Pirate 4x4 banner

181 - 200 of 298 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,138 Posts
dane said:
My problem with getting rid of little sluice is that part is the part I like. I feel like I'm on my own on this one, but I think the trail should have parts that are "boring" to super built rigs, as well as parts that are "extreme" to the lesser built rigs.
Dane and others,
I think this is the common sense middle ground that we will end up with for the difficulty level of the trail.
My plea to the people that like the LS box the way it is...
Please tell your like minded friends to take care of it like it was your front yard in a nice neighborhood.
What I mean is that this is one of those places that brings a lot of attention to the trail, both good and bad. This is the only part of the trail where I have consistently seen rigs upside down. I’m not afraid to role my Jeep, but it isn’t my goal. It seems to me like the LS has become a mess and the people that like the challenge have no aversion to being upside down and making a big mess and a big party scene.
I’m not saying close it down, just take care of it. I like watching the buggies run it, but I get upset when I see someone synch up their 5 point aim it at the wall and hit until they roll. Then they get out and everyone cheers and mean while the motor is dumping its contents in the Little Grease Box. I see some version of this almost every weekend that I have been to the sluice. The education needs to come from with in their own group of peers. Please make it stop or the county will and that is not a good thing.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
881 Posts
I thought we were making progress Trailer Guy. Again, when you start to tell me what I'm thinking, please quote me.


Ok, so a rookie. But without body damage, and on the Rubicon.

Now I have to wonder if you are trying to find a standard to maintain the trail, or find a sly way of getting the trail paved. There is no way to run the entire Rubicon without running the risk of body damage.
Talk about trying to read between the lines. I never said I wanted to elminate the risk of body damage. Hundreds, even thousands of vehicles travel across the Rubicon Trail every year without a scratch! Yes, there is aways a risk of body damage. There's a risk of body damage dring down highway 50.

"I DO NOT WANT TO PAVE THE RUBICON TRAIL." Doug Barr, December 10, 2005.
Please quote me all you want! Print it out and tape it to your computer screen so you don't forget it!



I read that you wanted to take the trail back to the early 90's. What you are asking for is a roadway like in the 20's.

If that is your true intension, then I would like you to make it public to everyone right now.
I still stand by my posts of getting the trail back to the early 90's.

The comment about body damage comes from looking at most of the vehicles that do run the Little Sluice. They are beat to death. The Sheriff's department would not stand for that kind of damage to their vehicle.



I am all for keeping the Rubicon open, and if that is what it takes, then fine. But I would like to know yours and others full intensions and modivations behind what you are saying. And please, don't tell me that you want to see the Rubicon stay open, WE ALL DO. I want to know more than that, and anyone reading that post you made will also want to know.
Personally, I would like to see the trail maintained to the point where an average driver in 95" wheel base vehicle with 31" tires an appropriate lift and one locker could run every part of the trail.

Yes, I've been posting something similar with 33" tires. I believe that w/ 33's and a locker you can go a hell of a lot of places. I ran 32's a locker and a limited slip with only 1 3/8" of lift and I ran the Rubicon (less Little Sluice and the True Sluice) and Fordyce! Sure I hit my rear corners a lot but they weren't bashed in.

I'd rather see smaller rigs and better drivers than huge rigs and idiots driving.

I 'd like to see the fines for driving off the trail and other violations start at $1500. If severe damage is done to the environment, I'd like to see the vehicle confiscated by the county and parted out on Ebay.

I'd like a family to be able to camp anywhere along the trail and not be scared or disturbed by other users.

I would like the Rubicon to become the poster child for how an OHV trail can be managed: open year round for all types of users without any ill effect on the environment.



It now seems that you have shifted from wanting to see the trail maintained, with difficulties, to a trail with no difficulties and no risk to the driver and the vehicle. What do you truely want to see?
I have not shifted anything. You are reading something that is not there. You need to learn not to put words in other peoples mouths. It pisses them off!



.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,461 Posts
The comment about body damage comes from looking at most of the vehicles that do run the Little Sluice. They are beat to death. The Sheriff's department would not stand for that kind of damage to their vehicle.
Oh, so you meant the Little Sluice and not the entire trail........(Please refer LS comments to the LS thread)

The Sheriff department should be able to patrol the trail with the same expectation it patrol the local doughnut shop. There should be no body damage.
"Should be able to patrol the trail with the same expectation it patrol the local doughnut shop." "Should be no body damage." Yes, you did refer to the trail. Trail, not Little Sluice. I thought it was you that told me that you wanted to see Little Sluice cleaned up, but left with difficulty. No Body Damage is not really leaving much difficulty. I don't need 4-wheel drive to go through the parking lot at the local mall, but body damage is possible there and it is pretty darn easy to drive through.

Sure the LEO should be able to drive their rig through the Con, with some difficutly, but without having to change broken parts every 100 yards. But to say that they should be able to drive it without body damage is just the wrong way of saying it. They are going to get body damage, and the more they are on the trail, the more they should expect. The only way to reduce the risks is to make the trail something like the roadway of the 1920's. If you want the trail returned to early 1990's, I'm all for it. But you cannot expect that a vehicle with a rookie driver isn't going to get body damage with as many hours on the trail as they are going to have. Lets at least be realistic.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,607 Posts
Simple Man said:

First you say the illegal rocks should go then you say something on 31's should make it without damage. Even with those rocks gone your not gonna do to well with 31's in there.. Shoot, even in the early 90's your gonna get some damage..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
24 Posts
Simple Man said:
Two points about "with who driving".

If we're going to settle on the Sheriff's XJ (I personally think it's too well built) the choice of "with who driving" should be the least experienced Sheriff's Deputy that could be assigned the task of patrolling the Rubicon.

The second half is that it should be able to be done without body damage. The Sheriff department should be able to patrol the trail with the same expectation it patrol the local doughnut shop. There should be no body damage.
.....
Come on now, the least experienced Sheriff's Deputy could even get body damage on the way to the donut shop. :shaking:
No slam intended toward the EDC Sheriffs.

In the early 90's, I drove the trail, but bypassed LS, in an XJ on 31's with little or no body damage. From 95 to 2001, I drove the box in the same XJ on 33's, with no body damage. However, my friends and I never go to the trail thinking that "there should be no body damage". A good driver in a well prepped rig on 31's can still get thru the trail cleanly, while an asshat on 37's will still tear his junk up. Just like in life, stupidity and bad luck are punished.

I doubt that the EDC or FS could afford to maintain the trail at a "no body damage" level and suspect that 99.9% of us do not want to see it get dumbed down to that level.

To keep the trail interesting and help keep user volume down, I'd like to see it continue to be a challenge to a good driver in a rig on 33's and a locker, and be oriented towards 4x4 enthusiasts and their families.

Further, if blasting or closing the box could accomplish having Spider areas open again for camping, I'd be all for it. I'm gonna put my flame suit on now...
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
881 Posts
The comment about body damage comes from looking at most of the vehicles that do run the Little Sluice. They are beat to death. The Sheriff's department would not stand for that kind of damage to their vehicle.

Oh, so you meant the Little Sluice and not the entire trail........(Please refer LS comments to the LS thread)
Comments about a standard level of maintenance be it a vehicle standard or rock size measurement will include every inch of the trail and legal bypasses! That includes the Little Sluice.



The Sheriff department should be able to patrol the trail with the same expectation it patrol the local doughnut shop. There should be no body damage.

"Should be able to patrol the trail with the same expectation it patrol the local doughnut shop." "Should be no body damage." Yes, you did refer to the trail. Trail, not Little Sluice. I thought it was you that told me that you wanted to see Little Sluice cleaned up, but left with difficulty.
When I say "The Rubicon Trail" I mean the whole thing. I would like to see the Little Sluice returned to the condition that it was in during the early 1990's.



No Body Damage is not really leaving much difficulty.
You need to learn how to drive if you do body damage on every tough trail.



They are going to get body damage, and the more they are on the trail, the more they should expect. The only way to reduce the risks is to make the trail something like the roadway of the 1920's. If you want the trail returned to early 1990's, I'm all for it. But you cannot expect that a vehicle with a rookie driver isn't going to get body damage with as many hours on the trail as they are going to have. Lets at least be realistic
Again, I never said I want to reduce or eliminate the RISK, you are still putting words in my mouth.

You return that trail to the condition it was in during the early 1990's and I will drive that XJ across it several dozen times without body damage.

To be realistic, we might not ever see the Sheriff's XJ on the trail again. If it is on the trail body damage might occur. I never go out wheeling expecting damage. Those drivers that do go out expecting damage are driving a trail that is too tough for them, their rig, they are just bad drivers or they just don't care about their vehicle or the environment.

I know you're going to comment on that last line so let me go first. If you're driving down the trail and anything but the tires or undercariage touches the trail, rocks or trees, you've done something wrong. To leave body paint on a rock or tree shows bad driving and leaves a scar on the environment. It's as bad as taging a brick wall in downtown San Diego.





.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,138 Posts
I don't think the LEO's want to spen $$ on fixing their rig each time and they won't drive a beater either. I don't think they do now the rig has (or should have) some skid plates similar to Jes (black XJ) and steel tail lights, etc. So basically, wouldn't that say that the trail is about right right now and let's keep it this way and not let it get much worse.

Or you could poney up and by them a buggy. :)
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
5,906 Posts
This is why I was so leary of this subject. It is too dependant on driver ability vs rig capability. A tough thing to do. I applaud you guys for tking it on. Kudos.

I drove a Tj on 31's and open last summer through the Rubicon about 12 times. I took a strap twice. Would I do it in the Springtime? I'd think hard about it. I drove a cruiser on 37's through as well as a mini on 35's. Both locked.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,505 Posts
Doug, you keep saying that you want everyone to be able to run the entire trail to include LS. By doing this you have to know you are ostracizing the larger rigs. I AM NOT QUOTING YOU HERE BUT : If you make the trail no fun for the bigger rigs by hiding behind the guise of keeping the trail open to everyone you can get your way by sleeping with the enemy.

Dane
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
5,906 Posts
Simple Man said:
Again, I never said I want to reduce or eliminate the RISK, you are still putting words in my mouth.

You return that trail to the condition it was in during the early 1990's and I will drive that XJ across it several dozen times without body damage.

To be realistic, we might not ever see the Sheriff's XJ on the trail again. If it is on the trail body damage might occur. I never go out wheeling expecting damage. Those drivers that do go out expecting damage are driving a trail that is too tough for them, their rig, they are just bad drivers or they just don't care about their vehicle or the environment.

I know you're going to comment on that last line so let me go first. If you're driving down the trail and anything but the tires or undercariage touches the trail, rocks or trees, you've done something wrong. To leave body paint on a rock or tree shows bad driving and leaves a scar on the environment. It's as bad as taging a brick wall in downtown San Diego.
I'd first like to say that this is an open forum. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. Doug's taking a pretty hard line here and personally I have my feelings about it too. There will be no personal shots here.

I beleive the Rubicon is a place where body damage is likely to occur. It can be driven without it in a lesser rig. By a good driver. (I know, as I just pointed out I have done it) A bad driver in the same rig can do massive damage to it in a small amount of time. A bad driver in a very capable rig can do a large amount of damage to the trail in a short period of time.

Back to fence building, Scott
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
5,906 Posts
dane said:
Doug, you keep saying that you want everyone to be able to run the entire trail to include LS. By doing this you have to know you are ostracizing the larger rigs. I AM NOT QUOTING YOU HERE BUT : If you make the trail no fun for the bigger rigs by hiding behind the guise of keeping the trail open to everyone you can get your way by sleeping with the enemy.

Dane
The trail should be open and accessable YEAR ROUND to anyone that is willing to risk damage to their rig. Big, small, blue, green, whatever.

K?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,505 Posts
cruzila said:
The trail should be open and accessable YEAR ROUND to anyone that is willing to risk damage to their rig. Big, small, blue, green, whatever.

K?
I really really dont understand now. If the most unexperienced LEO "should" be able to get their XJ thru w/no damage how the hell are any of the rest of us going to risk damage????

Dane
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
881 Posts
Doug, you keep saying that you want everyone to be able to run the entire trail to include LS. By doing this you have to know you are ostracizing the larger rigs. I AM NOT QUOTING YOU HERE BUT : If you make the trail no fun for the bigger rigs by hiding behind the guise of keeping the trail open to everyone you can get your way by sleeping with the enemy.

Dane
I'm not hiding behind anything. I've never stated that my goal is to provide a challenging section on the Rubicon for extreme rigs. I have said that I want the trail open to all user types, the less equiped rigs will face more of a challenge and the better built rigs will have less of a challenge.

The Rubicon has historically been a family/camping Jeep trail. The drivers of the extreme rigs had to illegally alter the trail or drive off the trail to find challenges. That is wrong, it is also illegal.



I really really dont understand now. If the most unexperienced LEO "should" be able to get their XJ thru w/no damage how the hell are any of the rest of us going to risk damage????

Dane
Is your goal to risk damaging your vehicle?

If you drive a better equipped rig than the Sheriff's XJ the risk will be minimal. There are tougher lines on certian sections of the trail. If you have a more moderate rig and take the most challenging line, you will risk damage.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
881 Posts
I wonder if were think of the work "expect" differently?


I'll point out an example from 2004. I took my wife's daily driver down Cadillac Hill and in to Rubicon Springs for a work party. It's a 1998 XJ w/ a 3.5" R.E. lift and 31" tires, boulder bars, sway bar d/c, open diffs and stock gears.

I didn't expect any damage. But when driving the Rubicon Trail, body damage is possible. Due to Cruzila's great spotting, there was no body damage. I did use a strap twice but on the way in not out. Once was driver error, I got high centered on the roots near the base of Cadillac, wrong line. The second time was going over some granite slabs that were coverd with sand before the springs. I might have been able to bounce it over but I didn't want to increase the risk of breaking something.

I did put a few scratches on the alloy wheels, my wife wasn't happy. I wasn't either but it was the risk I took and I accepted the fact that there was damage done.

I'd never take a trip along the Rubicon without thinking there was the possibility of body damage.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,461 Posts
Ok Doug, here's the deal. You said:

The Sheriff department should be able to patrol the trail with the same expectation it patrol the local doughnut shop. There should be no body damage.
Now you're saying:

Again, I never said I want to reduce or eliminate the RISK, you are still putting words in my mouth.
Ok so do you want to reduce or eliminate the risk so the Sheriff department doesn't receive any body damage, or possibly receive body damage by NOT reducing or eliminating the risk? With a rookie driver, you cannot have both.

You also said:

If we're going to settle on the Sheriff's XJ (I personally think it's too well built) the choice of "with who driving" should be the least experienced Sheriff's Deputy that could be assigned the task of patrolling the Rubicon.
And you said:

You return that trail to the condition it was in during the early 1990's and I will drive that XJ across it several dozen times without body damage.
So no body damage with a rookie or no body damage with you driving?

The point I'm getting at, is that it depends on the driver, not the rig. So, get off the rig and start thinking of a way to have a standard to maintain the trail without using a rig or a rigs specs. You pretty much said it, it's the driver and not the rig, so no more rig.

You need to learn how to drive if you do body damage on every tough trail.
Doug, do you really want to go there? I rarely get body damage unless I'm driving over the rig stuck infront of me.

I guess the big thing here is that for us to discuss what the standard should be, everyone has to be very clear on what they expect it to be. You cannot say two different things. Say just one thing and stick to it.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
5,906 Posts
I have to look at the comedy in this. Really I do.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,505 Posts
Simple Man said:
I'm not hiding behind anything. I've never stated that my goal is to provide a challenging section on the Rubicon for extreme rigs. I have said that I want the trail open to all user types, the less equiped rigs will face more of a challenge and the better built rigs will have less of a challenge.

The Rubicon has historically been a family/camping Jeep trail. The drivers of the extreme rigs had to illegally alter the trail or drive off the trail to find challenges. That is wrong, it is also illegal.





Is your goal to risk damaging your vehicle?

If you drive a better equipped rig than the Sheriff's XJ the risk will be minimal. There are tougher lines on certian sections of the trail. If you have a more moderate rig and take the most challenging line, you will risk damage.

I would like to address these points. First of all the trail is currently open to all user types, the less equipped rigs face more of a challenge, the better built rigs will face less of a challenge. You say the drivers of more extreme rigs had to drive off of/alter the trail to make it more challenging. I have an extreme rig, but I do not drive off of or alter the trail. I understand where the challenge is and love the scenery of the less challenging parts. My goal IS to risk damage to my vehicle. When I do not damage my vehicle I am happy about driving a clean line, when I do I realize that is just part of the sport. If I cannot risk vehicle damage there is no challenge, you just get stuck, get a strap and are on your way.

Dane
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
881 Posts
Scott,

I'm glad you're being entertained by all of this.




Ok Doug, here's the deal. You said:
Quote:
The Sheriff department should be able to patrol the trail with the same expectation it patrols the local doughnut shop. There should be no body damage.

Now you're saying:

Quote:
Again, I never said I want to reduce or eliminate the RISK, you are still putting words in my mouth.

Ok so do you want to reduce or eliminate the risk so the Sheriff department doesn't receive any body damage, or possibly receive body damage by NOT reducing or eliminating the risk?

With a rookie driver, you cannot have both.
I want to maintain the trail so a 95" vehicle with 31's or 33's w/ one locker can travel across the trail.

With the trail maintained to this level, a rookie LEO can drive that XJ with minimal risk and no body damage across the trail.




You also said:

Quote:
If we're going to settle on the Sheriff's XJ (I personally think it's too well built) the choice of "with who driving" should be the least experienced Sheriff's Deputy that could be assigned the task of patrolling the Rubicon.

And you said:

Quote:
You return that trail to the condition it was in during the early 1990's and I will drive that XJ across it several dozen times without body damage.


So no body damage with a rookie or no body damage with you driving?
No damage with either of us driving. With that I make the assumption that I am a better driver than the least experienced rookie.



The point I'm getting at, is that it depends on the driver, not the rig. So, get off the rig and start thinking of a way to have a standard to maintain the trail without using a rig or a rigs specs. You pretty much said it, it's the driver and not the rig, so no more rig.
As Scott pointed out, this is an open forum. This is my opinion on the matter at hand. You are free to disagree and voice your opinion. You have said that my version is too vague yet your version only says a properly built rig with an experienced driver. That is more vague than my version.



Quote:
You need to learn how to drive if you do body damage on every tough trail.

Doug, do you really want to go there? I rarely get body damage unless I'm driving over the rig stuck infront of me.
from Trailer Guy:
No Body Damage is not really leaving much difficulty.
From this I read that if there is difficulty, there is body damage. I think it is possible to drive a difficult trail without body damage. Scott proved this several times this past summer with a STOCK Jeep.

If you have driven over a rig stuck in front of you, you should be arrested for reckless driving, damage to private property and endangering the lives of others (if they were in the rig).



I guess the big thing here is that for us to discuss what the standard should be, everyone has to be very clear on what they expect it to be. You cannot say two different things. Say just one thing and stick to it.
I have yet to see you point out where I have said two different things. I'll admit with this type of communication it is easy to keep your comments short thus not entirely clear.







You say the drivers of more extreme rigs had to drive off of/alter the trail to make it more challenging. I have an extreme rig, but I do not drive off of or alter the trail. I understand where the challenge is and love the scenery of the less challenging parts.
Maybe I should have left out the words "had to" when talking about finding challenges. I do not assume that all drivers of extreme rigs drive off the trail and alter the trail. But new routes were formed and the trail was altered. Don't try and tell me it was done by someone driving a rig with 31's.



My goal IS to risk damage to my vehicle. When I do not damage my vehicle I am happy about driving a clean line, when I do I realize that is just part of the sport. If I cannot risk vehicle damage there is no challenge, you just get stuck, get a strap and are on your way.
Dane, You make a good point here. Yeah, there is a thrill there when you walk that line of a clean line and several hundred dollars worth of body damage.

I guess we all do risk damage when we run the trail.

The difference might be how big a risk we are each willing to take. I wouldn't risk taking my wife's rig through the Little Sluice as it sits right now. But I did risk taking it down Cadillac.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,505 Posts
Here are the things I have come to realize throughout this thread.

1. We all want to keep the trail open
2. We all know that no one trail will make us all happy
3. We all have different rigs, and different driving skills
4. We all need to team up to keep the trail open and once we accomplish that we can "maintain" it to whatever level is deemed appropriate.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,607 Posts
Simple Man said:
FOTR has been working the trail for the past five years. Several clubs still regard the trail as their adopt-a-trail and are actively working the trail in both counites.
.

I was helping arrange pirate cleanups long before there was a FOTR. You say the county will maintain and now you say FOTR. I don't think FOTR is the county. FOTR can't maintain the entire trail - unless managed differently (adopt a club per section). I know people TRY to maintain the trail but it is nobody's responsibility (well it is the county but they don't do anything) to upkeep each and every section of the trail.

BTW Doug, some people dig body damage and could get it in the shopping mall, difficulty of trail has little to do with it. Lotsa people like to play bumper cars and it doesn't even take a trail to do that. Don't base anything on body damage..
 
181 - 200 of 298 Posts
Top