[Talk-GB] difference between bicycle and MTB cycle routes

[Chris Hodges]

On 16/06/2021 16:18, Simon Still wrote:
>
>
>> On 16 Jun 2021, at 16:06, Chris Hodges <chris at c-hodges.co.uk 
>> <mailto:chris at c-hodges.co.uk>> wrote:
>>
>> There's a lot of debate in one of my clubs about what the Sustrans 
>> routes are actually for, as many aren't suitable for practical active 
>> travel (preferring a long muddy off-road route to a short one on 
>> reasonable roads) while others are of limited use to serious road 
>> cyclists (too rough) or leisure/family cycling (too far from anywhere 
>> much). Of course they shouldn't get all the blame; they're often at 
>> the mercy of local authorities
>>
> There isn’t a right answer as it wasn’t defined when the network was 
> built, but I believe there is an ongoing programme to rectify this 
> (which has started with the ‘declassification’ of parts that really 
> don’t meet even a low bar.
The impression I've got of the declassification is that it's more likely 
to declassify roads than mucky tracks or daft bits, but that may be a 
regional effect
>
>> That doesn't help much with mapping of course.  Unfortunately neither 
>> does the rate of degradation of many unpaved routes, whether seasonal 
>> or permanent.  I see a middle ground between your two, or perhaps a 
>> split of the "off-road route": somewhere you could happily take the 
>> kids on hybrids in summer (when most casual riding takes place), but 
>> that turns into a mudbath for an MTB in the winter (when only hardy 
>> riders are out).  Mapping that to serve both user groups may actually 
>> be impossible, or require more detail than can reasonably be recorded 
>> and presented
>>
> I’m reminded of a bridleway warning sign up in Cumbria - “Route may be 
> impassable for horses when wet”
>
> It’s mud that’s the issue in my view - whether just puddles (which 
> make a route useless for riding in normal clothes/commuting/utilty 
> cycling), deep mud (that a bike with tarmac tyres won’t get though) or 
> just a slippery surface that many riders will find dangerous.
>
> Isn’t this just the ’surface’ tag though? Does it need any more?


"Surface=" is good, as it "tracktype=", when displayed on maps (clearly 
enough for users) or used sensibly by routers.  But of course it's a 
snapshot from when one mapper passed that way, and interpreting it 
becomes a matter of not just outdoor knowledge but local knowledge as to 
things like how quickly it drains after heavy summer rains/ 
Example:byway "surface=unpaved, tracktype=grade3" near me.  In dry 
weather I can go faster on the tourer with slicks than the MTB, limited 
more by visibility of other users than anything else.  In winter, even 
after a dry week, it's barely passable without knobblies, you'll need to 
change clothes and shoes afterwards.  In summer it drains quite quickly 
after rain, unlike a local bridleway that was still up to mid calf in 
places on Sunday despite no recent rain.



>
>> As far as some bikes having difficulty, it's also the rider.  I have 
>> friends who are willing to ride stretches of pretty rough tracks on 
>> 25mm tyres and fixed gears (e.g. the byways around Stonehenge last 
>> weekend), while others complain about much easier gravel on slightly 
>> bigger tyres;  my own ability to deal with rough stuff on the tourer 
>> improves the more mountain biking I do.
>>
>
> Absolutely  - I’ve ridden some pretty rough paths and sections of off 
> road on my road bike which is why I think the Brompton is a good 
> benchmark.  Small wheels and narrow tyres mean they’re really not good 
> off road and they are the ‘benchmark’ active travel bike for me 
> (everyone should have one!)
>
>
Even then, a friend has done the local blue MTB trail on his Brompton 
and swears he got some air.


Overall I think there's agreement it's hard, and, unless there's a 
concrete proposal, I've probably run out of useful contributions, but 
will watch the thread with interest


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/attachments/20210616/a7e716b9/attachment.htm>