Have you seen the new Can-am Mavericks? That Maverick Max 4 seater is just as big as a Jeep. Maybe bigger if you put big off road tires on it. Many places where they ride them, the trails tend to be old roads or logging/mine roads anyway. So 60 inches is not a big deal anyway. People are getting all wrapped up around the axle and getting their underwear in a bunch over nothing. I am glad they are here. I have no problem going 60 inches. 65 would be just as good as far as I'm concerned.

 

If popo can get get 65" trails for the sxs guys cool, more power to ya. Just dont see what the fuss is about. If ya dont fit on the atv trails then you just go the to next size up, jeep trails I guess... Whats wrong with that?
Lets be honest here. Whats a fortified trail head? 20' of rocks some form of a gate and another 20' of rocks? Its like the lock on your front door... It only keeps the honest people out.

 

We have single lane trails here with two way traffic and no speed limits. Narrow trails are the only thing restricting us to a reasonable speed and everyone I ride with likes to go fast when they can. If the trails were that much wider they'd probably just go even faster. If everyone does that sooner or later there will be some serious crashes.

 

Maybe the point being missed is that many, not all, but many trail systems rely on existing roads anyway. Old logging roads, mine roads etc. So really, I see no issue other than somone wanting to raise yet another reason to complain. About the only real issue I see is on some trails where bridges are needed to cross sensative areas are too narrow for them. But truly, I don't think anyone builds a bridge under 60 inches to begin with anyway. Also noted that ATV trails share a lot of trails with the Snowmobile crowd too. AND if you are using tracks on your machine so you can extend your ride time into the colder seasons, they are all going to push beyond 50 inches. I do believe you hit on one item that plagues the sport though, and that is speed. I agree wider trails will tempt some to go faster. Not much you can do about that. I hate to see it come to that. But people have always disconnected their brains from their right foot once they turn the key. I don't think you can legislate stupid.... I am thinking the measuring stick should be something other than width. How about using weight instead? Maybe 1500 lbs tops. Or we could just say any vehicle originally designed for street use is forbidden? The real issue is that the sport of off road riding is evolving. And getting wider is the trend today. I just wish the ATV's would follow the lead. Lastly, since my original comment was in regard to Can-Am's Maverick. Just heard they are coming out with a woods/GNC model that is narower than the originals. 4 inches have been trimmed out of the width to get them to 60 inches.

 

When we were out on the Paiute Trail a few weeks ago there were a lot of spots where it would have been super costly for the local clubs and groups to widen the trails. We were on a switchback trail that had a good 8 hairpin turns descending into Circleville, UT. It was limited to 60". Just after we finished the hairpins we saw a group coming up from the valley below. Imagine how fun it was parking the quad on the edge of a 150-200 ft. drop so they could just barely squeeze by. My rental was literally teetering on the edge. The group had a mix of quads, 50" RZRs and a RZR S with the wider stance. Boy, was it close!!! We had to push the rollcages on the RZRs to keep them from scraping up against our quads and sending them into the dropoff.

We were talking about it with Randy, the owner of Moore's Old Pine Inn and he said that the section we were talking about had actually been much more narrow and they lost 8-10 quads over the edge every year until they widened it a bit. I can't imagine how it used to be with a more narrow trail and a group coming up meeting a group going down.... Must've been scary. So, in this case at least, the wider trail is a safer way to go.

We talked with Kenny (Specta, here in the forums.) and he was saying a lot of the side trails off the Paiute Trail are National Forestry lands where they want as little impact on the environment as possible. So, they keep the trails narrow. Was thinking about this especially in light of Utah being a pretty dry, arid, environment. If you widen a 50" trail another 10-12" or so you're going to loose a square foot of vegetation per foot of trail. That adds up. I don't think it's as much of an issue with areas like New England where we get plenty of rain to keep things green and less likely to burn in a big forest fire. In the West though, where it's arid and wildfires are more likely to spread rapidly, the greenery can act like a buffer to keep the fires from spreading more quickly.

I guess what I'm saying is that there are benefits to wide trails in some places but not everywhere. I think it's something that has to be hashed out between the local groups, the states, and the federal government, on a per trail system basis.

Everywhere I've ever been has a mix of roads, wide trails, and two-tracks. Most of the two tracks are in remote areas where it's more difficult to get the equipment needed to keep a trail maintained. Most of the roads are either logging roads, old stagecoach roads, or class 6 roads that can be used by anyone willing to try them.

Riding in New England where there are some 50" gates dictates that we don't buy machines that are any wider.

 

Here we have mostly 50" wide trails but also some wider routes. ATVs and motorcycles can ride either one but anything wider than 50" can only ride the routes. Cars and trucks are also allowed to drive on the routes. If they want to widen the trails they should just make them into routes and let everyone ride/drive them. That would require a lot more maintenance because routes aren't ignored the way trails are, but our money has to be spent somewhere.

 

Oh I agree with you whole heartedly. I do not mean to say that every trail needs to be widened to 60 or 65 etc. It just would not work as you have stated so eloquently. However there is the trend for wider machines, and they need a place in our sport too. I can't see drawing lines between us. But I think you may have hit on something here. With trails that narrow, I'd be very cautious either way. I doubt I'd let my grandsons ride them because I just can't trust a kid to react in the proper manner. We see it on some of the Hatfield McCoy all the time too. And it isn't just in narrow spaces. You widen the trails and the speed goes up. Next thing you know some yahoo is barreling around a blind corner and comes up on someone and they take evasive action and down the side of the mountain goes at least one of them. Some times both of them take a tumble that depending on where they are, they both may not be getting back up from. One thing I will say though, is that as I get older, I see a lot of advantages to having that cage around me in situations like that. So the answer is where it makes sense I guess. Don't forget that companies like Can-Am, Polaris, Yamaha, Honda etc all put a lot of money back into the sport. I do not doubt there is an expectation that goes along with that investment either.