. Side hill moderate up to 15 degrees. 4WD under most conditions. No width problems, vehicle passing spots frequently available if less than two vehicles wide.

5 - Moderate - Rutted and/or rocky road. No shelves. Rocks up to 12" and water crossings up to 12" with possible currents. Passable mud. Moderate grades to 15 degrees. 6" holes. Side hill to 20 degrees. 4WD required. No width problems.

6 - Moderate - Quite rocky or deep ruts. Rocks to 12" and frequent. Water crossings may exceed hub depth with strong currents. Shelves to 6". Mud may require checking before proceeding. Moderate grades to 20 degrees. Sidehill may approach 30 degrees. 4WD necessary and second attempts may be required with stock vehicles. Caution may be required with wider vehicles.

7 - Moderate - Rocks frequent and large, 12" and may exceed hub height. Holes frequent or deep (12"). Shelves to 9". Mud 8" deep and may be present on uphill sections. Grades to 25 degrees and sidehill to 30 degrees. Water crossings to 18" and may have strong currents. 1-1/2 vehicles wide. 4WD required. Driver experience helpful.

8 - Difficult - Heavy rock and/or severe ruts. Rocks exceeding hub height frequent. Shelves to 12". Deep mud or uphill mud sections. Steep grades to 25 degrees and can be loose or rocky. Water crossings may exceed 30" in depth. Side hill to 30 degrees. One vehicle wide. Body damage possible. Experience needed. Vehicle Modifications helpful.

9 - Difficult - Severe rock over 15". Frequent deep holes over 15". Shelves over 15". Mud bog conditions (long, deep, no form bottom). Over 30" water crossings with strong currents. Steep grades over 30 degrees. Sidehill over 30 degrees. May not be passable by stock vehicles. Experience essential. Body damage, mechanical breakdown, rollover probable. Extreme caution required.

10 - Extreme - Severe conditions. Extreme caution recommended. Impassable by stock vehicles. Winching required. Trail building necessary. May be impassable. Impassable under anything but ideal conditions. Vehicle damage probable. Personal injury possible. Extreme caution necessary.

Christian

[Mitch]

Christian,

I've got a new scale that I've been using:

* Dirt Road / Can be fun and can also get you to more of the fun places.

**Trail With Big Rocks / Even more fun, if there is a lot of loud banging sounds from slamming on the rocks, might be really fun!

***Trail You Get Stuck On / Extreme fun! Keep trying or start the upgrade process (just empty every pocket).

Lets go wheeling!!!!!!!!!!!

Mitch

[2blk2drs]

Here is their Vehicle Rating Guide:
2 - Taller wagons, some 2wd trucks (with traction device), taller AWD SUV’s.:

* Honda Pilot
* Mitsubishi Endeavor
* Toyota Highlander
* Ford Explorer
* Acura MDX
* GMC Envoy / Chevrolet Trailblazer

2.5 - 4wd SUV’s and trucks with low range gearing. Some AWD (without low range) SUV’s with traction control system and good ground clearance.

* Land Rover Freelander
* BMW X5
* Isuzu Rodeo
* Dodge Durango
* Mitsubishi Montero Sport
* GMC Canyon
* Volvo XC90
* GMC Yukon
* Toyota Sequoia
* Jeep Liberty




So, what are your thoughts?

Christian

I didnt see XJ anywhere on the list. Im guessing I am in group 2 with the tall wagons? :beer:


Thanks for doing this. Hopefully it will aid in getting more beginners on trails that will be enjoyable.

[blackZZR]

I used to have problems with all the different systems also, but now prefer the 3 teir system, green is for stock, blue is for high clearance, and black is for big tires and traction control. Simple to understand to me.

[blackZZR]

I'm back to looking for pieces to a trail rating puzzle. It may ultimately take a combination of many systems with the ability to add people's personal input in real time as trails change with weather and use.

I'm interested in knowing what you think of a system that takes into account both the vehicle and terrain in separate guides. Additionally, I think you could add a sort of "adjustment scale" to the system where you have three levels of driver ability (Novice, Intermediate & Advanced) that slide you up or down by one level on the guides, but I may be over complicating things.

At Expeditions West, I found another attempt at a rating system that uses in combination both a Trail Rating Guide and a Vehicle Rating Guide.

The Trail Rating Guide is on a "1 - 5" scale, but with half steps. This makes it a bit more like a "1 - 9" scale. I like that within the guide they link to some specific trail descriptions with pictures as typical examples.

The Vehicle Rating Guide is on a "1 - 4" scale with half steps.

Trail Rating Guide:
http://www.expeditionswest.com/resou...ail_rating.htm

Vehicle Rating Guide:
http://www.expeditionswest.com/resou...cle_rating.htm

For the sake of convenience and because links tend to change over time, I've reproduced "most" of that info below in this post.

Here is their Trail Rating Guide (without their pictures, some slight reformatting, but including their links for context):



Here is their Vehicle Rating Guide:



So, what are your thoughts?

Christian

complicated, and arguable pitting guys ego to the wall naming there rig as not as capable, bad idea.
Face it if a guy in an Explorer is so stupid not to know his rig is not capable of a trail, he deserves the damage done. I have seen a Tercel on top of Lytle creek divide. z

[Materdaddy]

complicated, and arguable pitting guys ego to the wall naming there rig as not as capable, bad idea.
Face it if a guy in an Explorer is so stupid not to know his rig is not capable of a trail, he deserves the damage done. I have seen a Tercel on top of Lytle creek divide. z

I think Christian is questioning trail rating systems not to set requirements, or keep people from certain trails. I believe his motive here is so people DONT'T get in over their heads. Maybe that guy in the Trecel heard Lytle creek was an "easy" trail. Who called it easy? What did they drive? How long had they been driving?

Basically, he wants a way to compare trails he's been on to new trails, and come up with a system that keeps himself (and others) out of trouble.

[headhunter]

I think Christian is questioning trail rating systems not to set requirements, or keep people from certain trails. I believe his motive here is so people DONT'T get in over their heads. Maybe that guy in the Trecel heard Lytle creek was an "easy" trail. Who called it easy? What did they drive? How long had they been driving?

Basically, he wants a way to compare trails he's been on to new trails, and come up with a system that keeps himself (and others) out of trouble.

Mat,

Keeping people from getting over their heads is exactly what I'm trying to do, first and foremost. In addition to that, I want to give people a way to pick the next trail that is slightly more difficult.

I think that a rating system is more there for those that are still learning what their rig is capable of and how their skill enters into the picture than the guy that already knows that he can run all of the trails at The Hammers.

For someone who is a novice (like me), it would be nice to have a system that allows us to take it up one notch at a time. It's not just about the rig, but also about the driver's skill. A more skillful driver can take a less capable rig somewhere.

I think that taking bits and pieces from these different systems may yield a good comprehensive system.

A comprehensive system will also help people in different regions compare their trails to trails in other regions to successfully plan a visit around their own comfort levels.

I don't expect this to be easy. People have been coming up with systems for years. None of them will ever be perfect.

Christian