c_dinsmore

once i conjured the idea that if i ever have some free time and no conviction to share my life with people, it'd be fun to get into mountain bike touring, and that an awesome place for a long, tough, lifestyle would be on the appalachian trail along the east coast. however, i looked up the site, and no bikes allowed. to be fair, no anything besides feet allowed. but i wondered how dangerous bikes would really be to hikers? or are they thinking bikers would tear up the trail too much? i'm a passive type, so i'd never probably push it, but maybe this rule should be changed. the thing is just that i've very unsure how i feel about this particular trail. maybe it is nice for hikers to have a place just for them, all quiet, and peaceful, in the heart of my home appalachian beauty. so this thread is to ask all of you: what do you think? in an ideal world, would this trail open to bikes, or stay as it is?

peace to you all, my brothers and sisters.

Da Tinker

I've hiked parts of the Appalachian train system. Many of the turns would be a 'blind' turn at bike speeds and there are stairsteps, log bridges and cutbacks that would be tough on a bike.

I vote for keep the trail as is. Any new trails could be built with an eye towards wheeled users. The biggest problem might be motors.

Little Darwin

+1

The one section I did a day hike on for fun would be a challenge for a trials rider... but I say leave it for hikers.

Not everywhere needs to be open for bikes... just almost everywhere.

Mr. Underbridge

In theory, if everyone were respectful, it wouldn't be. The problem is that some nontrivial percentage of morons ruin it for the rest of us by not slowing for hikers. So I guess the answer is, most of us aren't dangerous for hikers, but too many are, so it won't happen.

I think that's much of the concern.

I think this particular trail should stay a hiking trail.

Speedo

I've done a lot of hiking on the AT in New Jersey, New York and parts of New England. Don't get the impression that it is a hiking super-highway. Aside from a few smooth stretches the trail is very rooty, rocky and steep. This is just an opinion, but I always thought that that AT designers went out of their way to go through the steepest terrain they could. It would take some serious bike handling skills to get through the likes of The Lemon Squeezer and up (or down!) "Agony Grind".

You are sure to be able to find better mountain biking tour routes than the AT.

Peace to you too!

Speedo

mandovoodoo

Hiking trail. Hiking trail. Even the stretches where horses are allowed gets very annoying to the hikers.

Goes along ridgetops where possible. Not suited.

Complex mix of landowners. Opening up the whole thing would likely take an improbable mix of federal, multi-state, municipal, county, and private agreements or law changes.

Az B

I hiked the thing end to end a while back. It's not for mountain bikes. There are some sections that are difficult to hike, and would be impossible to ride. Mahoosec Notch, as one example, required me to remove my backpack and push it through some boulders and then crawl through after. You'd be completely disassembling your fully loaded mountain bike to get it through. And there are other places... stream (and river) crossings, ledges, short fairly technical climbing... etc.

And besides the fact that it's a nationally dedicated FOOT trail. I mean, how would you like a bunch of joggers on your dedicated mountain bike trail?

Az

littlewaywelt

danger to hikers, bpers and thru--hikers would be substantial.

The rule is a very good thing. There are plenty of places you can ride. This trail was designed and built for hiking.

Road_Biker

I suggest you hike part of the trail. That should give you some idea of the terrain. It's not a mountain (despite the name) bike trail. Hitting 25mph on a 'downhill' stretch and taking out a couple of oblivious through hikers would aggravate the rangers.

Much like not allowing jet skis in federal parks, there is the *ass* factor that comes into play. These folks, and they are self aware through deliberate disregard, find ways to make a memorable and pleasant experience miserable for others.

8bit

I think that the bit about it being a walking trail is actually written into it's charter from the early 20th century.

Also, the AT suffers from extreme boringness. The most exciting thing out there is the big risk of Lyme disease.

StephenH

It depends on the trail, really. I have hiked on a lot of trails that were mostly used by bikes, and they quickly degenerate into a single narrow rut that is muddy and hard to walk on.

It gets more awkward where people are commonly walking with bigger backpacks- harder to get out of the way. And on a lot of those singletrack trails, regardless of the rules, it is way easier for the hiker to move than the bikes.

In the case of the Appalachian trail, it's intended for long hikes and backpacking. I don't ever recall seeing a mountain bike on a trail with full panniers and all.

RB1-luvr

i wouldn't want to ride the AT up here in CT, MA, NH, ME. it's nearly unrideable. and it should probably be just for hikers, that was it's original intent.

wheel

Try the Continental divide if you want to bike.

gohawks

Had a friend who hiked the App trail and I remember his description, "ill-defined at times" and a story about walking through some fenced-in pasture in West Virginia wondering if he'd get blasted (literally) for trespassing. Same guy just finished the Pacific Crest Trail- took him from May through October to complete.

oboeguy

We went down "Agony Grind" in the dark back in September. Scary! And yes, much, dare I say most, of the NY section of the AT is simply not rideable.

Ajenkins

I built a fair chunk of the current Appalachian Trail through New Hampshire and Maine as part of the AMC Trail Crew. It in no way could handle mountain bikes, nor could the mountain bikes handle it.