Gary's "Nothing Special" Moab trip

[BigBrother-84]

So, how does Seven Mile compare to Shafer & Potash?

Bob will certainly answer more accurately than I could, since he knows much better than me this wonderful region.

Seven Mile is an overland trail. I understand it’s following kind of “ridge”, allowing these gorgeous 270°-360° views to a distant horizon.

Shafer is a steep slope, the more you go down, the more the horizon gets close to you. You’re going down the canyons, following this hairpin gravel road, which is smooth and absolutely not rough.

In my case it was double breathtaking, about the superb views and driving BIG-Bro in these famous curves.

Potash is down the canyons (but not completely at the Colorado level), the views are completely different. Looking down to the river and up to the canyon ridges.

You follow the Colorado on a rough trail, but compared to Seven Mile, it’s not really overland. Lot of nice spots to stop and enjoy the views.

It’s a nice “bumpy” gravel road, take it easy and observe the spectacular landscapes.

Note that the more you’re getting out the valley, the landscape becomes less impressive. But maybe it’s just “less” impressive than what you’ve just experienced?

 

[Nothing Special]

So, how does Seven Mile compare to Shafer & Potash?

Bob will certainly answer more accurately than I could, since he knows much better than me this wonderful region.

Seven Mile is an overland trail. I understand it’s following kind of “ridge”, allowing these gorgeous 270°-360° views to a distant horizon.

Shafer is a steep slope, the more you go down, the more the horizon gets close to you. You’re going down the canyons, following this hairpin gravel road, which is smooth and absolutely not rough.

In my case it was double breathtaking, about the superb views and driving BIG-Bro in these famous curves.

Potash is down the canyons (but not completely at the Colorado level), the views are completely different. Looking down to the river and up to the canyon ridges.

You follow the Colorado on a rough trail, but compared to Seven Mile, it’s not really overland. Lot of nice spots to stop and enjoy the views.

It’s a nice “bumpy” gravel road, take it easy and observe the spectacular landscapes.

Note that the more you’re getting out the valley, the landscape becomes less impressive. But maybe it’s just “less” impressive than what you’ve just experienced?

Speaking to Jeff's comments...

His breakdown of the scenery (and trail) differences is pretty spot-on. Both trails have pretty great scenery, but in different ways, so it's hard to rate them against each other. If I were to do that I think I'd give Potash/Shafer the nod. Most of the time on Sevenmile you aren't very close to the rim (good for the fear factor, less good for the scenery factor), so the views off Shafer are probably better. Plus Shafer overlooks less developed area. Not that anything out there is heavily developed, but I'd rather see a river at the bottom of a canyon than highway 191.

(This brings up a thought I've had if you're driving up Shafer to get to the park. Don't forget to turn around and look behind you! Not that all of the view will be in your mirror, it'll mostly be out the side windows whether you're going up or down. But there can be a tendency to focus ahead, and the best views will be back. So maybe stop at the switchbacks and take the time to smell the roses.)

Other than the vistas from Sevenmile Rim or from Shafer, Sevenmile has views on top of a mesa while Potash has views from near the bottom of a canyon. Again, both are great, but I tend to think cliffs are prettier from below, and being near a river in a desert is pretty cool too.

To Jeff's comment about the views on Potash getting less impressive as you go, that's true if you go down, the way he and I did. But if you're going up the views will get better as you go! That's one reason I think going up to get into Canyonlands would be a better choice than going down to get out. The other is that you're driving the long, rough slog before you're tired out at the end of the day. then when you are tired it's a pretty pleasant drive down highway 313 to get back to town.

[Gary Lewis]

Speaking to Jeff's comments...

His breakdown of the scenery (and trail) differences is pretty spot-on. Both trails have pretty great scenery, but in different ways, so it's hard to rate them against each other. If I were to do that I think I'd give Potash/Shafer the nod. Most of the time on Sevenmile you aren't very close to the rim (good for the fear factor, less good for the scenery factor), so the views off Shafer are probably better. Plus Shafer overlooks less developed area. Not that anything out there is heavily developed, but I'd rather see a river at the bottom of a canyon than highway 191.

(This brings up a thought I've had if you're driving up Shafer to get to the park. Don't forget to turn around and look behind you! Not that all of the view will be in your mirror, it'll mostly be out the side windows whether you're going up or down. But there can be a tendency to focus ahead, and the best views will be back. So maybe stop at the switchbacks and take the time to smell the roses.)

Other than the vistas from Sevenmile Rim or from Shafer, Sevenmile has views on top of a mesa while Potash has views from near the bottom of a canyon. Again, both are great, but I tend to think cliffs are prettier from below, and being near a river in a desert is pretty cool too.

To Jeff's comment about the views on Potash getting less impressive as you go, that's true if you go down, the way he and I did. But if you're going up the views will get better as you go! That's one reason I think going up to get into Canyonlands would be a better choice than going down to get out. The other is that you're driving the long, rough slog before you're tired out at the end of the day. then when you are tired it's a pretty pleasant drive down highway 313 to get back to town.

I hadn't found Potash/Shafer in the book, but see it now. Thanks.

And it is interesting what y'all are saying about the views. Especially the part about them getting better as you go up.

But I'm a bit confused about the directions. Bob, I think you are saying to do as the book says, meaning go up 191 to 279, and onto Potash Road by the plant - first. That shows to be at about 4200', and then you climb to 5900' when you join the Island In The Sky road. And then turn left to go into the rest of the park that way.

Is that what you mean?

[Nothing Special]

I hadn't found Potash/Shafer in the book, but see it now. Thanks.

And it is interesting what y'all are saying about the views. Especially the part about them getting better as you go up.

But I'm a bit confused about the directions. Bob, I think you are saying to do as the book says, meaning go up 191 to 279, and onto Potash Road by the plant - first. That shows to be at about 4200', and then you climb to 5900' when you join the Island In The Sky road. And then turn left to go into the rest of the park that way.

Is that what you mean?

Yes.

As far as the "up" or "down", I suppose that since you are following the river in the direction it's flowing (as you drive west toward Canyonlands) you would say that you're driving down-river as you go that way. But as Jeff said, most of that road is looking down on the river, but at the end of the pavement (the start of Potash Road) you are at a boat landing, so you are going up in elevation a bit as you drive down-river.

But honestly, once you've driven the road you'll definitely call one direction "up" and the other "down" based on the Shafer Switchbacks portion of the road!

[Gary Lewis]

Yes.

As far as the "up" or "down", I suppose that since you are following the river in the direction it's flowing (as you drive west toward Canyonlands) you would say that you're driving down-river as you go that way. But as Jeff said, most of that road is looking down on the river, but at the end of the pavement (the start of Potash Road) you are at a boat landing, so you are going up in elevation a bit as you drive down-river.

But honestly, once you've driven the road you'll definitely call one direction "up" and the other "down" based on the Shafer Switchbacks portion of the road!

Ok, I think I understand. Going west we'll be going up the switchbacks? Sounds easier but, as you said, we'll want to get out and look 'cause the view will be behind us. Right?

[Nothing Special]

Ok, I think I understand. Going west we'll be going up the switchbacks? Sounds easier but, as you said, we'll want to get out and look 'cause the view will be behind us. Right?

The simple answer is "right".

If you head out of Moab west on 279 you'll get to the start of Potash Road (this happens at the end of the pavement, near a boat landing). Keep heading more-or-less west on Potash Road and you'll get to the bottom of the Shafer Switchbacks road. Head up the switchbacks and at the top is the main road through Canyonlands National Park.

Take a left on that road to get to the visitor center and to head toward most of the tourist spots in this part of the park.

Is that easier than going the other way? Probably not. But it might be nicer because this puts you on the rough Potash Road in the morning while you're still fresh, and then lets you head back to town at the end of the day on the highway.

If you have the ability to enter GPS coordinates into your nav device (aka phone) it might be a good idea to enter at least waypoint 04 from the guidebook. I THINK that intersection will be relatively obvious, but knowing exactly where it is might add some peace of mind as you are meandering along wondering if you missed your turn. Including points 01, 02 and 03 might also help you see where you are as you go.

[Gary Lewis]

The simple answer is "right".

If you head out of Moab west on 279 you'll get to the start of Potash Road (this happens at the end of the pavement, near a boat landing). Keep heading more-or-less west on Potash Road and you'll get to the bottom of the Shafer Switchbacks road. Head up the switchbacks and at the top is the main road through Canyonlands National Park.

Take a left on that road to get to the visitor center and to head toward most of the tourist spots in this part of the park.

Is that easier than going the other way? Probably not. But it might be nicer because this puts you on the rough Potash Road in the morning while you're still fresh, and then lets you head back to town at the end of the day on the highway.

If you have the ability to enter GPS coordinates into your nav device (aka phone) it might be a good idea to enter at least waypoint 04 from the guidebook. I THINK that intersection will be relatively obvious, but knowing exactly where it is might add some peace of mind as you are meandering along wondering if you missed your turn. Including points 01, 02 and 03 might also help you see where you are as you go.

Bob - I'll be using, or hope to be, my Garmin Montana 750. It'll let me put in GPS coords, but I have not checked to see that it has Potash Road and Shafer Loops.

As for which order to go in, my first thought was to do the park and then come out via Shafer/Potash. But as you've pointed out that might not be the best so I'm liking the other way 'round.

[BigBrother-84]

Which brings up the question of how many recovery points I ought to have. I'd planned to use that in both the rear and the front. Do I need more? The front is via the front hitch which uses the same four G8 bolts that hold the winch on, but they aren't that big.

https://forum.garysgaragemahal.com/file/n146546/Pintle_Hook.jpg

Guys, be VERY CAREFUL if using the hitch as a recovery point.

Remember this tragic accident .

« The father of three died instantly according to his wife, with his three children behind him in the back seats, unfortunately bearing witness to the whole ordeal.»

Being aware of that danger, I suppose that, if I was to use such towing way, I would attach a supplemental “cable to frame” link, so if the hitch breaks, the cable will not spring all the way back and will stay attached to the vehicle.

And why not install such “safety link” at each end of the towing cable?

Also, I know that a chain is heavy to carry, but it’s not like an “elastic” stretching cable. When it breaks, it simply drops, no?

 

[Gary Lewis]

Which brings up the question of how many recovery points I ought to have. I'd planned to use that in both the rear and the front. Do I need more? The front is via the front hitch which uses the same four G8 bolts that hold the winch on, but they aren't that big.

https://forum.garysgaragemahal.com/file/n146546/Pintle_Hook.jpg

Guys, be VERY CAREFUL if using the hitch as a recovery point.

Remember this tragic accident .

« The father of three died instantly according to his wife, with his three children behind him in the back seats, unfortunately bearing witness to the whole ordeal.»

Being aware of that danger, I suppose that, if I was to use such towing way, I would attach a supplemental “cable to frame” link, so if the hitch breaks, the cable will not spring all the way back and will stay attached to the vehicle.

And why not install such “safety link” at each end of the towing cable?

Also, I know that a chain is heavy to carry, but it’s not like an “elastic” stretching cable. When it breaks, it simply drops, no?

Jeff - Good point. But the part in my picture has a solid cross section, not hollow like the one in that tragic incident. So it isn't going to fail. In fact, that's what was meant by the author of that article when he said "If you’re ever going to be pulling on or from a trailer hitch on a 4x4, you need to ensure that you have the proper insert, specifically one that can be used with recovery shackles."

However, you are right that something might fail. So we will have to be very very careful. And a chain from the vehicle to the end of the winch cable or recovery strap would be a good idea as it would stop things from flying back at the other truck.

Thanks!

[Nothing Special]

Which brings up the question of how many recovery points I ought to have. I'd planned to use that in both the rear and the front. Do I need more? The front is via the front hitch which uses the same four G8 bolts that hold the winch on, but they aren't that big.

https://forum.garysgaragemahal.com/file/n146546/Pintle_Hook.jpg

Guys, be VERY CAREFUL if using the hitch as a recovery point.

Remember this tragic accident .

« The father of three died instantly according to his wife, with his three children behind him in the back seats, unfortunately bearing witness to the whole ordeal.»

Being aware of that danger, I suppose that, if I was to use such towing way, I would attach a supplemental “cable to frame” link, so if the hitch breaks, the cable will not spring all the way back and will stay attached to the vehicle.

And why not install such “safety link” at each end of the towing cable?

Also, I know that a chain is heavy to carry, but it’s not like an “elastic” stretching cable. When it breaks, it simply drops, no?

(posted before I saw Gary's response above)

It wasn't the hitch itself in that accident that failed. It was the drawbar. They were using a drawbar with a lot of drop, so it put a lot of bending stress on it. The recovery point Gary shows is designed to be a recovery point. Among other design considerations it is completely straight, no drop, so the pulling force is strictly in tension, no bending. That is considered one of the best ways to hook to a vehicle for a recovery.

As far as attaching a secondary "safety strap", I've never heard of anyone doing it. I don't know that it would be a bad idea, but given that it's never recommended I don't think I'd recommend it either.

.... Also, I know that a chain is heavy to carry, but it’s not like an “elastic” stretching cable. When it breaks, it simply drops, no?

NO, it does NOT simply drop! I don't know if a chain is "better" or worse than a wire rope as far as how much it will sling-shot, but "better" is a very relative term there because both are terrible! (And people strongly recommend against using chains in recoveries while wire ropes are still widely used, so I would guess that chains are worse). Steel stores a lot of energy in elastic deformation (aka "stretching"). It's pretty stiff, so it doesn't stretch a lot, but it does stretch, and if something breaks it will shoot itself at and through anything in its path. Because along with storing a lot of energy in the stretch, it's also heavy, so once it starts moving it doesn't want to stop, so it will shoot a long way and hit VERY hard!

The safest recovery rope / chain / strap (or whatever) for static pulls is ultra high molecular weight polyethylene (or UHMWPE). Dyneema is one of the most well-known brands, and it's typically called that or just synthetic rope. It doesn't store energy as well as steel when it's in tension, and it's much lighter, so it slows down quickly when it does shoot. As a result it comes the closest to just dropping when something breaks.

That's all talking about static pulls. If you are going to take a run at something to try to pop it free that takes a different kind of rope or strap. But I'm not going to go into that now.