The term 'flow trail' is a relatively recent addition to the mountain bike lexicon, a phrase used to describe a trail, usually machine made, that's full of berms and rollers, a dirt carnival ride that almost any ability level can make their way down without much trouble. They seem to be popping up with increasing regularity, and part of their growth may be due to the fact that more trails are being built specifically for mountain bikes (that's a good thing), as opposed to riding on paths that were originally constructed for foot and hoof traffic. The increasing number of flow trails could also be a side effect of the pumptrack craze that began roughly ten years ago. If a backyard pumptrack is fun, imagine how great a supersized, gravity-fed one out in the woods would be – or at least that seems to be the train of thought behind the construction of these swoopy, wide, and above all, smooth, trails.
Crunchy vs. smooth.That smoothness is one hallmarks of a flow trail, and most of them are nearly completely devoid of roots, rocks, or anything that would require the use of knobby tires. That's part of what makes it easier to get one through the bureaucratic red tape that comes with building a legal mountain bike trail – it's like getting permission to build a sidewalk in the woods, a task that's much simpler than trying to explain to a non-cyclist why that jumble of boulders in the middle of the trail doesn't need to be removed.
The growing number of flow trails combined with increasingly capable bikes makes for an strange juxtaposition, especially since the ideal bike for these trails would be something along the lines of a dirt jump hardtail or a slopestyle bike, rather than the 160mm enduro bikes that are currently en vogue. In a perfect world, a riding area would have a mix of trails, with rugged, natural singletrack interspersed between the machine built options. This certainly isn't always the case, but perhaps the focus on more rugged trails will return once the wave of flow trail construction subsides.
Personally, I like my trails to be served raw, full of spiderwebs of roots, chunky rocks, and sections that take a concerted effort to unlock the secrets. Don't get me wrong, I like railing through a double overhead berm as much as anyone, but if I were forced to choose, I'd pick a rough and raw trail over a sculpted sidewalk any day. But I'm genuinely curious about how other riders feel - maybe the demand for flow trails truly does outweigh that of natural, technical trails, which is the premise for this week's poll.
I also find that flow trails have a tendency to lull beginners into a false sense of security. They don't have the skills to ride the tech, but when they start picking up some speed and air on the flow its usually not long before they go down HARD. I've seen a few big injuries put a lot of new riders out of the sport early!
I think the answer we are all looking for is balance. To find a way to use the land that makes the trail flow no matter how technical it becomes, and without losing what made a specific zone unique in the first place.
We got chucked out of the English bar there after one of our bunch crushed a glass with his bare hand after too many jagers.
What's the poll at now anyhow? I still haven't voted so can't see the results....
just me 2centz
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYjaAQGDsQI
Overall I would get bored of pure flow and might want more jumps if I was always on "natural" ground, not all natural trails offer jumps and or drops without manicures. Diversity is where I'm at I guess!
I'm not saying things were better then, everything about mountain biking is better these days (from the technology to the amount of trails) but these ultra groomed trails feel like they're dumbing down the sport to a degree. Sure, they're a necessary evil for introducing new blood into the sport but at the rate the technical trails seem to be disappearing from our riding parks at this rate we'll be breeding nothing more than bmxers who ride big wheels.
I wont be giving up my new bike for anything, but for those with complaints about trials being too smooth go back to your older bikes and enjoy the bumpy ride. Cheers!
But when we got back to Australia, we only ever talked about the natural trails we'd ridden. That is where the commitment is. That is where you have to dig into your bag of skills. When I went to Whistler, A-Line was the second trail I hit. But once I discovered the Garbo tracks like Goat's Gulley and In Deep, I never rode A-Line again.
"Natural" trails of the 'pick a line, cut a few branches, ride it in' variety (as espoused in a bunch of comments) are only sustainable in areas with very little use. Everywhere else, they cause too much erosion, leading to the area closing to bikes altogether. So you end up with man made trails regardless. So if you're building anywhere there will be any appreciable number of riders, you have to build 'properly' with erosion prevention in mind.
So then the question is what do you build, "flow" or "tech" or some combination, and what degree of difficulty. For every trail system (whether a commercial bike park, or a community-supported area of private or public land opened up to MTB trail building, like the hills above Squamish BC, or Galbraith in Bellingham, or Post Canyon in Hood River, OR, or Duthie or Tiger Mountain or Leavenworth or what have you), you now have to make some big picture decisions. What will the land owner tolerate? What is attractive to the community (so you can get more riders engaged, which then gets you the political power to protect access and perhaps even expand it)? What gets volunteers fired up to actually come out and swing shovels?
All these arguments about whether trails need to challenge newbies so they learn the hard way and get truly committed, or whether trails need to be easier so people get hooked before they learn the skills for the more technical stuff - geez, what a bunch of posturing. Newbies, intermediates, experts - everyone has their set of preferences for what and how they like to ride, and they differ not just between ability levels, but within ability levels. Exposure to other things will broaden horizons, but only if there's enough of the stuff they like to where they come back in the first place. And anyone turning this into some sort of moral issue is missing the point.
Morgins in Switzerland is a good example of how "intermediate rider friendly" tracks should be... rooty, natural, multiple lines, with loads of berms and man made jumps. Smiling as I type this: Only 7 more days!
And before people start yelling that growing the sport shouldn't be a goal - the sport it big enough to where we can't fly under the radar, so the "in my day" thing is dead. If you want access to land to build trails, or you want access to trails that already exist, or you want dedicated mountain bike trails/areas, then the best chance of making that happen is to get more people into the sport. We're not too big a movement to get screwed out of access (see Portland, OR...). Every competing land use is growing its lobbying power - we can either compete with that, or lose what we have.
Other than that there is a middle way between these two extremes, like a bunch of lips added to a rooty trail, little catchberms etc etc making it easier to keep speed and "flow".
Old man rant over
Over at Sumas Squid Line is hugely popular and big time fun but I only ride it about 10% of my trips to Sumas. the Tech trails are more interesting.
If I only had one chance, I would always choose the tech vs. the smooth. But sometimes I just wanna float and dick around and that's what flow trails are good at.
But this idea that flow trails are "dumbing down" MTB? No, that's just foolishness and internet bravado.
NOT building any new trails because they're "too easy" and "dumbing down" the sport is what's dumb.
No one is talking about taking a Bobcat to every natural trail in existence. We are talking about NEW trails, often built with public money. Which WILL eventually lead to more tech trails being built as municipalities grow more comfortable with us. So stop complaining.
Oh and I like riding both! Preferably intertwined together, chunk tech to flow jumps back into rattle tech to a few berms a natural drop into a couple man made booters and rattle out of a rock garden.
TLDR: fatties ruined my trails
I guess it is only true of you are riding the am or dh trails. The xc trail just goes up and down into the wild brown yonder.
Both areas are fun, but the scope of the riding between the two are not even close to comparable...
Let me break it down: to ride for 8 miles at eagle you have to climb the hill 3-4 times which stinks. To do the same distance at draper you only climb it once. Yes the amount of climbing may be the same, but uninterupted descending is what I want, and the places that have that are mostly flow trails around here. Canyons in Park City has some better longer trails, but that is driving a lot more and paying a lot more, which aren't options for me.
If you think all 400+ miles of singletrack in the PC area alone are buffed smooth, all I can say is you need to expand your horizons a little bit and maybe venture beyond the Bermuda Triangle that is Armstrong>MM>Spiro.
Don't get me wrong, the 1 mile long Flintstone trail IS fun and techy, but in the scope of the riding here it is really only worthwhile December thru February.
All the best man, and thanks for "breaking it down" for me...
There's not a great deal of purpose built stuff down the South East UK that I know of so the number of times I've been to a trail centre I can count one hand. As a result most of my riding is to/from my front door.
The flow trail stuff is more appealing, despite not really having ridden much of either although for context I'm still fairly inexperienced, I ride a rigid singlespeed for general mountain biking and a dirt jump bike for having a laugh/jumping around etc.
That being said; when you have technical stuff that's cleared wide it all turns into a flow trail because you can pick your lines. Seeing a clean, wide trail and all your options makes you way more confident so naturally it just keeps getting ridden faster and faster...
Mmmmm.
Flow trails are dope too though, I just feel kinda dirty riding em ... Like I stole something hahahah
As others have said, it takes time to learn flow on techy trails, for example I consider Millagrosa in Tucson to be very flowy, but it took a while for me to get there, you have to learn to maintain speed over the chunk.
Stuff that's not flowy has abrupt uphills, low grades, or sharp, abrupt corners. I find some of my local "flow" trails (Heil Ranch) not very flowy, because the grade is so low that it ruins the flow and you have to pedal a bunch.
Pump tracks are great for building skills, while flow trails don't require that much skills to be ridden. The key is applying pumptrack techniques to crunchy trails on a full suspension bike.
I love riding pump track on a BMX and I love riding technical trails. I ride flow trails also because they're unavoidable but it's like eating at McDonald's: it can be fun once in a while, but riding flow trail only can make you feel sick!
Another point, I'm not as fit as I could be, so the later in the day, the more I like flow.
Achieve the fitness (and skill) to do both.
Ride Up, Chug a Beer Ride Down, Ride Up, Chug a Beer, Ride Down, and repeat as many times as your body lets you.
#momentum concepts
We desperately need Matt Dennison to chime in here with another brilliant satire of our sometimes-opposing tastes.
Oh - and I derive far more satisfaction from flowing through tech than from big jumps. Just no skinnies please (or at least give me a p-line around them).
either way...JUST RIDE IT! : )
I like both.
Imagine it,
design it,
build it,
ride it,
change it,
Ride it
love it!