72" wide width restriction at Evans Creek?

Binder · May 13, 2010

pokey said:
Hub to hub sounds familiar. When the rule was written hubs stuck out to the edge of the tire or even farther. Wider tires and rims were rare. In fact we used to have to make them. (rims)

Hub to hub or WMS to WMS is easy to measure with a straight edge and tape. If the FS wants to change the rule to outside of tire then they need to make it official and change it as right now they can't enforce something that isn'ty a rule.....Given that my buggy may be the only rig wheeling Evans with the ATV's.:cheer:

Corey Y · May 13, 2010

So is the 70" width an enforceable rule or a guide?

Murkman · May 13, 2010

Crazy Daze said:
So is the 70" width an enforceable rule or a guide?

The sheet posted on page 4 of this thread is from a FS publication tittled FSH 2309.18. The FSH means Forest Service Handbook. When the Forest Plan was adopted way back when the FSH 2309.18 became part of the Forest Plan. Thru a court ruling the FS is now required to go back to that old Forest Plan while a new Forest Plan is written. If you research the new plan you will not find the width restrictions. HOWEVER, each District Ranger may include a Forest Rule as they deem necesary. Your new challenge is to become familiar with the CFR's (Code of Federal Regulations) to see how this can be enforced.

Pook · May 13, 2010

Wheel Hub? Locking hub? driveflange? Sounds like it was meant to be a WMS to WMS measurement.

Gibby1 · May 13, 2010

Pook said:
Wheel Hub? Locking hub? driveflange? Sounds like it was meant to be a WMS to WMS measurement.

That was the determination that I think Jaydog came up with quite some time ago. I know he'll find this thread sooner or later and respond.

pokey · May 13, 2010

Pook said:
Wheel Hub? Locking hub? driveflange? Sounds like it was meant to be a WMS to WMS measurement.

If you look back at some old pics you will see the hub or locking hub sticking out of the wheel. I cant say for certain that this is what the FS rule is refering to but I would guess thats it. This is what the original trails were built to so its probably what their refering to. just my guess:eeek:

Damnyankee · May 13, 2010

but to me, 6" is alot bigger than most people think..

is this a womans or a mans measurement?

Money Mark · May 13, 2010

Lets say that this 72" width rule is as the folks "in the know" have represented it to us, in this thread.

Is this thread meant to inform others of this rule, to publicly complain about this rule....... or is this thread about proposing and actively pursuing a change to this rule?

Apparently, the majority (if not all) that have posted in this thread are informing or complaining...........Wanna change it?

Damnyankee · May 13, 2010

First we need to clarify, what IS the rule?

hub hub, wms wms...

skinny pedal1 · May 14, 2010

hope nobody see's me up there at 93'' i would hate to have to run over a skinny little heep to go through the trail.

Travis1 · May 14, 2010

Just measured my waggie 44 w/ warn premium hubs. Comes out to just about exactly 72".

dirk · May 16, 2010

benw said:
Does that mean its time to post the ancient FS trail rating sheet again?

I think I found some updated trail guidelines...

I found these HERE...the 2 specific sections to focus on are:

Trail Class definitions start on page 06...

http://www.fs.fed.us/im/directives/fsh/2309.18/2309.18_10.doc

4x4 Trail Specifications start on page 30...

http://www.fs.fed.us/im/directives/fsh/2309.18/2309.18_20.doc

If I am reading the specifications correctly, 4x4 trails on FS land should fall between the following widths:

Trail Class 1 = Typically not designed or actively managed for 4WD Vehicles > 50

Jay W · May 16, 2010

I will guess that what they mean is the total outside widest point of your vehicle. So if your LED marker lights stick out wider than your tires, hubs, WMS, or curb feelers, then measure THERE.
Picture what they are trying to prevent, trees getting cut down because your pile won't fit through. What would keep said pile from getting through?

Jaydog · May 18, 2010

Gibby said:
Jaydog has looked into this before. I believe that the actual number is 74" not 72" and that per the rule, that is WMS to WMS not outside tire to outside tire.

Actually it is Hub to Hub, this is an old rule based off of fullsize rigs, my '71 K20 is within that width limit, there has been a lot of miss information spread around that it is outside tire to outside tire, but a stock fullsize that in within the USFS manual width limit of hub to hub would be somewhere around the 87-93"" outside tire to outside tire.

Edit: Ok I responded to this before reading the entire thread, you have to use simple hermeneutics when reading an old text to understand what the author intended, at the time these rules where put into place the hubs stuck out beyond the tire, or fairly close to flush, with the offset wheels, and wide rims and tires that we have today it is easy to go well beyond this limit, like I stated already, my old fullsize falls within the width restriction, and I am somewhere around 85" wide, so my TJ, which is 83" wide falls well within the legal width, do we need to change the rule, NO, we just need to understand it and interpret it as it is written, if you have axles wider than a stock 60, well then I guess you are out of luck :redneck:

Jaydog · May 18, 2010

dirk said:
I think I found some updated trail guidelines...

Thoughts?

Those are new guidelines for NEW trails, although you are correct in your interpretation as far as I have read, Evans Creek was designed under the old rules and therefore would fall under that guideline, the trails are the width they are, and reducing the vehicle width would do absolutly nothing to narrow the trails now, what's done is done.

pokey · May 18, 2010

Jaydog said:
Those are new guidelines for NEW trails, although you are correct in your interpretation as far as I have read, Evans Creek was designed under the old rules and therefore would fall under that guideline, the trails are the width they are, and reducing the vehicle width would do absolutly nothing to narrow the trails now, what's done is done.

The FS has been talking for a while now about bringing the trails at Evans back into the standard that they were created. Bob has hired a 3 man crew and is purchasing a trail machine to begin this process this season. I cant really say how far hes going to take it but I know he's tired of dealing with a lot of the issues and wants to get the trails back into a condition that dosent promote so much erosion or need so much maintance.

Binder · May 18, 2010

pokey said:
The FS has been talking for a while now about bringing the trails at Evans back into the standard that they were created. Bob has hired a 3 man crew and is purchasing a trail machine to begin this process this season. I cant really say how far hes going to take it but I know he's tired of dealing with a lot of the issues and wants to get the trails back into a condition that dosent promote so much erosion or need so much maintance.

Trail machine?

pokey · May 18, 2010

Binder said:
Trail machine?

I "believe" hes buying a mini excavator(tracks) with a blade but he "may" be getting more of a 4x4 bucket loader with a backhole. Last time I talked to him he wasnt sure and was still debating. He is buying a machine (has funding) so thats a great plus for us up there for WPs.

crash2 · May 18, 2010

Isn't a trail machine a walk behind escavator of some kind?

dirk · May 18, 2010

pokey said:
The FS has been talking for a while now about bringing the trails at Evans back into the standard that they were created. Bob has hired a 3 man crew and is purchasing a trail machine to begin this process this season. I cant really say how far hes going to take it but I know he's tired of dealing with a lot of the issues and wants to get the trails back into a condition that dosent promote so much erosion or need so much maintance.

The real questions are:

What restrictions will he place on the trails, once they are brought back to the standard they were created?
What is the PNW4WDA stance on restrictions at Evan's Creek...width, length, seasonal closures, etc?

:hi: