New mountain bike trail grade system

After discussing with a fellow cycle club member today on our gravel ride, on the different trail grading colours. I was expressing that orange graded trails caused some confusion of their difficulty compared to reds and blacks. Resulting in some beginner riders ending up riding an orange trail by error maybe resulting in an off.

I thought I’d look up what the actual definition of an orange graded trail was.

That’s where I found that the Forestry commission is moving away from orange graded trails and seem to have replaced it with a double black extreme. I think this is a good thing.

What’s everyone else’s opinion on this?

https://forestryandland.gov.scot/visit/activities/mountain-biking/mountain-biking-trail-grades#:~:text=Orange%3A%20Extreme&text=Trail%3A%20Extreme%20levels%20of%20exposure%20%26%20risk%2C%20large%20features.

Makes sense for the uninformed.

The existing system seems to be a collision of two separate systems possibly leading to misconception that orange is easier than red.

Looks like it’s now similar to how it is in BC (outside Whistler Bike Park), although with an extra grade (Red).

Reads like our Green would be the UK’s Blue in order to match everything up. That said, our grading system doesn’t even match up between riding areas so you have to take everything with a pinch of salt. I can ride some Double Backs totally fine and are some of my favourite trails, and others terrify me and I walk the whole way down….

Our gradings are only skillz based though.

American red is harder than black, which has caught me out.

Double black makes sense. Harder than a black in everyone’s vocab

Australia doesn’t have red or orange.

Green, blue, black, double black. Then at places like Maydena I’ve seen “pro line”.

That said what one place calls black is another places blue it seems…

Lines up closer with ski grading, likewise for N. America (albeit with the extra red).

I’m trying to think of major trail centres with significant orange trails, but drawing a blank. I guess it’s mostly places with DH tracks, so Cwm Carn, Inners, Ae?

Grading is always going to be a very rough guide, so the most important thing is that the message is clear and consistent.

Do climbing/bouldering grades have more consistency?

Also I seem to remember some of them have two parts, one for the difficulty and other for risk. Not sure if that would really apply in MTB terms for most trails, the risk is probably always you can’t cope with the technicality so you crash your bike.

The trouble is it’s just so difficult to provide a useful grade because mountain biking covers a bunch of different skillsets. Like “black”, is it technical, is it steep, are there gap jumps? Who knows. BPW’s system with the flow/tech axis works fairly well I think.

I always thought keywords could be good. Like red: jumps, berms or red: steep, woodwork. Quick and simple. Grade and flavour.

Good idea with keywords but wherr does it end?

Whoever graded it would be liable if someone falls off having not been forewarned of the “blue : sharp left hand bends, small jumps, low hanging branches, narrow spaced trees, rooted sections, puddles when wet, walkers present on sunny days, oh and the labrador on a wednesday morning….”

Do climbing/bouldering grades have more consistency?

Do you mean V grades or F grades of f grades or UK tech grades.. indoor or outdoor?

The only consistency is no one agrees on them.

BPW’s system with the flow/tech axis works fairly well I think.

Only on an uplifted trail I think (yes I know you can ride up BPW).

There are trails than are long with significant climbing – which makes all the downhill bits more challenging as you’re tired when you get to them.

Or surfaces that are grippy in the dry and lethal in the wet – wood obviously, but also some soils and rock types.

An XC trail can be red or black without gaps or the like due to its length or total elevation or the surface – simply because as a rider you are taking on a challenge and the grading is simply the size of the challenge.

It’s a real mixed bag to try and grade.

Do climbing/bouldering grades have more consistency?

Not really. There are areas which are notorious for comedy grades – Northumbrian sandstone for one – plus different types of rock have different qualities / require different skills, so climbing E1 on limestone doesn’t necessarily bear much relation to the same grade on grit. Plus there’s an overall/seriousness sort of grade and a technical grade, so something can be overall graded quite hard, but be technically straightforward, but with a monumentally high death potential if things go wrong.

Winter grades are even worse because so much depends on conditions. Something that’s quite tricky in thin conditions can be an easy ‘stroll’ when banked out with loads of snow.

Ultimately I think all you can ask of grades is that they give you an overall feel for ‘seriousness’, but accept that more nuanced stuff is much harder to incorporate and consistency is problematic because grading is always going to be subjective. Arguably the most important bit is for people to understand the basics, like pink being more serious than yellow or whatever.

What happens if you’re colour blind btw?

I like it – makes sense to me. They’ve taken out the bike judgement too which I think is a good thing.

I’ve always assumed that the grade was not just the technicality but also impacted by the length and amount of climbing too.

As you were discussing this on a gravel bike I’m guessing you were not at a trail centre at the time! I think for a complete system it would be good to have a similar/related system for natural tracks, paths and trails. One of the joys of living in Scotland is that nothing is off limits. One of the disadvantages of living in Scotland is that doesn’t mean its actually ridable! It could get complicated I guess. Gravel bikable. Hike a bike 12 months a year, Hike a bike in poor weather, Hike a bike in ascent but ok in descent. etc.

I’ve always quite liked the grading used in German speaking lands, the Singletrail Skala.

Applies well to natural trails.

S0 through to S5.

S0 being nothing more than a gravel path/road. S5 being is almost trial riding territory.

For me S2 is interesting, S3-4 fun challenging.

So we are going back to how it was? Orange was introduced as it tended to be more jump lines rather than trails. The grading is based on what else is around it (which was why so many riders at Glentress FC complained about Laggan black when it opened – Glentress black had no tech, just distance and remoteness; Laggan had technical but no distance and it was very different…Laggan was a true black but they tried to change it to double black diamond)…
Then orange appeared and was more jump orientated.
Issue with any and all grading is consistency across all sites using that grading system, so it won’t matter what is used as it’ll differ at each location.

It doesn’t help when some comedian swaps the black for blue sign. Such as when riding the new  Sandwell valley bike trails for the first time recently. I was on a gravel bike. It was all rollable but a beginner might at best be put off riding or worst have a painful off

What happens if you’re colour blind btw?

Hit and hope.

It doesn’t help when some comedian swaps the black for blue sign. Such as when riding the new  Sandwell valley bike trails for the first time recently. I was on a gravel bike. It was all rollable but a beginner might at best be put off riding or worst have a painful off

Resulting in Black & Blue – Maybe also a bit of red on you

The FC explanation for existing grade Orange from the link above doesn’t look right to me. Orange always meant ‘a bit jumpy’, with the number of dots within the lozenge signifying how jumpy. So, I could quite happily roll a single dot orange trail, but would be prepared for a bit more wheels off on a two, and swerve a three dot orange.

A bit like cigarette packets could we replace the colour coding with the gory graphic images that WCA and Derek Starship have posted on the forum over the years?

Whistlers trail grading was pretty straightforward to me with black or blue, flow or tech. Never felt like I got caught out riding there.

Not so keen on double black being a replacement for orange, unless I’ve misunderstood the meanings.

Looking at that link above then orange seems to be the level of difficulty above black, in which case fine, but I’ve always thought of orange as being a jump line, so really a slightly different categorisation and not necessarily black (it could be perfectly rollable). Agree with @roger_mellie above.

Maybe the colour or symbols need to change, but not to double black.

Thinking of somewhere like Lee Quarry which has tech stuff and fun stuff mixed up. The black line there is a “sneeze and you’re dead” rock strewn narrow trail on the side of a cliff, knowing that if I saw a double diamond black trail I would not go near it! …And probably miss out on some fun pump track type thing.

@convert

Fot context, we passed the nearly complete new jump mtb track at Callendar House in Falkirk and was discussing what grade they would be. I said Orange would best suit them, but if they follow the new FC grading system then I’m not sure what they’ll be.

Do you mean V grades or F grades of f grades or UK tech grades.. indoor or outdoor?

The only consistency is no one agrees on them.

I mean consistency of application within one of the systems.

From how I read it, they’ve just extended the grading above black. Doesn’t mean that all Orange trails will automatically become double black, simply that they’ll be dropped into the appropriate category. Wasn’t the lower blue at Laggan originally an Orange trail? I’m also thinking of the GT freeride park. It had one, two and three for lines. Surely they just be individually graded into different coloured line if they still existed, li km they’ve done with the new trails. . Makes sense to be, but it is the Forrstry that are implementing it.

Had a spot of bother on Golfie last year with orange on Trailforks. Someone in the group favoured less gnarly trails so I suggested a orange one on the map. In my mind I logically assumed orange was between green and red, like a traffic light. Wrong! Damn near a parachute job!

I’ve always just taken the gradings to indicate the difficulty level at that specific place. Blue, red, black – easiest, middle, hardest, with no relation to any other place. Are they meant to be consistent across all FC spots? If so it’s news to me.

Someone above mentioned climbing, I’d liken it to indoor bouldering grades. It’s very subjective and depends where you happen to be. A V6 at one place could be wildly different to a V6 somewhere else.

It isn’t meant to be consistent across everywhere, just for that particular area. However, humans being humans…if they can ride the black at X, then they assume they can ride the black at Y – but there may be absolutely no similarities between the 2 areas.

Had a spot of bother on Golfie last year with orange on Trailforks. Someone in the group favoured less gnarly trails so I suggested a orange one on the map. In my mind I logically assumed orange was between green and red, like a traffic light. Wrong! Damn near a parachute job!

Crowd sourced grading has always been shite. Between showing off and lack of awareness, it’s rarely consistent.

I’m not that bothered by changes. Any system is imperfect, so improvements are watered down.

Had a spot of bother on Golfie last year with orange on Trailforks. Someone in the group favoured less gnarly trails so I suggested a orange one on the map. In my mind I logically assumed orange was between green and red, like a traffic light. Wrong! Damn near a parachute job!

Crowd sourced grading has always been shite.

I believe Trailforks is curated by a single local admin in each area, who would approve and correct the trail gradings?

Gradings at the Golfie are pretty accurate IMO. Rode Hangover there a couple of weeks ago and it was very difficult, steep with tyre-packing mud. Only found out it was an “orange” trail when I looked at TF later.

I’m not sure about this double black thing, I was only just getting used to orange – and will I tell the difference between black and double black squinting at TF on my phone without my glasses on?

That said what one place calls black is another places blue it seems…

The “Black” at Thetford Forest can be ridden by someone on a road bike on 19mm slick tyres, with their hands tied behind their back.

The “Black” at Thetford Forest can be ridden by someone on a road bike on 19mm slick tyres, with their hands tied behind their back.

Conversely, the swinley blue is a fun loop of singletrack. (no doubt can also be ridden on a road bike by people so inclined)

At other, overall harder trailcentres, the blue offering would only be amusing if you were 5 and on a balance bike.

Do climbing/bouldering grades have more consistency?

Jesus Christ, don’t open that can of worms.

There are far too many divisions in climbing grades anyway, no need for more than 5 maybe in MTB.

I mean consistency of application within one of the systems.

Not really, because they’re being applied by different individuals in different areas with different styles of climbing. Not many people get around enough to be able to offer an overview.

Meh… leave orange as it is, changing it now would just add even more confusion. Isn’t there already a double black anyway? Meaning “extra super hard expert level black”? As opposed to the orange meaning jumpy?

All it needs is a bit of clarity on the signposts and maps etc.

IMO as it’s so complex (the types and difficulties of different trails) the only sensible way to look at it is location based. Meaning that you grade the trail difficulties related to each other at that particular location, so black at TrailCentreA is harder than TrailCentreA’s red but may not even be as hard as TrailCentreB’s red… which is how it is now anyway really.

Does that make sense? I should not be a sign writer 😋

Thought about this again.

Tbh – not too fussed either way about orange. I’m neither technically competent enough to enjoy it or that interested in becoming so. MTB is about longer trails into the wilderness. Trail centres sort of offer a bit of that in a reliable but slight sanitized way I do from time to time but it’s very far from my day to day diet.

The change I’d like to see is for trails to have a colour and a number. So you might have a Red 9 or a Black 4. The colour (Blue, Red, Black etc) describes the technical ability needed and level of exposure. The number describes the cardio workout it’s going to give you. Distance sort of gives you that but imo there’s often more to it than that. For example an ascent which is all forest road verse one that climbs via nurdly rooty rocky twisty singletrack is a lot more taxing.

So does orange mean something different on Trailforks? Or in Scotland?

Because I was familiar with it for jumpy lines in Wales, but north of the border it usually seems to apply to super-steep death chute kind-of trails.

It could be jumpy, but means there is a level of skill required where there aren’t (usually) alternative lines, so once you are on it, you need to commit. That is all it really is, so it can varying from an area having loads of jumps to otehr stuff where it is near-vertical and that is the only way down…

I like the BPW solution as well, either Tech or Flow, with one being predominately (but not exclusively the higher up the grades you go) wheels in the air, and the other not. When faced by a Black Flow at BPW I know exactly what I’m in for.

I like how FOD grade their DH trails.