Wife & I just spent the weekend in our new 2024 Subaru Forester Wilderness at Big Bend NP. I installed skid plates (3) and used a departure skid plate on the trailer hitch receiver. I have been driving offroad for 35 years, which I feel makes a huge difference. Only trail we did not take was Black Gap, as I do not feel the Subi is capable enough (drove it previously in a Tacoma TRD Sport 4x4). We had zero issues whatsoever with the Subi on the trails. The best part was a dude in a Jeep Gladiator pulling up to pass us on Old Ore Rd, and asking if we had really just driven the same trail he had came from. The look on his face was priceless. Know YOUR capabilities, as well as your vehicle.
So, as a former NPS ranger, I think these rules are being misunderstood a bit. If your driving a Bronco sport down a trail they aren't going to stop you and issue a fine. The rules are so that when some idiot takes their Subaru down a trail they shouldn't and gets stuck, they have a specific violation they can cite for the fine. The broad terminology gives a ranger the ability to issue fines as nessesary on a case by case basis, or turn back individuals who clearly have no business being there.
What kind of Subaru are we talking about because if we’re talking about like an STI of course it shouldn’t be on that but like a forester wilderness outback wilderness something with X mode and decent specs to go off-road
That's not what happened though. The video starts with an example of a crosstalk driver being warned to drive on the trail and being threatened with fines and jail time. This isn't being used as a tool to enforce consequences, its being used as a tool to keep people off the trail.
It's more about anti driving. They put in restrictions to limit the amount of people who qualify, then eventually shut the trail down citing lack of use/habitat degradation.
@NoName-ml5yk I would agree with you if this were a consequence. Something along the lines of if we have to tow you out it's a huge fine. In that way you leave people free to use the public land as they wish and take on the risks. But this is preventative, it's designed to prevent the use of off toad vehicles. And it is not in a vacuum. They just banned orvs from large tracts of Moab. Last year a national refuge banned drive on permits that had been issued to Surfcasters for driving on the Beach. There is a national push to curtail off roading.
@@briandambrosio2064 maybe in 5 year TFL will only be off road testing 140k dollar 4runners and wranglers because those will be the only vehicles allowed on trails.
Just a tip, if you're going to argue with a Park Ranger or ignore their directives, you're going to need a lot of money and a team of good lawyers to get your vehicle back, much less stay out of jail. Anyone who's dealt with Fish Cops knows what I mean. They have broad powers, even outside their jurisdiction.
@@LightningTime777 Depends on the type of Parks or Fish & Wildlife ranger. Many areas are handled under federal agencies rather than at the state level, but even at the state level their jurisdiction extends, well, state-wide. Traditional police officers operate more regionally (excluding state troopers).
yea but thats the thing good lawyers can fight the federal government. just because they have power doesnt mean they're right lol. sadly the common man cant really afford to get into that fight .
I have a awd cross over myself and I sure in hell won’t take it down a road ment for rugged 4wd vehicles lol the off roading do is going down a gravel road in the country to see my friends lol
@TFL the Subaru wilderness edition models do have underbody protection as standard along with a specifically tuned version of the AWD system with dual x-mode. Its not just a lifted Subaru with no other upgrades like you led on. Technically it has a locker but instead of hardware based its software based. So blanket laws just don't cut it when we talk about modern vehicles.
Subaru needs actual recovery points. I was very disappointed when I realized the Wilderness editions just have additional tow points. @TFL Not sure how "stock" skid plates are so important. They are available by Subaru, for those that actually go off road.
It's more about driver knowledge & skill. I've been off roading since a kid. And my '17 Outlander Sport has seen many trails in UT, AZ, NM, NV & CA. Ive pulled friends cars out of sand & ditches. Had people tell me my suv (crossover) was a 4x4, when it's only a FWD. Lol. Like I don't know my own vehicle. BUT... I knew the limits of my suv. And turned back when I knew it could get stuck on a trail.
I love this argument. That Bronco sport is the grayest of vehicles. Or maybe its the subaru's.. it seems like clearance is the most important thing. But.. What about a lifted Ranger prerunner w/ rear limited slip and 35" tires, 14+ inches of travel, and tons of clearance. It looks great and gets past the guards but it doesnt have working 4wd. There just needs to be a set up entry that is slightly more challenging than the rest of the trail..a gatekeeper.
@@s.gibson9329 There's no question that Bronco Sport Badlands they're in would outperform any Subaru in technical rocky terrain. The drivetrain, chassis, and suspension are built much beefier on the Bronco sport. Not to mention the center-locker and better off-road drive modes on the Ford. Despite what you think Ford builds very reliable vehicles right here in the USA and employs more Americans than any car brand in the world doing it. They just build so many hundreds of thousands more vehicles that of course you're going to see more parts failures based purely on statistics. I've been a Subaru fan a long time and owned a couple Foresters, they offer standard AWD at a price point lower than pretty much everyone which is cool. But at least here in the Northeast they tend to rust and fall apart quicker than most other brands for a number of reasons I won't list due to comment length.
Subaru since they moved to the ATS coupling system they cannot drive the rear without front slip. Pair that with the CVT and you are digging ruts at best, but you are going to have big issues if you cannot run up on everything. You will overheat the CVT too. And old Suabru with the VTD center diff or 4ACT center coupling (with a locking switch) will do great.
If you want a blanket set of rules just tell people if they get stuck and the park service has to recover you then there's a $500 fine no matter what you're driving. If you're circumventing the trail because you don't think your vehicle will make it or you bypass the by pass then you also have a $500 fine to pay. Why should it matter if one is driving a 4WD or an AWD? If you have to be rescued the cost is the same.
Stop it, you are making too much sense. The government would never enact such simple, logical rules that don't allow them to go on abusive power trips.
I've seen many AWD vehicles stuck at Cape Hatteras National Seashore in the sand at the beaches. They always block entrance and exit ramps making it impassable for others until the tow trucks come or someone with a strap to yank them out. I think it's a good thing to finally fine them.
@@yaboimax6356 That's certainly a part of it, drive incompetence, but I've seen it too close to the entry point - mostly Chevy Traverse and the like vehicles that the owners thought were capable, but far from it.
On the other hand,I have never seen one vehicle in 37 years I live in Nevada got stuck out here .(Not to many people go out in the desert here around Vegas ,that what it always seems to me).
Parks should make a small demo trail at the entrance to see what cars and trucks can be approved. If they don’t pass just tell them to not take certain trails
Parks should hire Tommy and Roman to decide what vehicles can enter and use the trails. Tommy at one Park and Roman at another Park. Oh let’s not forget the rest of the T F L staff like Andre, Nathan and Chance and a few others.
You have to keep instructions simple for the public. I am glad they put out black and white rules to start with. They can be modified in time but it is a good start. It is costing a lot of money to rescue these vehicles from trails they should not be on. TFL is talking to the choir on this as most of us are car folks. The people who are causing the trouble just believe what a salesman tells them and do not do their own fact finding.
It's not so much the rule I have a problem with, it's the consequences. Thousands of dollars and 6 months of jail time are a real possibility for a minor infraction. That is tyranny, pure and simple.
I have a Subaru crosstalk wilderness. While you're right on the attachment points I would highly recommend it for off road capabilities...I've had mine in the backroads of Texas, New Mexico, Arizona and Colorado and never had a problem. Even pulled a Rav4 adventure outta sand with it. If I can get my front tires on it then I can get over it.
It depends on when the rule was first written, the law cited in the letter was last amended in 1986. That makes the 15" rim and rest of the definition makes more sense.
BTW it's all national parks. State parks still vary. Big Bend states "You Will Need A High Clearance Four-Wheel-Drive (4WD) Vehicle A high clearance 4WD vehicle is defined as a SUV or truck type vehicle, with at least 15 inch tire rims or more, with a low gear transfer case, designed for heavier type use than a standard passenger vehicle, with at least 8 inches of clearance or more from the lowest point of the frame, body, suspension, or differential, to the ground, also including a means to mechanically power both, front and real wheels at the same time"
The crew at TFL are hardcore car enthusiasts. I’m a car nerd myself and they got all the details correct on the non 4WD approved list, right down to which vehicles have twin clutch rear differentials. 👏.
It's twin clutch transmissions / gearboxes they're talking about, they overheat at low speed with wheel spin. There's no such thing as a twin clutch rear differential lol.
@@SkylarRace The Ford Bronco Sport and Chevy GM have GKN twin clutch rear differentials. The Hondas have a Rear drive unit which is technically has 3 clutches. These systems are located on the rear axle.
@@SkylarRacethere is such a thing as twin clutch differentials and Ford has them in several vehicles. In fact those Ford's have three clutches. One operates the PTU and two on the rear differential.
Fantastic video, thank you!!! You said everything that needed to be said in the way it needed to be said. We have a 2023 Pilot Trailsport that we use to tow a 3500 lb travel trailer and for light to moderate roads in state and national parts. The three TFL videos about it helped a lot in making our choice.
This is bupkis. There is more than 1 type of AWD. For example Subaru's AWD system works like 4WD until 1 or more wheels lose traction, then it redistributes power to the wheels with the most traction. Which makes it safer for off-road driving than 4WD.
There's that 2004-2009 Toyota Prius that was entered in the Gambler 500 and it finished. Prep on the Prius consisted of installing special higher ground clearance Auris suspension parts made for the Russian market, disabling traction control, 29" chunky off road tires on Subaru wheels, sawing off the lower half of the front bumper cover then fitting a heavy aluminum skidplate. There's an article on Jalopnik about it. Who can forget the original Austin Mini and its long history of success in brutal off-road rally competition?
I think the Park Service is going by a more traditional viewpoint, where a 4x4 is based on a RWD body on frame, and AWD is based on FWD unibody. There are obviously exceptions to every rule, and the most important factor are the drivers and their experience on these types of trails. Self recovery is underestimated by many drivers
Surprised you skipped the Subaru Wilderness vehicles (or maybe not, as I do know you guys had a falling out with Subaru many years ago). One of the most capable soft roaders out there.
Great episode! Put all Buick AWD vehicles on the 'no' list also. I saw one of the small Buick SUVs on a mild trail. It had highway tread tires, trying to make it through a rocky part of the trail. One wheel was broken. Like rim and tire from the spokes.
Most people don’t understand this stuff glad your explaining it but they still won’t get it. Moral of the story do your full research before going on trails. Read the signs. Thank you to fearless leaders and brothers kase and tommy Hopefully this helps others.
Great discussion guys, but with the rapidly changing “off road” vehicle market, it is impossible for a government agency to enforce. I would submit the problem is not the vehicles, but the drivers. Anyone who has been to a National Park recently has seen idiots with little or no off road skills or experience in very capable rigs needing rescue. The Parks have to account for them. Let’s come at this a different way and put the responsibility on the drivers. On all written Park materials, and the website, and at trailhead signs put the following disclaimer. “Any non-paved roads or trails in this park may require vehicles and driver skills that may exceed you or you vehicle’s capabilities. If you travel on off pavement surfaces in this park and require rescue or extraction, YOU WILL BEAR THE ENTIRE COST OF THE OPERATION INCLUDING DAMAGE TO THE TRAIL OR GOVERNMENT EQUIPMENT. Know you and your vehicle’s capabilities and carry emergency supplies and self extraction equipment.”
I used to take a stock 1994 Suzuki Swift on 4x4 trails. I took a 1994 Mitsubishi Eclipse up the same trails. Neither of those cars had any business being there, but they were what I had. I do not claim to be a good off road driver, but I did understand the capability of those two little cars and was able to read the trail and get through.
The #1 reason for this law is because lesser capable vehicles are much more likely to drive around the obstacles. Which means trails get wider and wider with cut offs everywhere. If you have wheeled in California you know what I'm talking about. Also, most rangers aren't going to ticket you unless you're being real destructive and even then you get a chance to plead your case to a judge.
Subarus are really capable off road, shoot I even drove my lowered wrx in mud up a hill during spring melt. Literall streams forming, cutting the road down, and adding a big dent in the path. If I can make it through wet mud in a lowered wrx, a subaru suv with the wilderness package will be fine.
I don’t think this is a fair assessment. Until recently the technology allowing advanced traction in all wheel drive vehicles was largely not there. When the policy was made awd systems didn’t have the more advanced traction management systems they have now. They are better now and they could probably update their policy. In general I feel like it should be the responsibility of the vehicle owner to know the capability of their vehicle, and be responsible for the consequences of their decisions. Because even built 4x4 can have breakdowns/failures and get stuck. Recovery of a 4x4 is gonna be easier than an awd vehicle though.
It's likely CVT Subarus and single clutch Hyundai's getting into trouble and needing emergency services (help I'm stuck with my family and the tow truck can't get me!" that made them create a crappy law like this by lumping all AWD cars into the same category.
@@volvo09 No, if you actually watch recovery videos in various places out west it's usually people renting a variety of AWD's including sedans that because it has AWD they think can go anywhere. Subarus aren't anymore likely to get stuck because they have a CVT than any other similarly capable vehicle with a regular transmission. Any Subaru Wilderness model could do what they did in this video with the Bronco Sport and then some.
Speaking of the White Rim Trail, there was a guy wh did tours over a large chunk of that trail in an old VW Bus, it handled everything just fine. Someone needs to take an old Willys CJ2/3/5 that only has 7 inches of clearance out there, it is way more capable than it needs to be yet smaller so it doesnt need that much clearance. Most trails in Canyonlands are much rougher that the White Rim Trail.
Mostly true. In the US, '80s most 4x4 Subarus had transfer cases with separate low range gearing. There are more recent global models that also shipped with a dual range transmission (sans transfer case), but those were never sold in North America, unfortunately. Some people source them from their originally Japanese and Australian vehicles through companies like ADS to swap into US market cars, though.
Wow. The high quality / fact filled / tight editing that went into your story today! Setting a brand new standard with this one. Watched every minute, my jaw on the floor, all-the-while learning so much that never even fully crossed my mind before. Ground Breaking, Career Defining. Stellar!
Yes here in hawaii you have to have 4x4 low to go up to mauna kea it keeps the engine at a higher rpm while going down the huge mountain for more control breaking. My 2016 jeep Cherokee has a proper 4x4 low.
I'm seeing a lot of really sound comments on this video, countering TFL's argument here. I like how someone pointed that AWD cars can tear up trails more, because people will drive around obstacles in those. That in turn widens trails, and damages the environment that trails are designed, and intended to protect. The whole point of trails is to preserve the natural landscapes around it. You even have former NPS rangers saying TFL is misunderstanding the rules a bit.
Do you think that Bronco Sport is going to tear up the trail more than a 5500 pound f-150 with open diffs? I guarantee it won't. The rule is antiquated and the possibility of 6 months in jail for a minor infraction is downright tyrannical and any ranger who doesn't understand that should probably not be a ranger to begin with.
I hate the marketing used for AWD vs 4x4 sometimes. The transfer case used in the base model 4x4 Jeep Grand Cherokee is marketed as full-time 4x4 without low range, but the same transfer case in the Durango is marketed as AWD.
This! The marketing terminology is really annoying. Since there is no industry standard for 4x4 or AWD. I drive a jeep Cherokee trail hawk that is supposedly trail rated with a rear locker and decent tires. It is now banned from trails because it doesn't fit their technical definition of requiring a transfer case with low range despite first gear being on par with "low range" gear sets in transfer cases.
If you take a ‘Corvette’ on an off road trail, then the owner should pay 100% of the recovery costs. And this just needs to be stated at the start of the trail. “You get stuck, you pay for removal.”
4WD doesn't mean it's safe. A Jeep Rubicon slide out of road and hit a rock in Shafer Canyon Road while my AWD car is ok, it was raining. If the national park really want to limit it, they should also measure tire trend and pattern as well.
Sounds like the parks need a more granular system to identifying how hard the trail is similar to how OnX rates trail's. Heck even say a 3 level scale would be helpful: Level 1 = Any AWD vechile, 2 = AWD "trail Trim" with trail rated tires OR traditional 4x4 low range with trail rated tires, Level 3 = Lockable 4WD with transfer case and lockable rear diff.
Our 2004 Rav4 AWD does have a transfer case, limited slip rear diff and has great ground clearance. The Approach angle and Departure angle were amazing. The only thing it lacks was underbody protection and front locker. .. I'd probably still get a warning letter 😂
If the newer Volvo XC90 is half as good as the stock first gen. I had, it needs to be on this list. It ran circles around my buddies Tacoma TRD Pro in the mud. Tires have alot to do with off road capabilities as well.
Something I'd like to point out for anybody. If you dont know where your intake is, don't cross derp streams. Ive told this to somone in a subaru at one point. Whether they crossed or not was on them. Ive seen a Jeep Cherokee that had a low intake suck in water. Know your rig if you're going to use it
I work for the USFS and was given the choice between a Bronco Sport and a Crosstrek Sport for my work vehicle. I leaped at Crosstrek. The Bronco Sport is just a rugged-looking Escape, which is what I just got rid of.
Your Dad's beef with Subaru really hurts videos like this one. The letter was about a Crosstrek, Subaru's are the quintessential soft-roader, and only just a mention of them at the end. Good vid otherwise, thx boys.
I'm surprized the wilderness models were not mentioned. They have over 9 inches ground clearance, skid plates and lower gearing, although not a transfer case. And I think you guys have managed to test a few subarus.
My Outback Wilderness has an added full suspension lift kit, BFG’s, and heavy duty skid plates front to back. It’ll offroad better than many of the vehicles mentioned.
My personal experience at Big Bend NP was I had my Jeep Gladiator and I was stuck behind a Camry and a Tahoe who were both driving 3mph because of the rough roads. I was able to finally get past them and continue my journey but I just felt like you shouldn’t take a vehicle out to these types of roads/trails if you’re afraid of damage or a rough ride.
I have a 2016 LR4 without the HD package. That means that I have a Torsen center diff instead of a locking center diff. No low range, no rear locker, and no "Rock Crawl Mode". What it does have is 10+ inches of ground clearance in offroad mode, a top notch AWD system, and dedicated attachment points for rescue. Based on your list and the official rules, this car isn't allowed.
From my prior experience... I had the older v6 powered, awd Terrain in college. I totally trusted it in snowy/ icy weather, especially when the plow trucks couldnt quite keep up. But I would have never taken it on an "off road" or "4x4" only designated trail.
It’s to keep idiots from getting in trouble when they think their AWD means they can go off roading. There a recent video I watched of a guy from Oregon or Washington going to Colorado and getting his AWD Chevy Traverse stuck way off highway and having to be rescued. The trail he was trying to go down was something lifted vehicles were built for. Meanwhile, he was blocking the trail for everyone else. You can see it under Justin King. It’s ridiculous what this guy was trying to do with his Traverse, all because it was an AWD.
Worth pointing out that rangers have explicitly allowed bronco sports on elephant hill. It's an individual call when you get the permit, but several folks have done it with no issues.
Even Jeep’s Trailhawk designation is not the same for every vehicle. The Cherokee and Grand Cherokee have legitimate off-road features like a true low gear, lockers, skid plates, etc. The GC even has adjustable suspension. The Renegade, on the other hand, is OK on moderate trails, but you wouldn’t want to go mud bogging with it.
This was a well researched and well done video. You dive into the trims and sub-trims and tell you which ones are mostly appearance and which ones actually have better hardware. This must have taken a lot of time! Thanks!
As an owner of a bronco sport and a Land Cruiser who has done the white rim many times, there is only one spot I wouldn’t want my bronco sport: Hard Scrabble Hill. Definitely want a low range and more sidewall for the crux of that section.
What they forget is that AWD vehicles, like the Land Rover Discovery 2, uses their traction control and stability control to maintain power for off roading, and they work better because its instantaneous and has been tested already
The law is supposed to protect the parks, not the vehicles right? An unexperienced driver with a 4 ton electric hummer can create a disaster of a recovery operation. In general when capable 4x4 get into trouble its almost always more serious than when a non capable car gets stuck. This law really makes no sense. Would be good if you could get someone from the park service explain the rationale behind this law, and why they came up with these set of rules Anyways I suspect the reason this pops up is because of unexperienced drivers/tourists with little or no knowledge of what their car is capable of and where not to drive
Arches and canyonlands have trails that are extreme and ones that are not extreme. The trail the Subaru did that caused the letter is not extreme. Proof? He made it! Other trails would be impossible. One problem is that the park people group all 4x4 trails together. Another problem is normal dirt roads that used to be passable in sedans are not being maintained at all and are now becoming jeep trails. some extreme trails require modifications to even a top line Rubicon to successfully complete. Another problem is that the park service doesn't consider preparedness. Like the ability to air down, air up, lockers, tow points, tow straps, spare tires, off road tires, tire size, shovels, traction boards, winches, driver experience, whether the vehicle is yours or a rental, whether you are alone or in a group. My personal problem, being a Subaru driver, is getting any useful information from a ranger on road conditions so I can decide if a road ( not trail ) is suitable for my lifted Subaru with all terrain tires. They always just say " 4x4 high clearance" . If asked what is high clearance they don't have an answer. Btw, 8 inches is not enough for canyonlands trails and some require a front winch to get up high steep ledges.
Subaru with ATS damage the trails. They cannot driver the rear without slip, so no modern subaru from the last 10 years should be allowed. You could I guess build an STi or CVT WRX since those have fancy center diffs, but I doubt you see that.
Kinda surprised it wasn't mentioned that 4x4 or 4 wheel drive doesn't mean all 4 are spinning like an AWD vehicle. They HAVE to have lockers. Otherwise its more or less staggered 2wD
Not sure about mountain trails. But on the beaches I’ve driven on? Subaru, Audi, fwd based Explorer and many other FWD based AWD vehicles are the type that get stuck in deep sand, especially when without low range.
Make it simple and avoid all the traffic and problems caused by these type vehicles and side by sides simply require a solid front axle. Few if any are going to take their $100,000 dually out Canyonland trails.
I don't own an AWD but find this needs to be addressed and POSTED on any trail that people can not take AWD on. Many off road roads,trails are easy to do in 2wd , AWD would crush them that are labeled 4wd. It is unfair to just attack them when they are very capable for simple to mild off roading and can be built to take harder stuff. I will add this, many many many "4wd" vehicles have open diffs wich means one front and one rear are the only thing that turns. Last thing, I own a Doge Mega cab with open dif , a Tacoma TRD Off road and a Gladiator Rubicon.
I drive a 2004 Lexus GX470. It technically wouldn't meet the requirements, as it is AWD, but its more capable than most other (stock) 4x4 vehicles. I also live in Utah, and haven't had any issues with Park Rangers. I understand what the Rangers are trying to do here though. I've had to go rescue a stock Subaru Outback that was on a trail that only modified vehicles or SxS should be on, I think gravity helped him get to where he was, and he's lucky he didnt get any farther. I've seen multiple other (mostly Subaru) cars and crossovers out stuck in areas they never should have been. Check out Matt's Offroad Recovery for videos on people that took their cars somewhere they never should have.
If the goal is to save the parks from having to rescue people, then consider that almost all vehicles rescued off the trail in canyonlands, arches, Moab, and sand hollow are Real 4x4 vehicles. I see this as a preamble to closing down all trails. Like they do for hiking trails in the summer time.
I agree with your views. Even your list is not complete and there lies the problem. The list will never be complete because of modifications and the driver. It seems a simpler answer is for the NPS to have a list but also a warning. The warning should state that any vehicle and driver should be capable of completing the trail otherwise there will be a fine of $5000 and the owner is responsible for all recovery costs. That should make some people think twice about tackling a trail with no experience and a great vehicle and a vehicle on street tires, little clearance and not built for off road.
I can see the rules being needed for trils like Elephant Hill. Most of the vehicles you said should be included could not safely do that trail, it has gotten much harder and has a few places where real lockers, AT or MT tires are needed. It is very remote and getting stranded is not good, especially if you are blocking the trail and cause others to become stranded because the vehicle was no capible of navigating the trail and should not have been there. I suggest doing Elephant Hill in a Landcruiser or Rubicon with lockers so you can see why they need some kind of rules for trails like that.
Part of the problem is also that manufacturers have muddied the waters between what is AWD and what is 4WD. From a purely technical perspective, if a vehicle has a center locking chain driven transfer case, then it is 4WD; if the vehicle only has a center differential (regardless of differential type) then it is AWD. 4WD is also (with a few exceptions like the older Land Rover system) meant to be either be completely on or completely off (nowadays it is typically automated by the vehicle computer); AWD is meant to be always on and always delivering power to all 4 wheels while varying the power each wheel receives. Many manufacturers (BMW for example) also refer to their clutch-pack based center power transfer units as a "transfer case" when they are actually a limited slip or locking differential not a chain driven transfer case.
2 variables make even your explanation no 😊 good.. there is no way out now for any of us after thr lunatics took over the asylum...Lol. 1.) fluid driven auto transmission instead of gears/chain ⛓️ oppose the xfer logic. 2.) open diffs, LSD diffs, air lockers, etc. the variables there should cover the variables of AWD . 3.) BONUS.. ADVANCED braking systems..
These rules also bar other vehicles like off road modified Miatas, baja Bugs and the like, which can do easier trails. There is alot to be said about vehicle size, wheelbase, suspension flex and knobby tires. Also having recovery gear too.
The Grand Cherokee Trailhawk may be an independent suspension crossover but it’s in a class of its own. We need to see videos comparing it to the Defender and the new Land Cruiser! The internet has none.
The Jeep Cherokee also has the Active Drive II that has a true low range and higher suspension. It’s no trailhawk but I find it quite capable with my wildpeaks at.
It is also not just about the vehicles capabilities but also the driver. I have taken my 2 wheel drive Ford F150 (short bed version), with 17 inch rimes but off road tires basically 32's on trails that people have told me I couldn't go, that you need a 4x4 for. As long as you know both you induvial capabilities as well as your vehicles you are usually ok....its when people decide to do dumb stuff that the rest of us have to pay.
In New Jersey, they require you have permit. To get the permit, they look over vehicle and recovery equipment (there is a required list) and tell you yes or no.
Yes, the park service needs to update the criteria to include modern day vehicles like the Bronco Sport Badlands that in many ways is more capable than older vehicles that would qualify. A list, as you described would make sense.
There is a reason for this, but unless you have actually wheeled a proper trail rig, you won't begin to understand. Just because you can gimp it up a trail doesn't mean you have the ability to safely clear the trail or be able to self recover or maintain appropriate balance and traction.
The Renegade 4xE Trailhawk is well capable to drive such trails, yet would not even meet that basic criteria. It doesn't even have a mechanical linkage between the front and rear axles whatsoever. The combustion engine drives the front axle and the electric engine drives the rear axle. If out of battery, the engine uses more fuel but drives a generator that still drives the rear. Same might apply to the Cherokee Trailhawk 4xe. Does not apply to the Wrangler 4xe though since that one has the electric engine directly attached to the transfer case, both electric and combustion engine can drive all wheels, either one or the other or simultaneously.
Did I miss why Subaru wasn't listed? I think they also need to define what is "off road". I am not an off road user nor an expert but back in my youth I had a 1978 F250 4x4 with over sized tires. I learned that truck had enough power to get me into trouble real fast. In fact the tires that I had on it would dig themselves in to the mud and sand if I got stuck so I had to be very careful. My 2021 Subaru Ascent AWD has the same ground clearance as my 2008 F150 2x4. Neither has "off road" tires. The Subaru has front and rear towing hooks which my F150 does not. It has Vehicle Dynamic Control and the X-mode systems which per the manual is for slippery, snowy, icy, off-road conditions. I did not seek out an AWD, it was just how Subaru sells them and the towing capability equaled my F150 which is what I needed. I consider that both vehicles can drive in snow up to about 6-8 inches, or off road in sand, dirt, or gravel. I'll take my Subaru over my F150 for icy conditions for more control and the ability to start from a stop. I would not drive either vehicle (even if I had the correct tires) on deep loose sand like a beach nor on a steep, rocky, ungraded, unlevel, hill or road. I have neither the skill, or the money for recovery and repairs, nor the need to do it. I would drive both of them "off road" through a flat wet field or other ungraded relatively flat as in smooth between tire ruts which is not paved. I'd even drive it "off road" on a road up or downhills. If I did that everyday, I would change the tires. So, what defines NPS "off road trails"?
Why not ban hiking because a lot of people go out unprepared and get lost, requiring rescue? If I pay taxes to maintain national park and government lands, I'm using them. Don't let bureaucracies that take your income tell you what you can and cannot do. You lose your freedoms that way.
IMO just follow the rules park services put out. If your vehicle is not 4WD "a sport utility vehicle (SUV) or truck with at least 15-inch tire rims and at least eight inches of clearance from the lowest point of the frame, body, suspension, or differential to the ground. Four wheel drive vehicles have a transfer case between the front and rear axles that locks the front and rear drive shafts together when four wheel drive is engaged." please turn back. There are plenty of off pavement roads not marked as 4WD high clearance. Keep your self, the machine and environment safe. This is a problem where people just can't obey the rules. If you don't have a 4WD vehicle and want to explore a 4wd trail please rent from a jeep rental place and you might even can consider a guide for a better and safer experience.
What about is Ford build a Mustang raptor? Litterly a mustang dunebuggy? Or you take your modded one? assuming the only thing it isn't is a truck or Uility.
This video makes me think of my friend who just got a awd equinox and instantly had the mind set of "I have AWD". I can't wait for that to backfire on him.
Another example: I have a 2021 Ford Ranger FX2 not that I'll do a lot of off-roading just slight camping and trails. But have done a steep incline up a mountain before.
Awd vehicles on this channel constantly fail moderate challenges including subarus. With even a little bit of resistance the system overheats and throws a warning. More than half of the awd vehicles have a hard time on the slip test. Sure there are gray areas but for most awd they cant hang and just cause issues on trails that are slightly difficult
Ive done borderline hilarious offroading feats in my manual crosstrek. Ive had jeep wranglers and 4x4 trucks the only difference to me is the crosstrek has no protection underneath
Sorry guys you missed the other important reason why AWD's are banned. They are the main contributor for ruts and wash board roads given AWD systems send a variable amount of torque to each axle. This all leads to more expensive trail maintenance.
Now my Nissan pathfinder had true four wheel drive until it decided you didn’t needed it then switched it to all wheel drive which drives me crazy. There is a huge difference between the four wheel drive and the awd
As other commenters have said, this is likely a back door method to close trails. That said, successful off-roading is amost always more about driver skill and awareness than vehicle capability.
The BMW X3 & X5 would not qualify but with the right tires are surprisingly capable off pavement. Although I know with its limited ground clearance, I would not attempt true off road trails but the BMW Performance Center demonstrates their abilities daily, including fording 18” of water!
Yup. My 2000 Cr-v is advertised and labeled as RT-4WD but its more like awd BUT! It is technically 4wd it just lacks a low range, it has a transfer case that locks the front and rear together BUT! It has a clutch pack in the rear diff along with a dual pump system that controls when the power is applied, it's pretty capable for what it is but that bronco is leagues more capable.
The criteria makes no sense if you actually you know, moderately drive on more primitive roads. I lived at the foot of the cascades and while I had an 4x4 ExTerra forever and it's still in the family, the number of folks going into the cascades with awd on some pretty garbage forest, logging, National Forest roads, WA DNR roads, etc etc, is super common. They can handle alot. The issue here is people that don't know what they are doing. The same person getting stuck in a rented AWD is the same person getting stuck in a 4x4. But the penalties are insane for the "crime". Honestly, Congress gave WAY to much leeway on the criminal code for bored rangers to bone people with. And some Federal courts will run with in. SO it s duel issue. CAR/DRIVER issue and folks can get nailed to hard with criminal charges. In the end, these NP roads are generally graded and maintained excellent roads. Its so obviously a driver problem and not a vehicle problem. But also an NP admin problem when you read this bulletin. It is not in line with reality. Most of these NP roads are GRADED like every year.
Wife & I just spent the weekend in our new 2024 Subaru Forester Wilderness at Big Bend NP. I installed skid plates (3) and used a departure skid plate on the trailer hitch receiver. I have been driving offroad for 35 years, which I feel makes a huge difference. Only trail we did not take was Black Gap, as I do not feel the Subi is capable enough (drove it previously in a Tacoma TRD Sport 4x4). We had zero issues whatsoever with the Subi on the trails. The best part was a dude in a Jeep Gladiator pulling up to pass us on Old Ore Rd, and asking if we had really just driven the same trail he had came from. The look on his face was priceless. Know YOUR capabilities, as well as your vehicle.
im a subby tech and i love my forester. good job picking up the wilderness.
So, as a former NPS ranger, I think these rules are being misunderstood a bit. If your driving a Bronco sport down a trail they aren't going to stop you and issue a fine. The rules are so that when some idiot takes their Subaru down a trail they shouldn't and gets stuck, they have a specific violation they can cite for the fine. The broad terminology gives a ranger the ability to issue fines as nessesary on a case by case basis, or turn back individuals who clearly have no business being there.
This comment is my favourite & makes the most sense.
Yes, but if an idiot with a Jeep Wrangler with summer tires gets stuck on the trail in winter, is it okay?
@@mg7990good point
What kind of Subaru are we talking about because if we’re talking about like an STI of course it shouldn’t be on that but like a forester wilderness outback wilderness something with X mode and decent specs to go off-road
That's not what happened though. The video starts with an example of a crosstalk driver being warned to drive on the trail and being threatened with fines and jail time. This isn't being used as a tool to enforce consequences, its being used as a tool to keep people off the trail.
It's more about anti driving. They put in restrictions to limit the amount of people who qualify, then eventually shut the trail down citing lack of use/habitat degradation.
Seen this locally.
Yeah, with the gov't one HAS TO read between the lines.
Tin foil comment. It's actually to give Rangers a law they can use to cite people that have no business on that trail.
@NoName-ml5yk I would agree with you if this were a consequence. Something along the lines of if we have to tow you out it's a huge fine. In that way you leave people free to use the public land as they wish and take on the risks. But this is preventative, it's designed to prevent the use of off toad vehicles. And it is not in a vacuum. They just banned orvs from large tracts of Moab. Last year a national refuge banned drive on permits that had been issued to Surfcasters for driving on the Beach. There is a national push to curtail off roading.
@@briandambrosio2064 maybe in 5 year TFL will only be off road testing 140k dollar 4runners and wranglers because those will be the only vehicles allowed on trails.
Just a tip, if you're going to argue with a Park Ranger or ignore their directives, you're going to need a lot of money and a team of good lawyers to get your vehicle back, much less stay out of jail. Anyone who's dealt with Fish Cops knows what I mean. They have broad powers, even outside their jurisdiction.
If it's outside of their jurisdiction don't they by law not have any power at that point? I thought that's how jurisdictions work...
@@LightningTime777 Depends on the type of Parks or Fish & Wildlife ranger. Many areas are handled under federal agencies rather than at the state level, but even at the state level their jurisdiction extends, well, state-wide. Traditional police officers operate more regionally (excluding state troopers).
Oh old fashioned American freedom of speech
yea but thats the thing good lawyers can fight the federal government. just because they have power doesnt mean they're right lol. sadly the common man cant really afford to get into that fight .
@@phgamer4393 They don't need to lawyers can work for free as long as the guy who's wrong pays for it.
I have a awd cross over myself and I sure in hell won’t take it down a road ment for rugged 4wd vehicles lol the off roading do is going down a gravel road in the country to see my friends lol
I’m going to push back on your Hummer recommendation at 11,000 pounds if it does get stuck, there’s not much that can get it unstuck.
That’s not always how things work when getting stuck. Watch Matt’s offroad recovery.
@@myronhensel haha I was gonna say unless you have a yellow banana !
My Hummer does not get stuck. It has a hydraulic winch that can get it out of almost any situation I've put it in.
@@nothingtoseaheardammit I was about to say this. The winch kits for hummers are cheap and bolt up quick.
Are we talking about the EV Hummer or older ICE Hummer?
@TFL the Subaru wilderness edition models do have underbody protection as standard along with a specifically tuned version of the AWD system with dual x-mode. Its not just a lifted Subaru with no other upgrades like you led on. Technically it has a locker but instead of hardware based its software based. So blanket laws just don't cut it when we talk about modern vehicles.
Subaru needs actual recovery points. I was very disappointed when I realized the Wilderness editions just have additional tow points. @TFL Not sure how "stock" skid plates are so important. They are available by Subaru, for those that actually go off road.
The 15 inch rim seems like a throw back to the 80s where basically only trucks had 15 inch rims.
I believe all the criteria are a throwback to the 80s.
A reasonable criteria so that a classic 4x4 can enjoy the trails also.
Park service should build an obstacle at entry....all towing at your expense LMAO
Agreed, ittl scare off those who shouldn't be on the trail.
A true redefinition of "barrier to entry".
This is common on mountain bike trails. If you can't handle the entry feature, stay off the trail.
It's more about driver knowledge & skill. I've been off roading since a kid. And my '17 Outlander Sport has seen many trails in UT, AZ, NM, NV & CA.
Ive pulled friends cars out of sand & ditches. Had people tell me my suv (crossover) was a 4x4, when it's only a FWD. Lol. Like I don't know my own vehicle.
BUT... I knew the limits of my suv. And turned back when I knew it could get stuck on a trail.
I love this argument. That Bronco sport is the grayest of vehicles. Or maybe its the subaru's.. it seems like clearance is the most important thing. But.. What about a lifted Ranger prerunner w/ rear limited slip and 35" tires, 14+ inches of travel, and tons of clearance. It looks great and gets past the guards but it doesnt have working 4wd. There just needs to be a set up entry that is slightly more challenging than the rest of the trail..a gatekeeper.
@@s.gibson9329 There's no question that Bronco Sport Badlands they're in would outperform any Subaru in technical rocky terrain. The drivetrain, chassis, and suspension are built much beefier on the Bronco sport. Not to mention the center-locker and better off-road drive modes on the Ford. Despite what you think Ford builds very reliable vehicles right here in the USA and employs more Americans than any car brand in the world doing it. They just build so many hundreds of thousands more vehicles that of course you're going to see more parts failures based purely on statistics. I've been a Subaru fan a long time and owned a couple Foresters, they offer standard AWD at a price point lower than pretty much everyone which is cool. But at least here in the Northeast they tend to rust and fall apart quicker than most other brands for a number of reasons I won't list due to comment length.
Subaru since they moved to the ATS coupling system they cannot drive the rear without front slip. Pair that with the CVT and you are digging ruts at best, but you are going to have big issues if you cannot run up on everything. You will overheat the CVT too. And old Suabru with the VTD center diff or 4ACT center coupling (with a locking switch) will do great.
@@s.gibson9329 onyx has it too and still overheat off-road.
I wouldn't touch a cvt with 10 ft pole
Good luck teaching common sense to the government.
Sounds like one of the nonsensical regulations we have here in Germany😂
If you want a blanket set of rules just tell people if they get stuck and the park service has to recover you then there's a $500 fine no matter what you're driving. If you're circumventing the trail because you don't think your vehicle will make it or you bypass the by pass then you also have a $500 fine to pay. Why should it matter if one is driving a 4WD or an AWD? If you have to be rescued the cost is the same.
Stop it, you are making too much sense. The government would never enact such simple, logical rules that don't allow them to go on abusive power trips.
I've seen many AWD vehicles stuck at Cape Hatteras National Seashore in the sand at the beaches. They always block entrance and exit ramps making it impassable for others until the tow trucks come or someone with a strap to yank them out. I think it's a good thing to finally fine them.
I think that usually comes down to the drivers incompetence and not the vehicle though.
I guarantee it’s not just was blocking the entrance
@@yaboimax6356 That's certainly a part of it, drive incompetence, but I've seen it too close to the entry point - mostly Chevy Traverse and the like vehicles that the owners thought were capable, but far from it.
@@yaboimax6356 It's both. The vehicles can't make it through the sand. Not like hard pack sand at other beaches. Our sand is soft and vehicles sink.
On the other hand,I have never seen one vehicle in 37 years I live in Nevada got stuck out here .(Not to many people go out in the desert here around Vegas ,that what it always seems to me).
Parks should make a small demo trail at the entrance to see what cars and trucks can be approved. If they don’t pass just tell them to not take certain trails
Or perhaps have a graded system the you have to pass in your vehicle before you can take certain trails. I could support that.
Parks should hire Tommy and Roman to decide what vehicles can enter and use the trails. Tommy at one Park and Roman at another Park.
Oh let’s not forget the rest of the T F L staff like Andre, Nathan and Chance and a few others.
You have to keep instructions simple for the public. I am glad they put out black and white rules to start with. They can be modified in time but it is a good start. It is costing a lot of money to rescue these vehicles from trails they should not be on. TFL is talking to the choir on this as most of us are car folks. The people who are causing the trouble just believe what a salesman tells them and do not do their own fact finding.
The black and white rules don’t follow the spirit of the law. People are gunna get dinged by old Johnny law for no reason.
It's not so much the rule I have a problem with, it's the consequences. Thousands of dollars and 6 months of jail time are a real possibility for a minor infraction. That is tyranny, pure and simple.
I have a Subaru crosstalk wilderness. While you're right on the attachment points I would highly recommend it for off road capabilities...I've had mine in the backroads of Texas, New Mexico, Arizona and Colorado and never had a problem. Even pulled a Rav4 adventure outta sand with it. If I can get my front tires on it then I can get over it.
But an oldish school open diff 4x4 with low range qualifies, even though crossed up it would be stuck and spin one front and back tire…
Yet not old scoll enough to allow cars that can do it regardless of equipment... Like the model a.
It depends on when the rule was first written, the law cited in the letter was last amended in 1986. That makes the 15" rim and rest of the definition makes more sense.
BTW it's all national parks. State parks still vary. Big Bend states "You Will Need A High Clearance Four-Wheel-Drive (4WD) Vehicle
A high clearance 4WD vehicle is defined as a SUV or truck type vehicle, with at least 15 inch tire rims or more, with a low gear transfer case, designed for heavier type use than a standard passenger vehicle, with at least 8 inches of clearance or more from the lowest point of the frame, body, suspension, or differential, to the ground, also including a means to mechanically power both, front and real wheels at the same time"
The crew at TFL are hardcore car enthusiasts. I’m a car nerd myself and they got all the details correct on the non 4WD approved list, right down to which vehicles have twin clutch rear differentials. 👏.
It's twin clutch transmissions / gearboxes they're talking about, they overheat at low speed with wheel spin. There's no such thing as a twin clutch rear differential lol.
@@SkylarRace The Ford Bronco Sport and Chevy GM have GKN twin clutch rear differentials. The Hondas have a Rear drive unit which is technically has 3 clutches. These systems are located on the rear axle.
@@SkylarRacethere is such a thing as twin clutch differentials and Ford has them in several vehicles. In fact those Ford's have three clutches. One operates the PTU and two on the rear differential.
Fantastic video, thank you!!! You said everything that needed to be said in the way it needed to be said. We have a 2023 Pilot Trailsport that we use to tow a 3500 lb travel trailer and for light to moderate roads in state and national parts. The three TFL videos about it helped a lot in making our choice.
This is bupkis. There is more than 1 type of AWD.
For example Subaru's AWD system works like 4WD until 1 or more wheels lose traction, then it redistributes power to the wheels with the most traction. Which makes it safer for off-road driving than 4WD.
There's that 2004-2009 Toyota Prius that was entered in the Gambler 500 and it finished. Prep on the Prius consisted of installing special higher ground clearance Auris suspension parts made for the Russian market, disabling traction control, 29" chunky off road tires on Subaru wheels, sawing off the lower half of the front bumper cover then fitting a heavy aluminum skidplate. There's an article on Jalopnik about it.
Who can forget the original Austin Mini and its long history of success in brutal off-road rally competition?
I think the Park Service is going by a more traditional viewpoint, where a 4x4 is based on a RWD body on frame, and AWD is based on FWD unibody. There are obviously exceptions to every rule, and the most important factor are the drivers and their experience on these types of trails. Self recovery is underestimated by many drivers
Surprised you skipped the Subaru Wilderness vehicles (or maybe not, as I do know you guys had a falling out with Subaru many years ago). One of the most capable soft roaders out there.
They no like because of CVT
@@kylebar724 lots of compact SUVs have CVTs. That's not why it was left out.
Great episode! Put all Buick AWD vehicles on the 'no' list also. I saw one of the small Buick SUVs on a mild trail. It had highway tread tires, trying to make it through a rocky part of the trail. One wheel was broken. Like rim and tire from the spokes.
Most people don’t understand this stuff glad your explaining it but they still won’t get it. Moral of the story do your full research before going on trails. Read the signs. Thank you to fearless leaders and brothers kase and tommy Hopefully this helps others.
Great discussion guys, but with the rapidly changing “off road” vehicle market, it is impossible for a government agency to enforce. I would submit the problem is not the vehicles, but the drivers. Anyone who has been to a National Park recently has seen idiots with little or no off road skills or experience in very capable rigs needing rescue. The Parks have to account for them. Let’s come at this a different way and put the responsibility on the drivers. On all written Park materials, and the website, and at trailhead signs put the following disclaimer. “Any non-paved roads or trails in this park may require vehicles and driver skills that may exceed you or you vehicle’s capabilities. If you travel on off pavement surfaces in this park and require rescue or extraction, YOU WILL BEAR THE ENTIRE COST OF THE OPERATION INCLUDING DAMAGE TO THE TRAIL OR GOVERNMENT EQUIPMENT. Know you and your vehicle’s capabilities and carry emergency supplies and self extraction equipment.”
I used to take a stock 1994 Suzuki Swift on 4x4 trails. I took a 1994 Mitsubishi Eclipse up the same trails. Neither of those cars had any business being there, but they were what I had. I do not claim to be a good off road driver, but I did understand the capability of those two little cars and was able to read the trail and get through.
The #1 reason for this law is because lesser capable vehicles are much more likely to drive around the obstacles. Which means trails get wider and wider with cut offs everywhere. If you have wheeled in California you know what I'm talking about.
Also, most rangers aren't going to ticket you unless you're being real destructive and even then you get a chance to plead your case to a judge.
Subarus are really capable off road, shoot I even drove my lowered wrx in mud up a hill during spring melt. Literall streams forming, cutting the road down, and adding a big dent in the path. If I can make it through wet mud in a lowered wrx, a subaru suv with the wilderness package will be fine.
People making laws about things they have no understanding of? Color me surprised.
I don’t think this is a fair assessment. Until recently the technology allowing advanced traction in all wheel drive vehicles was largely not there. When the policy was made awd systems didn’t have the more advanced traction management systems they have now. They are better now and they could probably update their policy.
In general I feel like it should be the responsibility of the vehicle owner to know the capability of their vehicle, and be responsible for the consequences of their decisions. Because even built 4x4 can have breakdowns/failures and get stuck. Recovery of a 4x4 is gonna be easier than an awd vehicle though.
Welcome to being a gun owner
It's likely CVT Subarus and single clutch Hyundai's getting into trouble and needing emergency services (help I'm stuck with my family and the tow truck can't get me!" that made them create a crappy law like this by lumping all AWD cars into the same category.
@@volvo09 No, if you actually watch recovery videos in various places out west it's usually people renting a variety of AWD's including sedans that because it has AWD they think can go anywhere. Subarus aren't anymore likely to get stuck because they have a CVT than any other similarly capable vehicle with a regular transmission. Any Subaru Wilderness model could do what they did in this video with the Bronco Sport and then some.
@@davep2945that's not saying much. They didn't do anything remotely difficult in this video.
Speaking of the White Rim Trail, there was a guy wh did tours over a large chunk of that trail in an old VW Bus, it handled everything just fine. Someone needs to take an old Willys CJ2/3/5 that only has 7 inches of clearance out there, it is way more capable than it needs to be yet smaller so it doesnt need that much clearance.
Most trails in Canyonlands are much rougher that the White Rim Trail.
The PTU is technically a transfer case. This is more about the driver and not the vehicle.
They specify it must be a transfer case with 4X4 Low speed gear reduction.
Had a Subaru and had low gear worked great in the mountain trail in Colombia South America
By low gear they mean a 4X4 transfer case with 4X4 Low which no Subaru has ever had.
Mostly true. In the US, '80s most 4x4 Subarus had transfer cases with separate low range gearing. There are more recent global models that also shipped with a dual range transmission (sans transfer case), but those were never sold in North America, unfortunately. Some people source them from their originally Japanese and Australian vehicles through companies like ADS to swap into US market cars, though.
Wow. The high quality / fact filled / tight editing that went into your story today! Setting a brand new standard with this one. Watched every minute, my jaw on the floor, all-the-while learning so much that never even fully crossed my mind before. Ground Breaking, Career Defining. Stellar!
Yes here in hawaii you have to have 4x4 low to go up to mauna kea it keeps the engine at a higher rpm while going down the huge mountain for more control breaking. My 2016 jeep Cherokee has a proper 4x4 low.
I'm seeing a lot of really sound comments on this video, countering TFL's argument here. I like how someone pointed that AWD cars can tear up trails more, because people will drive around obstacles in those. That in turn widens trails, and damages the environment that trails are designed, and intended to protect. The whole point of trails is to preserve the natural landscapes around it. You even have former NPS rangers saying TFL is misunderstanding the rules a bit.
Do you think that Bronco Sport is going to tear up the trail more than a 5500 pound f-150 with open diffs? I guarantee it won't. The rule is antiquated and the possibility of 6 months in jail for a minor infraction is downright tyrannical and any ranger who doesn't understand that should probably not be a ranger to begin with.
NPS can suck it
TFL should write an open letter to the NPS. They would probably hire you guys to do all this, you’d be surprised.
I hate the marketing used for AWD vs 4x4 sometimes. The transfer case used in the base model 4x4 Jeep Grand Cherokee is marketed as full-time 4x4 without low range, but the same transfer case in the Durango is marketed as AWD.
This! The marketing terminology is really annoying. Since there is no industry standard for 4x4 or AWD. I drive a jeep Cherokee trail hawk that is supposedly trail rated with a rear locker and decent tires. It is now banned from trails because it doesn't fit their technical definition of requiring a transfer case with low range despite first gear being on par with "low range" gear sets in transfer cases.
If you take a ‘Corvette’ on an off road trail, then the owner should pay 100% of the recovery costs. And this just needs to be stated at the start of the trail. “You get stuck, you pay for removal.”
I secretly hope the Subaru snub never ends for you guys. I don’t know why but I find it hilarious when you point it out.
4WD doesn't mean it's safe. A Jeep Rubicon slide out of road and hit a rock in Shafer Canyon Road while my AWD car is ok, it was raining. If the national park really want to limit it, they should also measure tire trend and pattern as well.
Sounds like the parks need a more granular system to identifying how hard the trail is similar to how OnX rates trail's. Heck even say a 3 level scale would be helpful: Level 1 = Any AWD vechile, 2 = AWD "trail Trim" with trail rated tires OR traditional 4x4 low range with trail rated tires, Level 3 = Lockable 4WD with transfer case and lockable rear diff.
Our 2004 Rav4 AWD does have a transfer case, limited slip rear diff and has great ground clearance. The Approach angle and Departure angle were amazing. The only thing it lacks was underbody protection and front locker. ..
I'd probably still get a warning letter 😂
If the newer Volvo XC90 is half as good as the stock first gen. I had, it needs to be on this list. It ran circles around my buddies Tacoma TRD Pro in the mud.
Tires have alot to do with off road capabilities as well.
Something I'd like to point out for anybody. If you dont know where your intake is, don't cross derp streams. Ive told this to somone in a subaru at one point. Whether they crossed or not was on them. Ive seen a Jeep Cherokee that had a low intake suck in water. Know your rig if you're going to use it
I work for the USFS and was given the choice between a Bronco Sport and a Crosstrek Sport for my work vehicle. I leaped at Crosstrek. The Bronco Sport is just a rugged-looking Escape, which is what I just got rid of.
Your Dad's beef with Subaru really hurts videos like this one. The letter was about a Crosstrek, Subaru's are the quintessential soft-roader, and only just a mention of them at the end. Good vid otherwise, thx boys.
I'm surprized the wilderness models were not mentioned. They have over 9 inches ground clearance, skid plates and lower gearing, although not a transfer case. And I think you guys have managed to test a few subarus.
My Outback Wilderness has an added full suspension lift kit, BFG’s, and heavy duty skid plates front to back. It’ll offroad better than many of the vehicles mentioned.
That was a surprisingly good piece on this issue. Much better than another TFL video I just watched.
The NPS criteria are too rigid.
My personal experience at Big Bend NP was I had my Jeep Gladiator and I was stuck behind a Camry and a Tahoe who were both driving 3mph because of the rough roads. I was able to finally get past them and continue my journey but I just felt like you shouldn’t take a vehicle out to these types of roads/trails if you’re afraid of damage or a rough ride.
I have a 2016 LR4 without the HD package. That means that I have a Torsen center diff instead of a locking center diff. No low range, no rear locker, and no "Rock Crawl Mode". What it does have is 10+ inches of ground clearance in offroad mode, a top notch AWD system, and dedicated attachment points for rescue. Based on your list and the official rules, this car isn't allowed.
From my prior experience... I had the older v6 powered, awd Terrain in college. I totally trusted it in snowy/ icy weather, especially when the plow trucks couldnt quite keep up. But I would have never taken it on an "off road" or "4x4" only designated trail.
It’s to keep idiots from getting in trouble when they think their AWD means they can go off roading. There a recent video I watched of a guy from Oregon or Washington going to Colorado and getting his AWD Chevy Traverse stuck way off highway and having to be rescued. The trail he was trying to go down was something lifted vehicles were built for. Meanwhile, he was blocking the trail for everyone else. You can see it under Justin King. It’s ridiculous what this guy was trying to do with his Traverse, all because it was an AWD.
My old stock XJ cherokee doesn't meet that criteria. It only has 7.3 from the differential.
My 2022 Kia Sportage has a locking center diff.
Worth pointing out that rangers have explicitly allowed bronco sports on elephant hill. It's an individual call when you get the permit, but several folks have done it with no issues.
Even Jeep’s Trailhawk designation is not the same for every vehicle. The Cherokee and Grand Cherokee have legitimate off-road features like a true low gear, lockers, skid plates, etc. The GC even has adjustable suspension. The Renegade, on the other hand, is OK on moderate trails, but you wouldn’t want to go mud bogging with it.
This was a well researched and well done video. You dive into the trims and sub-trims and tell you which ones are mostly appearance and which ones actually have better hardware.
This must have taken a lot of time! Thanks!
As an owner of a bronco sport and a Land Cruiser who has done the white rim many times, there is only one spot I wouldn’t want my bronco sport: Hard Scrabble Hill. Definitely want a low range and more sidewall for the crux of that section.
What they forget is that AWD vehicles, like the Land Rover Discovery 2, uses their traction control and stability control to maintain power for off roading, and they work better because its instantaneous and has been tested already
The law is supposed to protect the parks, not the vehicles right? An unexperienced driver with a 4 ton electric hummer can create a disaster of a recovery operation. In general when capable 4x4 get into trouble its almost always more serious than when a non capable car gets stuck. This law really makes no sense. Would be good if you could get someone from the park service explain the rationale behind this law, and why they came up with these set of rules
Anyways I suspect the reason this pops up is because of unexperienced drivers/tourists with little or no knowledge of what their car is capable of and where not to drive
Yep. People who have done no research about off roading or their vehicles capabilities tend to ruin it because of marketing.
Arches and canyonlands have trails that are extreme and ones that are not extreme. The trail the Subaru did that caused the letter is not extreme. Proof? He made it! Other trails would be impossible. One problem is that the park people group all 4x4 trails together. Another problem is normal dirt roads that used to be passable in sedans are not being maintained at all and are now becoming jeep trails. some extreme trails require modifications to even a top line Rubicon to successfully complete. Another problem is that the park service doesn't consider preparedness. Like the ability to air down, air up, lockers, tow points, tow straps, spare tires, off road tires, tire size, shovels, traction boards, winches, driver experience, whether the vehicle is yours or a rental, whether you are alone or in a group. My personal problem, being a Subaru driver, is getting any useful information from a ranger on road conditions so I can decide if a road ( not trail ) is suitable for my lifted Subaru with all terrain tires. They always just say " 4x4 high clearance" . If asked what is high clearance they don't have an answer. Btw, 8 inches is not enough for canyonlands trails and some require a front winch to get up high steep ledges.
Subaru with ATS damage the trails. They cannot driver the rear without slip, so no modern subaru from the last 10 years should be allowed. You could I guess build an STi or CVT WRX since those have fancy center diffs, but I doubt you see that.
Neither does a jeep or 4x4 pickup unless it has lockers.
Kinda surprised it wasn't mentioned that 4x4 or 4 wheel drive doesn't mean all 4 are spinning like an AWD vehicle. They HAVE to have lockers. Otherwise its more or less staggered 2wD
Not sure about mountain trails. But on the beaches I’ve driven on? Subaru, Audi, fwd based Explorer and many other FWD based AWD vehicles are the type that get stuck in deep sand, especially when without low range.
Make it simple and avoid all the traffic and problems caused by these type vehicles and side by sides simply require a solid front axle. Few if any are going to take their $100,000 dually out Canyonland trails.
I don't own an AWD but find this needs to be addressed and POSTED on any trail that people can not take AWD on. Many off road roads,trails are easy to do in 2wd , AWD would crush them that are labeled 4wd. It is unfair to just attack them when they are very capable for simple to mild off roading and can be built to take harder stuff. I will add this, many many many "4wd" vehicles have open diffs wich means one front and one rear are the only thing that turns. Last thing, I own a Doge Mega cab with open dif , a Tacoma TRD Off road and a Gladiator Rubicon.
I drive a 2004 Lexus GX470. It technically wouldn't meet the requirements, as it is AWD, but its more capable than most other (stock) 4x4 vehicles. I also live in Utah, and haven't had any issues with Park Rangers. I understand what the Rangers are trying to do here though. I've had to go rescue a stock Subaru Outback that was on a trail that only modified vehicles or SxS should be on, I think gravity helped him get to where he was, and he's lucky he didnt get any farther. I've seen multiple other (mostly Subaru) cars and crossovers out stuck in areas they never should have been. Check out Matt's Offroad Recovery for videos on people that took their cars somewhere they never should have.
If the goal is to save the parks from having to rescue people, then consider that almost all vehicles rescued off the trail in canyonlands, arches, Moab, and sand hollow are Real 4x4 vehicles. I see this as a preamble to closing down all trails. Like they do for hiking trails in the summer time.
I agree with your views. Even your list is not complete and there lies the problem. The list will never be complete because of modifications and the driver. It seems a simpler answer is for the NPS to have a list but also a warning. The warning should state that any vehicle and driver should be capable of completing the trail otherwise there will be a fine of $5000 and the owner is responsible for all recovery costs. That should make some people think twice about tackling a trail with no experience and a great vehicle and a vehicle on street tires, little clearance and not built for off road.
I can see the rules being needed for trils like Elephant Hill. Most of the vehicles you said should be included could not safely do that trail, it has gotten much harder and has a few places where real lockers, AT or MT tires are needed. It is very remote and getting stranded is not good, especially if you are blocking the trail and cause others to become stranded because the vehicle was no capible of navigating the trail and should not have been there. I suggest doing Elephant Hill in a Landcruiser or Rubicon with lockers so you can see why they need some kind of rules for trails like that.
Part of the problem is also that manufacturers have muddied the waters between what is AWD and what is 4WD. From a purely technical perspective, if a vehicle has a center locking chain driven transfer case, then it is 4WD; if the vehicle only has a center differential (regardless of differential type) then it is AWD. 4WD is also (with a few exceptions like the older Land Rover system) meant to be either be completely on or completely off (nowadays it is typically automated by the vehicle computer); AWD is meant to be always on and always delivering power to all 4 wheels while varying the power each wheel receives. Many manufacturers (BMW for example) also refer to their clutch-pack based center power transfer units as a "transfer case" when they are actually a limited slip or locking differential not a chain driven transfer case.
2 variables make even your explanation no 😊 good.. there is no way out now for any of us after thr lunatics took over the asylum...Lol.
1.) fluid driven auto transmission instead of gears/chain ⛓️ oppose the xfer logic.
2.) open diffs, LSD diffs, air lockers, etc. the variables there should cover the variables of AWD .
3.) BONUS.. ADVANCED braking systems..
These rules also bar other vehicles like off road modified Miatas, baja Bugs and the like, which can do easier trails. There is alot to be said about vehicle size, wheelbase, suspension flex and knobby tires. Also having recovery gear too.
The Grand Cherokee Trailhawk may be an independent suspension crossover but it’s in a class of its own. We need to see videos comparing it to the Defender and the new Land Cruiser! The internet has none.
The Jeep Cherokee also has the Active Drive II that has a true low range and higher suspension. It’s no trailhawk but I find it quite capable with my wildpeaks at.
Great video, TFL will have a long future with these young men
It is also not just about the vehicles capabilities but also the driver. I have taken my 2 wheel drive Ford F150 (short bed version), with 17 inch rimes but off road tires basically 32's on trails that people have told me I couldn't go, that you need a 4x4 for. As long as you know both you induvial capabilities as well as your vehicles you are usually ok....its when people decide to do dumb stuff that the rest of us have to pay.
In New Jersey, they require you have permit. To get the permit, they look over vehicle and recovery equipment (there is a required list) and tell you yes or no.
My Jeep Renegade Trailhawk has done great with trails. I don’t do more than I’m skilled with. I don’t “extreme” trails.
Many years ago I met a guy that completed the White Rim a stock 2nd gen CRV.
Yes, the park service needs to update the criteria to include modern day vehicles like the Bronco Sport Badlands that in many ways is more capable than older vehicles that would qualify. A list, as you described would make sense.
There is a reason for this, but unless you have actually wheeled a proper trail rig, you won't begin to understand. Just because you can gimp it up a trail doesn't mean you have the ability to safely clear the trail or be able to self recover or maintain appropriate balance and traction.
The Renegade 4xE Trailhawk is well capable to drive such trails, yet would not even meet that basic criteria. It doesn't even have a mechanical linkage between the front and rear axles whatsoever. The combustion engine drives the front axle and the electric engine drives the rear axle. If out of battery, the engine uses more fuel but drives a generator that still drives the rear.
Same might apply to the Cherokee Trailhawk 4xe.
Does not apply to the Wrangler 4xe though since that one has the electric engine directly attached to the transfer case, both electric and combustion engine can drive all wheels, either one or the other or simultaneously.
Did I miss why Subaru wasn't listed?
I think they also need to define what is "off road". I am not an off road user nor an expert but back in my youth I had a 1978 F250 4x4 with over sized tires. I learned that truck had enough power to get me into trouble real fast. In fact the tires that I had on it would dig themselves in to the mud and sand if I got stuck so I had to be very careful.
My 2021 Subaru Ascent AWD has the same ground clearance as my 2008 F150 2x4. Neither has "off road" tires. The Subaru has front and rear towing hooks which my F150 does not. It has Vehicle Dynamic Control and the X-mode systems which per the manual is for slippery, snowy, icy, off-road conditions. I did not seek out an AWD, it was just how Subaru sells them and the towing capability equaled my F150 which is what I needed.
I consider that both vehicles can drive in snow up to about 6-8 inches, or off road in sand, dirt, or gravel. I'll take my Subaru over my F150 for icy conditions for more control and the ability to start from a stop.
I would not drive either vehicle (even if I had the correct tires) on deep loose sand like a beach nor on a steep, rocky, ungraded, unlevel, hill or road. I have neither the skill, or the money for recovery and repairs, nor the need to do it.
I would drive both of them "off road" through a flat wet field or other ungraded relatively flat as in smooth between tire ruts which is not paved. I'd even drive it "off road" on a road up or downhills. If I did that everyday, I would change the tires.
So, what defines NPS "off road trails"?
Why not ban hiking because a lot of people go out unprepared and get lost, requiring rescue?
If I pay taxes to maintain national park and government lands, I'm using them. Don't let bureaucracies that take your income tell you what you can and cannot do. You lose your freedoms that way.
I imagine a helicopter search and rescue costs more than a vehicle recovery that can be found much easier.
IMO just follow the rules park services put out. If your vehicle is not 4WD "a sport utility vehicle (SUV) or truck with at least 15-inch tire rims and at least eight inches of clearance from the lowest point of the frame, body, suspension, or differential to the ground. Four wheel drive vehicles have a transfer case between the front and rear axles that locks the front and rear drive shafts together when four wheel drive is engaged." please turn back. There are plenty of off pavement roads not marked as 4WD high clearance. Keep your self, the machine and environment safe. This is a problem where people just can't obey the rules. If you don't have a 4WD vehicle and want to explore a 4wd trail please rent from a jeep rental place and you might even can consider a guide for a better and safer experience.
What about is Ford build a Mustang raptor? Litterly a mustang dunebuggy? Or you take your modded one? assuming the only thing it isn't is a truck or Uility.
This video makes me think of my friend who just got a awd equinox and instantly had the mind set of "I have AWD". I can't wait for that to backfire on him.
He does have awd.
@@jeremetriusoclaire6949 The point is thinking just because he has AWD he can make it through whatever situation.
You should publish the list on your website and adjust it as needed. And do both cars, SUV and trucks.
Another example: I have a 2021 Ford Ranger FX2 not that I'll do a lot of off-roading just slight camping and trails. But have done a steep incline up a mountain before.
I have a Jeep Wagoneer series 3 and it’s a awd. My Wagoneer is very capable attacking most of the trails or Jeep trails rated.
Awd vehicles on this channel constantly fail moderate challenges including subarus. With even a little bit of resistance the system overheats and throws a warning. More than half of the awd vehicles have a hard time on the slip test. Sure there are gray areas but for most awd they cant hang and just cause issues on trails that are slightly difficult
So what if they get stuck, just trade it in thru Caravana with pickup at the stuck grid coordinates 😂.
Ive done borderline hilarious offroading feats in my manual crosstrek. Ive had jeep wranglers and 4x4 trucks the only difference to me is the crosstrek has no protection underneath
Sorry guys you missed the other important reason why AWD's are banned. They are the main contributor for ruts and wash board roads given AWD systems send a variable amount of torque to each axle. This all leads to more expensive trail maintenance.
Now my Nissan pathfinder had true four wheel drive until it decided you didn’t needed it then switched it to all wheel drive which drives me crazy. There is a huge difference between the four wheel drive and the awd
As other commenters have said, this is likely a back door method to close trails.
That said, successful off-roading is amost always more about driver skill and awareness than vehicle capability.
The BMW X3 & X5 would not qualify but with the right tires are surprisingly capable off pavement. Although I know with its limited ground clearance, I would not attempt true off road trails but the BMW Performance Center demonstrates their abilities daily, including fording 18” of water!
A truck frame type 4wd suvs, pickup trucks and vans made us easy through difficulties.
Yup. My 2000 Cr-v is advertised and labeled as RT-4WD but its more like awd BUT! It is technically 4wd it just lacks a low range, it has a transfer case that locks the front and rear together BUT! It has a clutch pack in the rear diff along with a dual pump system that controls when the power is applied, it's pretty capable for what it is but that bronco is leagues more capable.
The criteria makes no sense if you actually you know, moderately drive on more primitive roads. I lived at the foot of the cascades and while I had an 4x4 ExTerra forever and it's still in the family, the number of folks going into the cascades with awd on some pretty garbage forest, logging, National Forest roads, WA DNR roads, etc etc, is super common. They can handle alot. The issue here is people that don't know what they are doing. The same person getting stuck in a rented AWD is the same person getting stuck in a 4x4. But the penalties are insane for the "crime". Honestly, Congress gave WAY to much leeway on the criminal code for bored rangers to bone people with. And some Federal courts will run with in. SO it s duel issue. CAR/DRIVER issue and folks can get nailed to hard with criminal charges.
In the end, these NP roads are generally graded and maintained excellent roads. Its so obviously a driver problem and not a vehicle problem. But also an NP admin problem when you read this bulletin. It is not in line with reality. Most of these NP roads are GRADED like every year.