Go Back   Pacific Northwest Four Wheel Drive Association > Wheeling > Washington Trails > Rimrock
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41  
Old 08-10-2010, 09:55 PM
dirk's Avatar
dirk dirk is offline
that WOHVA guy
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: washington
Posts: 648
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jim putman View Post
Most PNW4WDA members have learned to build their rigs to fit the trail. They do not expect the to change the trail to fit their particular rig.
When did they learn this?

The trails are much wider than when my dad was wheeling back in the 70's...so if the PNW4WDA members are building their rigs to fit the trail, why don't more members run a wider width rig?

If a new/young wheeler was to start wheeling today...building a rig to fit the trails would = an 80 inch plus wide rig.

Your logic is screwy....just because the FS rules are set to 72 inches, it doesn't mean that is the widest rig you can take down the trail without climbing trees.
__________________
Bryan Peterson
WOHVA | PNW4WDA
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 08-10-2010, 10:09 PM
dirk's Avatar
dirk dirk is offline
that WOHVA guy
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: washington
Posts: 648
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jim putman View Post
Heres the problem with gate keepers alone. A gate keeper will NOT keep a wider rig out. In fact not much of anything can stop a well set up buggy off a trail thats to narrow for it. We all know that some people out there have no issue with climbing up trees and stripping the bark off 8 feet off of the ground. The only real way the FS can moderate use of a trail is to post restrictions and then back them up with heavy fines. Nothing stops someone from doing something like the possibility of a heavy fine. BTW there already are gate keepers on this trail. Their called trees and someone has already cut down several of them because they couldnt fit. See the need for fines now ?
I take exception to your use of the term "buggy"...there are many types of rigs that could navigate a narrow trail...using the term "buggy" is stereotypical & unfair...please find a different terminology. I suggest using "wider rig" instead.

__________________
Bryan Peterson
WOHVA | PNW4WDA
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 08-10-2010, 10:22 PM
jim putman's Avatar
jim putman jim putman is offline
Washington State Director
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: puyallup wa.
Posts: 1,534
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dirk View Post
I take exception to your use of the term "buggy"...there are many types of rigs that could navigate a narrow trail...using the term "buggy" is stereotypical & unfair...please find a different terminology. I suggest using "wider rig" instead.

I use the term "buggy" because a "buggy that is say 84 inches wide is quite capable of squeezing between trees or obstacles much narrower than that by simply driving up the side of said obstacle sometimes even driving on their side to fit by. A average "wider" wheeling rig is simply not capable of this type of manuver.
__________________
Member #40 Hombres jeep club
Region 2 landmatters chairman
Wa. State Director PNW4WDA
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 08-10-2010, 10:34 PM
dirk's Avatar
dirk dirk is offline
that WOHVA guy
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: washington
Posts: 648
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jim putman View Post
I use the term "buggy" because a "buggy that is say 84 inches wide is quite capable of squeezing between trees or obstacles much narrower than that by simply driving up the side of said obstacle sometimes even driving on their side to fit by. A average "wider" wheeling rig is simply not capable of this type of manuver.
I call bullshiat on this one...a flatty on full widths would fit your "buggy" definition. Just the same...this would apply to a CJ, YJ or TJ.

Please discontinue your use of the term "buggy" as a generalization for wider rigs.
__________________
Bryan Peterson
WOHVA | PNW4WDA
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 08-10-2010, 11:02 PM
jim putman's Avatar
jim putman jim putman is offline
Washington State Director
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: puyallup wa.
Posts: 1,534
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dirk View Post
I call bullshiat on this one...a flatty on full widths would fit your "buggy" definition. Just the same...this would apply to a CJ, YJ or TJ.

Please discontinue your use of the term "buggy" as a generalization for wider rigs.
We have all seen it and you know its true. I didnt create the term and you shouldnt be so defenceful of it. Buggys / fullsize both differant animals and we all know it..


Oh and NO
__________________
Member #40 Hombres jeep club
Region 2 landmatters chairman
Wa. State Director PNW4WDA
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 08-11-2010, 11:20 AM
Binder's Avatar
Binder Binder is offline
Has some friends
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Everett
Posts: 201
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dirk View Post
I call bullshiat on this one...a flatty on full widths would fit your "buggy" definition. Just the same...this would apply to a CJ, YJ or TJ.

Please discontinue your use of the term "buggy" as a generalization for wider rigs.
My .02c....I don't see the big deal with using the word "buggy" as a generalization. "Wider rig" could be a fullsize Bronco or Hummer. "Buggy" gets the point across.
Using the word is no big deal as long as the context doesn't change to "Buggies need to stay off the trails" because then things would need to be more specific....
But hey, whateva.
And Jim I believe the gate keepers could be built to successfully keep "buggies" out if this were the goal.
__________________
Rick Wiltfong
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 08-11-2010, 11:30 AM
Binder's Avatar
Binder Binder is offline
Has some friends
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Everett
Posts: 201
Default

Zbd74......Your posts read as though you have a issue with the width restrictions only because your rig is just barely too wide. Ask yourself if you had a rig that fit the trail would you still have an issue with the restriction? There has to be a hard number on the width and someone's going to be just too wide, unfortunately this time it happens to be you....Or am I misunderstanding your posts?
__________________
Rick Wiltfong
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 08-11-2010, 12:22 PM
Merrick Graves Merrick Graves is offline
Old Goat
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Naches
Posts: 566
Default

To establish a "Gatekeeper" at this location would require much work and expense. Numerous bypass's could be made to go around. Consider the sign posted with the restrictions and CFR with potential fines as the "Gatekeeper".

As seen with the new Travel Management Vehicle Road maps in the Mt Baker/Snoqualmie the requirement for signs will soon go away when the Okonogan/Wenatchee implements the Travel Management plan.

Know before you go is where all this is headed.
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 08-11-2010, 12:29 PM
Binder's Avatar
Binder Binder is offline
Has some friends
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Everett
Posts: 201
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Merrick Graves View Post
To establish a "Gatekeeper" at this location would require much work and expense.......................
................

Know before you go is where all this is headed.
I was refering to gatekeepers in general.....

Know before you go may sound great on paper but unless you plan to do a full time stakeout it isn't going to do much. Once the signs are gone rigs that shouldn't be there will run the trail and trees will begin to go away. You may or may not fine people for this but the sad reality is the trail will suffer.
__________________
Rick Wiltfong
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 08-11-2010, 12:30 PM
Merrick Graves Merrick Graves is offline
Old Goat
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Naches
Posts: 566
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dirk View Post
I take exception to your use of the term "buggy"...there are many types of rigs that could navigate a narrow trail...using the term "buggy" is stereotypical & unfair...please find a different terminology. I suggest using "wider rig" instead.

You have a life's worth of work ahead of you to change the generic term "Buggy". Almost everyone I work with uses the term. Every rig that does not resemble stock or slightly modified is often reffered to as a "Buggy". Whether it's an Enforcement specialist or Policy development specalist the term is used and thrown about.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:31 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.