# How many years have you been building "Flow country Trails"?



## rfeather (Aug 22, 2006)

Bike magazine had an article in their latest issue about a "new" standard in trail building called Flow Country. Cross country trails with pumps, berms and a general flowy feeling. I don't know about you all, but I've been trying to make my trails that way for almost as long as I've been building trails, about 6 or 7 years. How about you? 
I know berms don't let water run off the trail the way it should, but I've never had a problem with it. The inside of them always get a collection of leaves which I don't bother to rake clean. That keeps the erosion down. Some of them will collect a puddle for a short time after a rain. Building in lots of grade changes is the key to a fun trail and getting rid of rain and melt water.


----------



## GR_Russia (Apr 7, 2006)

rfeather said:


> Bike magazine had an article in their latest issue about a "new" standard in trail building called Flow Country. Cross country trails with pumps, berms and a general flowy feeling. I don't know about you all, but I've been trying to make my trails that way for almost as long as I've been building trails, about 6 or 7 years. How about you?
> I know berms don't let water run off the trail the way it should, but I've never had a problem with it. The inside of them always get a collection of leaves which I don't bother to rake clean. That keeps the erosion down. Some of them will collect a puddle for a short time after a rain. Building in lots of grade changes is the key to a fun trail and getting rid of rain and melt water.


I'm working on my 4 kilometers loop second year now. Alone. In last year i made main trail without any pumps, obstacles etc. In this year i start working on these things. I hope the nature will not take away all back from me


----------



## bweide (Dec 27, 2004)

All of the trails I build are multi-use so I have never built a berm or a jump. The constant grade reversals are part of building a sustainable trail and that seems to have become the standard since IMBA began advocating for them 10-15 years ago.


----------



## cmc4130 (Jan 30, 2008)

I will have to check out that article !

Here at Walnut Creek park in Austin, berms have been very popular with XC riders for a while now.

When placed in strategic spots, they can add a TON of flow to a trail.

For instance when you have a decline into a tight turn, you will see tons of skidmarks and braking ruts. The berm goes a long way to fixing that. Or, where you have a turn right before a climb, the berm allows you to carry speed into the turn and part way up the climb.

These pics are from 2007:

















An S-berm that sends you slightly back up hill. 









This is from Winter Park Colorado near the bottom of Boot Camp:


----------



## Skookum (Jan 17, 2005)

When building trail you should always try to build for flow. But in my mind that DOES NOT necessitate building berms.

For instance if you are building a multi-use trail where hooves will destroy the berms, instead you make an inslope with strategically placed mounds for wheels to catch if the "flow" of a turn is creating a sweep that has a tendency to drift the rider off the trail.

There are just so many intangible things when building a trail that flow is simply a peice of the pie. There are various tricks to making a trail flow, and usually being strategic in your routing of the trail will help you avoid drainage issues and/or conflict issues.

Duthie Hill a skill park being built by Evergreen Mountain Bike Alliance here in the PNW have put a priority on flow for the trails in the park. But it's important to note that there are differences in that nearly every single trail are going to be one-directional. This makes it easier to build for flow. Also mt. bikers have the right away, hikers must yield to mt. bikers on the XC trails and they are not allowed on the Freeride trails for safety reasons. So again there is no reason to create choke points or worry about sight lines, there is more freedom to build faster trails as you don't have to worry about what's around the corner. And there is also an innovative use of a box with slats which acts like a segment of bridge in the center of berms that were places in low spots which is a no-no for drainage and sustainability. This "cheat" called scuppers are serving as drains, to keep the berms for holding water whenever they're not on the high side.

As far as being a "standard" i disagree. Many trails have unique character that shouldn't be altered for the sake of something being the new "rage". Flow is all about the application of keeping the wheels on the tread so they don't wear it down just as much as making it pleasurable for most riders.

Just because you can do something doesn't mean it's the best idea everywhere. And just because a trail might not look like it doesn't have flow because it is lacking in berms and bumps doesn't necessarily mean it's so.

edit
*this is kind of funny coming from someone whose next trail build will be exclusively bumps and berms and 110% achievement of flow... haha


----------



## hankthespacecowboy (Jun 10, 2004)

"Flow" is the main thing I keep in mind in my trail building. I'm very partial to pumps and berms, and they don't necessarily have render the trail directional. After all, that's the whole idea behind a pumptrack. In addition to these physical features, visual cues are equally important in maintaing a sense of flow and keeping riders on the trail. Simple stuff like trimming back branches, clearing loose rocks from the tread surface and avoiding start and stop and moves. Even when laying out techy trails, I think it possible to maintain flow. I hate trails that make you feel like you are constantly starting and stopping. But I don't have any published doctrine on this...


----------



## Berkley (May 21, 2007)

In flatter areas, berms may collect water, but in sloped areas, it's not very difficult to build berms that drain well and stay dry. IME, the biggest factor in erosion is water running into or along the trail. With the exception of heavy, heavy downpours, rain itself isn't enough to cause serious erosion (at least in the area I build in). 

That being said, if you can divert running water away from the berm/trail, then it will stay much drier and won't erode. Water likes to take the path of least resistance, so digging strategically placed drainage ditches and using rock boxes in the trail when necessary does a great job of keeping the water away from areas it would normally collect in.


----------



## Skookum (Jan 17, 2005)

hankthespacecowboy said:


> they don't necessarily have render the trail directional. After all, that's the whole idea behind a pumptrack. .


No you are absolutely right, and i appreciate a builder who understand how to build for flow on both a descent and a climb, not everybody has that sense...

and if this is inference to my post i just will say that the park i'm speaking of is in a suburb of a large populated city area, and the trail builds are really really fast so it makes sense. Also the thought of sustainability if you are building for flow in a multi-direction it means you have to work the tread in more places, so for 5 miles of XC track built in one year, it just made sense for this application.


----------



## k2biker (Jan 13, 2004)

Hans Rey, who coined the term 'Flowcountry Trails', was the keynote speaker yesterday at the IMBA World Summit, which I had the pleasure of attending. Even after hearing directly from Hans about Flowcountry Trails, there was some discussion amoungst us about the actual specs regarding this new classification. It's important to know / remember that these specifications have not been defined and will be at a summit in Italy in a few weeks. 

With that, after Hans rode the FATS trail system in Augusta, GA yesterday, Mike van Abel, IMBA Executive Director, asked him what he thought. Hans' response was that the trails are awesome and are indicative of Flowcountry Trails. 

I have to tell ya, this was the first time I'd ridden FATS and they are by far the flowiest trails I've ever ridden, and I don't recall any berms at all (tying this into the above discussion).


----------



## BigJay (Aug 15, 2004)

k2biker said:


> With that, after Hans rode the FATS trail system in Augusta, GA yesterday, Mike van Abel, IMBA Executive Director, asked him what he thought. Hans' response was that the trails are awesome and are indicative of Flowcountry Trails.
> 
> I have to tell ya, this was the first time I'd ridden FATS and they are by far the flowiest trails I've ever ridden, and I don't recall any berms at all (tying this into the above discussion).


Yeah... many discussions occured after everyone heard the "flow country" trails... Not so positive... because the "concept" is good... but the wording and definition will be a mess... But coming from Hans' perspective, old hiking trails in europe don't have flow... and building things that are more like the FATS is a great exemple of great trails built by riders for riders...

Even tough the trails are awsome, there is still room for improvement... Some turns were blind, many turns were missing some form of berm to carry speed... Some transitions were too short... some landing were too narrow because the corridor wasn't wide enough and you could go as high as you would have wanted... And don't take this has hard criticism. I loved those trails. They are one awsome network of trails and you can see the effort put into those... Do they define "flow country"? Maybe...

but maybe you'll never hear the "flow country" thing ever...


----------



## ebxtreme (Jan 6, 2004)

Having ridden some of the old hiking trails in France/Switzerland, I can see where Hans is coming from with this. Many of our trails have been designed with bikes in mind and a lot of European's vast network were created to serve very different uses. Sure, a bunch of them still rock for riding, but I've ridden some trails that had terrible flow there and were terribly routed for our use.

Flow doesn't have to mean fast or slow. The trail should be consistent, IMO. I've ridden lots of slow, techy trails that had flow if you have the skills to ride them. I've ridden faster, wide open trails that would come out of a fast zone into a corner and make you slam on your brakes. Sometimes that's necessary due to topography, but other times it's poor routing/design. I've had issues with this in the past. There are a couple of sections of trail I wish I could have a "redo" on and there are other sections where I was limited by the terrain.

EB


----------



## cmc4130 (Jan 30, 2008)

seems like different people have very different ideas about what "flow" is. and that sometimes what some people consider "technical" others would say is a flow killer.

to bring up an example, say you had a stretch of relatively flat trail approaching a straight climb up a hill. now, say that climb used to be relatively smooth but over years of erosion is pretty rugged with big roots and big rocks exposed, and deep ruts/craters/indents/ etc. (i'm not talking just bumps, but actually stuff that's relatively hard to ride over, even to skilled riders).

normally, the strategy would be to crank hard on the flat and gain momentum to get up the hill (especially if you're on a single speed). however, in this case, because the bottom of the climb is so heavily eroded with physical obstacles like roots you can't really do the momentum approach.

to me, that spot is technical, but not at all flowy. i think a possible solution however, is to re-pack the dirt/clay that has eroded down, back onto the first 5-10 feet of the climb. so you have a relatively rideable section at the bottom. then leave all the roots/rocks etc. exposed higher up the climb. this way the rider can mash at the hill, hit the incline, get the upward momentum, then have to deal with getting over the technical stuff. (sometimes i use the bottom of the hill like the transition of a jump and then float up the bumpy stuff the rest of the way). 

i'm guessing some of you might say, well that is the penalty for riding singlespeed. other riders would just start the climb at a slow speed, then do a slow-speed techy spin the rest of the way up. is that tech? or just non-flowy trail !?

i will admit, as a bmx-er turned 26DJ rider (and more recently a singlespeed 29'er), i'm really not into slow-speed climbs. other riders seem to love them. but i try to keep an open mind.


----------



## rfeather (Aug 22, 2006)

*One riders flow is another's struggle*

I just rode on the Michigan Trails last night with my 20 year old daughter, 18 year old son, a friend, who has built much of the newer trails, and my wife. Many of the trails have nice flow to them and others were just a struggle for my wife and me. In both cases, our friend and the kids had to wait for us at regular intervals, so I'm sure the faster three felt that more of the trails had "flow". I noticed that many of the older trails were badly eroded with stretches of accumulated sand alternating with stretches of exposed roots. A few could use some filling in and water diversion. The newer trails had areas of accumulated sand, but not too deep.

I agree that berms are not essential for flow, I just use them on curves that make it easier for me to keep my speed since I'm a little slow on twisty singletrack. I seems strange to hear that berms are a problem with multi-use trails. I would think that a horse would just naturally walk on the inside, more level part.


----------



## cmc4130 (Jan 30, 2008)

nice pic from SLC. pretty cool when the natural terrain offers "flow country" itself....










Earthriders Forum • View topic - Need Epic Trip Ideas


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

I've been working with the general idea ever since I started building trails 12 years ago. 

The concept of "flow" is a big part of the art of trailbuilding. It's so hard to define flow, you have to "feel" it.

I've ridden fast and swoopy trails with flow and I've ridden technical trails with flow. Part of the key is to blend the trail features into each other. I've ridden trails in the past where the trail is fast and swoopy and then you have this really hard 90* or tighter turn and then suddenly you're dumped into a slow and technical section. That's hard, yes, but that's terrible flow.

I've tried to put little jumps or kickers where appropriate on every trail I've worked on. They're good where the flow allows for speed. They aren't so interesting where the flow is more technical in nature.

the term "Flowcountry" sounds like it more specifically identifies the fast and swoopy stuff. Most of the ones I've built/ridden over the years worked with the existing terrain features to implement things like berms and stuff. Only recently have I worked on any trails to incorporate these ideas in an area where the existing terrain doesn't lend itself so easily to this design.

To be honest, I prefer the trail to blend with the surroundings more. I prefer to limit wood constructions to areas that need the woodwork to get the trail off the ground in areas with poor drainage, poor soil conditions, sensitive plants, whatever. I have come to not like big constructed wooden structures "just because". I would rather create riding features with downfall in place and modified.


----------



## mtbikernc69 (Mar 23, 2004)

It's all about the transitions. A trail with good flow generally has nice rhythmic transitions from fast to slow and slow to fast sections. Side to side and up and down. Like rocking to AC/DC and them hitting some Mozart and back to Talking Heads. 

Know what I mean?


----------



## Ridnparadise (Dec 14, 2007)

cmc4130 said:


> seems like different people have very different ideas about what "flow" is. and that sometimes what some people consider "technical" others would say is a flow killer.
> 
> to bring up an example, say you had a stretch of relatively flat trail approaching a straight climb up a hill. now, say that climb used to be relatively smooth but over years of erosion is pretty rugged with big roots and big rocks exposed, and deep ruts/craters/indents/ etc. (i'm not talking just bumps, but actually stuff that's relatively hard to ride over, even to skilled riders).
> 
> ...


This is a really good example of improving flow where it would not normally be thought of as such. We spend a good deal of time doing just this sort of maintenance - hammering exposed rock into the ground (when soft after rain) or armouring between obstacles to open up lines.

It is also a good reason why every team needs a single speeder as a digging buddy:thumbsup:. They ride by using flow. This week I am sad because my SS digging partner had his finger splattered by a rock thrown his way when we were building the downhill side of a creek crossing up to catch and hold silt. After a night in hospital, surgery to wire the shattered bone and make the tendons work, I guess I am SSerless for a while. And, no I did not throw the stone, but did get to watch it land just as he grabbed a large rock to reposition it. Not a nice sound or look.


----------



## matbar20 (Jan 30, 2012)

I think that "flow-country" sounds a lot like what we have been making "All-mountain bikes for". Cross country trails with jumps and berms are what we call mountain biking here in British Columbia. Myself, I have been building a trail for the past three years that I believe fits the description. Wide, and Flowy with bermed corners. My goal was to achieve what I like to think of as a "Chainless. Brakeless." trail, with natural speed checks on the downhills, and short flat or slightly downhill rests to break up the climbs.

If you are interested check out my Blog BikeFAT.com and check out the article on building "flowy" trails.

BikeFAT.com | 10 Ways to Make Your Mountain Bike Trail Awesome!


----------



## boostin (Apr 21, 2008)

When I am building a bermed turn, it is because it is too tight for the available speed. I've found that I can avoid berms by building wider turns or putting a grade reversal right before the turn to eat some of the speed. 

On descents I like my trails to be 'no brakes needed' The grade reversals and other features are designed so that I can get from the top down without the brakes, while coasting the whole time, pinning it on the edge. It is especially good if that state is only achieved in the right conditions combined with a well picked line. I think that it gives the trail a challenging aspect and an opportunity to build skill. 

After reading what matbar20 had to say, I'd say me an him need to hang out.


----------



## matbar20 (Jan 30, 2012)

boostin said:


> After reading what matbar20 had to say, I'd say me an him need to hang out.


It could be fun, if you are ever around Fernie, British Columbia, look me up! Can always use some good help building. Or could just ride bikes.


----------



## cmc4130 (Jan 30, 2008)

i guess you could call this a "pump trail." 
one of my spots, 4 years ago. i deliberately stretched out the 4th roller into a roller-table, and then the spacing to the 5th one is lengthened out because of the increased speed you have coming down the decline... #6 is a tabletop.


----------



## t0pcat (May 7, 2012)

First off i'd like to say that i haven't built a lot of mountain bike trails but i've been riding mountain bikes and motorcycles since the 70's. With that said and thinking about what i've read here and read receintly in dirt rag (new school trail design: have we gone too far) I think that the trails should have a new category of speed which would tell everyone what type of trail to expect, example 20mph trail - down hill, 2 mph trail- very tech you know what i mean? The pic by cmt4130 i wouldn't call a trail but a track. Here in the northeast pa i ride a lot of what can best be described as deer trail singletrack which is very rocky and has little flow. I think different parts of the country with all the different types of soils allow for many different types of trails but when we talk about them it means different things to different people. Berms for example don't really need to be that high to ride fast if there is good grip and you can hold your line, but a new rider skidding along can destroy a small berm with out even realizing he did so. So i think we all need to step back and think about terminology and the people who will be riding the trails. according to the article i mentioned less than 1% of the people out there riding mountain bikes can ride the tech lines.


----------



## singlesprocket (Jun 9, 2004)

building that way for years...


----------



## thefriar (Jan 23, 2008)

matbar20 said:


> My goal was to achieve what I like to think of as a "Chainless. Brakeless." trail, with natural speed checks on the downhills, and short flat or slightly downhill rests to break up the climbs.


This... and it can work with tech or with out tech in it and still flow like woah!


----------



## cmc4130 (Jan 30, 2008)

there are a lot of interesting things to be learned from rollercoaster design.

when you're looking at raw land, look for the types of natural rises and falls where you can use these shapes.... or when building wood features, think about how they can work into the terrain to exaggerate the "rollercoaster" flow of the trail... too many people think of wood features as something you put in a boring flat area called the "skills area." no!! work them into the landscape !

even really simple shapes like this banked roller turn:






























































World Class Bike Park Design, Development, and Construction

I think sometimes people build lumber banked turns only winging the physics of the shape of the turn....










as i noted in another thread . . . . . the shape of a few of the trestles at Keystone seemed totally off, in terms of radius of turn, slant of banked turn etc... i'm not criticizing, i'm just saying it's really interesting to figure out exactly how to do the physics right....


----------



## Ridnparadise (Dec 14, 2007)

t0pcat said:


> First off i'd like to say that i haven't built a lot of mountain bike trails but i've been riding mountain bikes and motorcycles since the 70's. With that said and thinking about what i've read here and read receintly in dirt rag (new school trail design: have we gone too far) I think that the trails should have a new category of speed which would tell everyone what type of trail to expect, example 20mph trail - down hill, 2 mph trail- very tech you know what i mean? The pic by cmt4130 i wouldn't call a trail but a track. Here in the northeast pa i ride a lot of what can best be described as deer trail singletrack which is very rocky and has little flow. I think different parts of the country with all the different types of soils allow for many different types of trails but when we talk about them it means different things to different people. Berms for example don't really need to be that high to ride fast if there is good grip and you can hold your line, but a new rider skidding along can destroy a small berm with out even realizing he did so. So i think we all need to step back and think about terminology and the people who will be riding the trails. according to the article i mentioned less than 1% of the people out there riding mountain bikes can ride the tech lines.


I think you are right about the benefits of more specific signage TC. Some time back I posted examples of signs that broke the trail down into ascending/descending, distance, grade, speed, TTF and jumps. Each of these was rated green to double black. So you could have a trail that is green in grade, but with blue speed and blue TTFs, or you could have a climbing trail that is green in speed, but double black in grade and TTF.

The signs were shot down in flames on this forum - apparently there are enough legitimate signs out there without trying to provide more information for riders. Can't say I agree.


----------



## cmc4130 (Jan 30, 2008)

i was stoked to lead a work day yesterday to build a few new berms, hole patching, and drainage. this section of trail has a gradual descent for a while, so it's a great one for speed control and skid prevention, not to mention fun leaning into turns.










i like berm exits where you sort of blend a roller into the end of the berm and drop into a descent...


















Walnut Creek Workday Saturday, January 12, 2013 from 10:00AM til 1:00PM


----------



## sambs827 (Dec 8, 2008)

That's what my club (Berkley, myself, and a couple others) started building with 4 years ago. Not because anyone really said we should, but because we watched all the crazy DH and FR videos with their crazy flow lines and we wanted to incorporate a lot of that feel into our multi-use XC trails. 

Our first effort was deemed Blood Sweat & Tears and took us 3 years to build just shy of 3 miles. We learned a lot along the way, often having to redo sections after what we did originally felt lousy or showed signs of erosion. Eventually we figured it out and the trail is by far the most heavily used trail in town now by hikers, runners, and bikers. The track & field and XC running teams in town (2 colleges and a high school) all love BST and run it for training. Upon being asked about it, their most common answer is "all the banked turns." I guess berms aren't just for bikes.

Since finishing BST we've built a couple other "flow country" trails that have been quite popular. The most recent efforts have resulted in a trail that has a descent in each direction that is essentially a jump line for XC bikes, and is still good to run. The next stage that we're laying out now and will start digging on soon links in with our super smooth flowy trails and is going to be super gnarly technical XC trail.

So I guess we're moving in the opposite direction for our next build after we put on a fair bit of the buffed out stuff over the past few years.


----------



## Ridnparadise (Dec 14, 2007)

I looks nice cmc. Couple of questions:

Do you think there is a correlation between berms incorporating the feature of a roller/descent at the exit and climbing berms? Reason I ask is a lot of descending berms cross the falline significantly and it can be an issue building inslope to outslope drainage past a roller. I understand you like BMX tracks and they don't climb. Also, is there a limit to the grade of land you can build this sort of berm?

Second, have you guys built some monument in that tree?


----------



## cmc4130 (Jan 30, 2008)

sambs827 said:


> . . . The track & field and XC running teams in town (2 colleges and a high school) all love BST and run it for training. Upon being asked about it, their most common answer is "all the banked turns." I guess berms aren't just for bikes..


:thumbsup: berm running in action. my buddy's son:


----------



## cmc4130 (Jan 30, 2008)

Ridnparadise said:


> I looks nice cmc. Couple of questions:
> 
> Do you think there is a correlation between berms incorporating the feature of a roller/descent at the exit and climbing berms? Reason I ask is a lot of descending berms cross the falline significantly and it can be an issue building inslope to outslope drainage past a roller. I understand you like BMX tracks and they don't climb. Also, is there a limit to the grade of land you can build this sort of berm?
> 
> Second, have you guys built some monument in that tree?


I'm not sure I quite understand what you're envisioning when you're talking about climbing berms. You mean like a two-directional trail, where some riders will be riding up the berms that were designed for descent ? To me, if the trail is one-directional climb . . . you either don't need berms at all, or they would be much smaller/tighter radius.

I do look at the fall line and where the water is going. In this case none of the berms "caught" the fall line. Rather the trail was doing switchbacks across the fall line with berms basically at the switches.

This is an upgradient view of the big berm we just did. I would imagine that if you were riding upgradient, you wouldn't even really use the berm.

As far as "roller out," really I could have better described it as what bmx trails guys call a "waterfall" (see: Waterfall.jpg ) That's when you pump just the down side into a dip, kind of like the second half of a roller, without the "up." When you exit a berm, it's fun to be able to drop down to downward slant (landing) to pump...


----------



## ak greeff (May 21, 2008)

Here's a short video of building and riding trails in Kincaid park which is a Anchorage's largest municipal park. Lots of banked corners, flow, and even a few roller doubles and table tops thrown in for good measure. Kincaid STA Trailer on Vimeo The trails where build by Single Track Advocates, a local trail advocacy group. Singletrack Advocates


----------



## cmc4130 (Jan 30, 2008)

"Camp Tamarancho Flow Trial in Marin County - the first flow trail built in the San Francisco Bay area."

Own the Flow | Mountain Bikers of Santa Cruz (MBOSC)

t fLow - YouTube


----------



## zachi (Jul 25, 2006)

Interesting thread and important. The advent of trail users in Motion (cyclists, runners etc..) has changed critical design considerations for trails. Flow to me means creating an route that anticipates user speeds and uses super elevation to keep the angle of the riders wheel perpendicular to the trail tread as it transitions through the terrain. 

Managing the pitch and alignment to minimize the need to pedal or brake is similar to roller coasters and is helpful for developing intuitive design. Speed also impacts required sight lines. Braking bumps are the visible gang green of poor design.

The roller coaster comparison is perfect because they manage momentum in beneficial ways and design to create passively managed movement (minimal braking or thrust required). 

I have found that designing and building snow luge runs is helpful to understand managing movement. The biggest mistake I often see is a chiseled berm vs a cupped berm. A flat angled berm (chiseled) does not graduate the level of centrifugal resistance or have a sweet spot. I have seen 8" tall cupped berms that will capture and 'rail' the rider through the turn with less lateral stress on the tread than a 3ft tall flat angled berm. Small cupped berms require less dirt and are lower profile.

We use a 1" sch40 PVC pipe 100+ ft long to check alignment transitions through terrain like an architect might use a ruler. Amplitude ratios to frequency are directly related to the anticipated speed of the rider. (less intense arcs the faster you go)


----------



## Ridnparadise (Dec 14, 2007)

zachi said:


> Interesting thread and important. The advent of trail users in Motion (cyclists, runners etc..) has changed critical design considerations for trails. Flow to me means creating an route that anticipates user speeds and uses super elevation to keep the angle of the riders wheel perpendicular to the trail tread as it transitions through the terrain.
> 
> Managing the pitch and alignment to minimize the need to pedal or brake is similar to roller coasters and is helpful for developing intuitive design. Speed also impacts required sight lines. Braking bumps are the visible gang green of poor design.
> 
> ...


Very well put. The roller coaster analogy does make sense.

Re cupped berms: There seems to be an angle (sidewall steepness) above which riders will not use the entire height of the berm, as well as making it hard to get adhesion from building materials. Over time a berm with a wall too steep develops an overhang as riders slot into a line eroding from use, but only part-way up the wall of the berm. It's probably the topic for another thread, but does anyone have a suggestion regarding maximum wall gradient on berms?


----------



## crux (Jan 10, 2004)

Ridnparadise said:


> Very well put. The roller coaster analogy does make sense.
> 
> Re cupped berms: There seems to be an angle (sidewall steepness) above which riders will not use the entire height of the berm, as well as making it hard to get adhesion from building materials. Over time a berm with a wall too steep develops an overhang as riders slot into a line eroding from use, but only part-way up the wall of the berm. It's probably the topic for another thread, but does anyone have a suggestion regarding maximum wall gradient on berms?


Do not think there is a rule of thumb on this, then again I may be completely wrong. I think it would depend more upon your soil type and how well it is able to compact. If it is dense with good adhesion then you could go both steeper and higher especially if you armor it with a few rocks. If the soil is effectively beach sand the it might not hold up all that well over the long haul.


----------



## si618 (Apr 10, 2012)

GR_Russia said:


> I'm working on my 4 kilometers loop second year now. Alone. In last year i made main trail without any pumps, obstacles etc. In this year i start working on these things. I hope the nature will not take away all back from me


Good on you! Here's a resource I found via mtbr forum which you might find useful.

Hope it helps build sweet trails


----------



## rob_co2 (Apr 23, 2004)

Can anyone point me to some pics or video of hand-made, natural looking flow trail? ie: doesn't look like a bmx race track or made with bulldozers and mining equipment. Or is it not considered flow trail without jumps and wall-berms?


----------



## pinkrobe (Jan 30, 2004)

rob_co2 said:


> Can anyone point me to some pics or video of hand-made, natural looking flow trail? ie: doesn't look like a bmx race track or made with bulldozers and mining equipment. Or is it not considered flow trail without jumps and wall-berms?


There's a trail in the Revelstoke area (Mt MacPherson?) that has been built as a flow trail. I have no pics as I was having WAY too much fun to stop, but I'm sure they're out there.


----------



## Trail Ninja (Sep 25, 2008)

rob_co2 said:


> Can anyone point me to some pics or video of hand-made, natural looking flow trail? ie: doesn't look like a bmx race track or made with bulldozers and mining equipment. Or is it not considered flow trail without jumps and wall-berms?


I'm just starting this one.


----------



## cmc4130 (Jan 30, 2008)

St Moritz's new Corviglia Flow Trail looks like a whole heap of fun | Riding | ChopMTB


----------



## drew p (Jan 20, 2012)

I thought this one was a good example of a "flow trail" that was well integrated into the terrain and looks like a blast to ride.


----------



## rob_co2 (Apr 23, 2004)

Those two vids do look really fun to ride! Although I'm still reminded of a big pump track through the woods, but I suppose that is what flow trails are really meant to be. I think I'm looking for more of a XC flow experience with narrower tread. Should it still be called a "trail" if the tread is 6' wide??

Here are a few bad cell phone pics. My next plan is to accentuate the features, make those rolling grade dips into actual grade reversals by adding ~6" soil to the high points, but I have no intention of making tables or gaps out of them.


----------



## mtbnc (Feb 22, 2009)

The trails in "Wilkesbermo" NC have plenty of flow. Kerr Scott Trails | International Mountain Bicycling Association


----------



## rob_co2 (Apr 23, 2004)

mtbnc said:


> The trails in "Wilkesbermo" NC have plenty of flow. Kerr Scott Trails | International Mountain Bicycling Association


The sorba crowd seems to produce some great stuff, the last time I made a trip to NGa and WNC area, some of the new machine built stuff just blew my mind! Funny to think that 12 year's ago Tsali was one if the top 10 trails in the country. Now it barely makes the top 10 in the state of NC.


----------



## cmc4130 (Jan 30, 2008)

rob_co2 said:


> Can anyone point me to some pics or video of hand-made, natural looking flow trail? ie: doesn't look like a bmx race track or made with bulldozers and mining equipment. Or is it not considered flow trail without jumps and wall-berms?


Hand-built, single-track(ish) wide, integrated to terrain....


----------



## Ridnparadise (Dec 14, 2007)

Flow trail may just be trail with IMBA standard drainage and some creativity. It doesn't have to have jumps or berms, but if they can be added to the design where terrain allows them, then great, but they also have to "flow". If you can flow along it slowly, then you are a happy little noob. If you up the speed ante, then jumps and different lines come into play. We let the terrain and content of the soil select those features, rather than construct large as can be done in a bike park.


----------



## cmc4130 (Jan 30, 2008)

Ridnparadise said:


> Flow trail may just be trail with IMBA standard drainage and some creativity. It doesn't have to have jumps or berms, but if they can be added to the design where terrain allows them, then great, but they also have to "flow". . . . .


I agree. But, just for the sake of word usage, let's not just call every xc trail that is a flowy a "flow trail."

I think that's why the original poster tried to come up with a new term "flow country."

"Flow trail" was explicitly a way of bringing rollers, berms, and some jumps into mountain biking and getting people used to the idea that they were okay on something other than a bmx track, pump track, or DH trail.

https://www.imba.com/model-trails/flow-trails

For example, last summer I checked out Tamarancho in Marin County, NorCal. The Loop is all traditional xc (and pretty exhausting!). But only the "Endor" section is called the "Flow Trail" and it is all downgradient or flat, with rollers berms, etc.

 

wow: :thumbsup: 








St Moritz's new Corviglia Flow Trail looks like a whole heap of fun | Riding | ChopMTB


----------



## Ridnparadise (Dec 14, 2007)

The term Flow Country Trail has been used for some time

https://www.imba.com/flow-country/history

The problem with definitions is that they either come with baggage or ownership (including $ value). That trail in St Moritz does look really awesome, but I'd call it an XC trail. The section of trail in my last post averages 9%, has similar grade reversals, but is not ever going to look like Switzerland, or drop 2000 vertical m. It's also an XC trail.

To me Flow Trail is bike park trail all at a high skill level and Flow Country trail is fun trail that goes somewhere and offers optional challenges (one being pace), but I could be wrong so please keep posting beautiful pics like that last one to continue the stoke.


----------



## cmc4130 (Jan 30, 2008)

Ridnparadise said:


> The term Flow Country Trail has been used for some time
> 
> https://www.imba.com/flow-country/history
> 
> ...


Yes, very good points! Thanks for the link, that helps explain a lot!
https://www.imba.com/flow-country/appendix-trail-characteristics


----------



## Ridnparadise (Dec 14, 2007)

Went for a ride with one of my digging buddies yesterday arvo and asked him how he defined flow trail or flow country trail. This guy is very practical. Answer - "When riders get to the end of it and say wow that flowed!"


----------



## cmc4130 (Jan 30, 2008)

"pump track" features do not have to be in a flat field.

think "Pump Trail"!

:thumbsup:


----------



## raisingarizona (Feb 3, 2009)

All types of trails can have flow, the key part isn't dependent on the character really for flow it's the transitions between each varied sections, turns and features imho.

But if you are going for the modern day idea of "flow trail" than you need to build it like a roller coaster. The most important feature of a roller coaster to keep in mind is that it doesn't have brakes. If I were going for that my main goal would be to make the line flow without hitting the brakes.


----------



## twd953 (Aug 21, 2008)

raisingarizona said:


> All types of trails can have flow, the key part isn't dependent on the character really for flow it's the transitions between each varied sections, turns and features imho.
> 
> But if you are going for the modern day idea of "flow trail" than you need to build it like a roller coaster. The most important feature of a roller coaster to keep in mind is that it doesn't have brakes. If I were going for that my main goal would be to make the line flow without hitting the brakes.


Agree completely.

However, I think some trail builders need to keep in mind that rollercoasters don't go the same speed the whole time. I've heard comments more than once, from volunteer and full-time pro builders alike, that make it sound like they are trying to preserve "flow" to the extent that the whole trail is designed to go 1 speed.

Just because I'm going 20 mph in one section of the trail, that doesn't mean I want to maintain a constant 20 mph down a 4 mile descent.

I want sections where I'm hitting 30 mph (obviously not not on bi-directional multi-use trails) just as much as I want sections where I'm going 5 or 10 mph.

Every rollercoaster I've been on has those changes in momentum. That is what makes them fun.

The key is to provide those changes in momentum and link them together in a way that doesn't require the rider to slam on the brakes and cause erosion.

You have to be thinking three dimensionally on trail layout. A rollercoaster wouldn't be any fun if it was a straight line with a bunch of ups and down, nor would it be if it was a uniform down grade with a bunch of left-right turns.


----------



## cmc4130 (Jan 30, 2008)

twd953 said:


> Agree completely.
> 
> However, I think some trail builders need to keep in mind that rollercoasters don't go the same speed the whole time. I've heard comments more than once, from volunteer and full-time pro builders alike, that make it sound like they are trying to preserve "flow" to the extent that the whole trail is designed to go 1 speed.
> 
> ...


Agree. One element of that is* turning the trail back up-gradient to shave off speed naturally*, instead of requiring riders to use brakes.

Winter Park Trestle Bike Park has a few trails that do that. Double Jeopardy, Cruel and Unusual and No Quarter, if I remember right.

One day at Trestle. Recommended trails?


----------



## KeithNorCal (Jun 7, 2016)

Great thread. Without knowing it previously, it sounds like "flow country" trails are what I try to build most of the time but I've always just thought of them as good cross-country trails rather "flow country". Personally, as stated in the first bullet point of the IMBA trail characteristics description (https://www.imba.com/flow-country/appendix-trail-characteristics ), I think "synergy with the landscape" is critical. That's why I'm not a big fan of bermed turns that don't use natural topography as part of the equation. They just look out of place to me. Admittedly, for reasons I can't explain, bermed wood ladder bridges feel more "natural" to me than high bermed turns built out of earth. Not sure why.


----------



## twd953 (Aug 21, 2008)

cmc4130 said:


> Agree. One element of that is* turning the trail back up-gradient to shave off speed naturally*, instead of requiring riders to use brakes.


Exactly. And that doesn't just have to be before a turn. Mixing them in to the straighter sections does wonders.

Providing adequate sight lines also play a big part in keeping riders off of the brakes.

I think these concepts apply equally well to Flow trails as they do to technical singletrack trails.


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

To me, "flow" just means you're building the trail to maximize enjoyment, rather than connecting two points. That *can* mean jumps/berms/rollers, or it can mean super tight and techy the whole time - but it *doesn't* involve getting from point A to point B as quickly/efficiently as possible - in fact, usually the opposite. 

I think for most riders a trail flows if the character remains similar throughout and it can be ridden enjoyably at a variety of speeds. Generally that means no giant drops/offcamber cliffs/mandatory doubles thrown into an easy XC trail, and likewise no long boring/flat sections thrown into a gnar trail. Most riders also dislike sudden speed changes (very hard braking) into tight corners, so if things are going to be tight - *keep* them tight. 

Grade reversals (and lots of them) are probably the #1 thing to add flow and enjoyment, IMO. But a trail can flow without them. 

-Walt


----------



## bsieb (Aug 23, 2003)

I've been building the flowiest trails I could buildsince the early 90's. Flow can be achieved by many means and at many speeds, since it exists in your mind. Flow is more or less the state of riding completely in the present, the zen of rider rolling down trail in harmony. Lots of attempts to proprietize the term these days. Now we have flow country.


----------



## jochribs (Nov 12, 2009)

Is this like when Kramer got the meat slicer and said "Welcome to Flavor Country"?


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

Flow trails? They are usually at a bike park in MA, not on xc , multi use trails in state parks. And flow is where you find it, not always on smooth dirt.


----------



## cmc4130 (Jan 30, 2008)

a work in progress: double "S" berms.

this is part of a regular xc trail system--not a DH bike park.


----------



## cmc4130 (Jan 30, 2008)

Integrating these type of rollers into xc trails, is one aspect of "Flow Country."


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

Dear God. I hope my XC trails never look like that. 

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


----------



## cmc4130 (Jan 30, 2008)

There's something to be said for rhythmic movements in mountain biking, at least occasionally. Pedaling is rhythmic. But, other things like turning can be.... A cross country trail can have patterns of left and right turns. A jump trail might have jumps at regular spacing (or in a music sense, "on time" spacing).

Skateboarding design was influenced by surfing, as was BMX. Why not MTB also? ; )


----------



## Ridnparadise (Dec 14, 2007)

I'm way out of the loop these days. The politics of trailwork got the better of me here some time ago (and are ongoing after, without warning, the LM ploughed down 2 gravity trails they had sanctioned but never mapped or signed because they never wanted to). However, here's my slight variation of thought on this subject. Everyone who builds trail from dirt knows that the original design and build are a framework and it is the riders who choose the line that lasts. Sometimes it is not exactly the line chosen by the builder. So that implies riders choose the flow they want. 
The problem is that unless it is a rider group of equal skill-set and objective - eg BMX, or total noob, or elite, there are always going to be those who don't have the confidence or skill level to trust the builder and let it run. If there are enough of them, the trail design may be great, but not remain flowy due to braking bumps or trail zombies. Allowing for the inevitable impact of time and erosion from use, I think the 2 things that are most conducive to flow on trails in general are good sight lines and no trees tight to the inside line on corners.


----------



## theMISSIONARY (Apr 13, 2008)

the only flow trails i have built have been whilst i was being paid to do so....... I detest flow trails , one or two runs and that's enough of them for me

here down under down under there is a real lack of technical trails being built and the "new" trail systems going in are not partially rounded

Trail building here is full of politics


----------

