Tarmac surfaces on former railway lines

[Rittmeister]

Does anyone have a comprehensive list of former railway lines that have a tarmac surface rather than the gravel or crushed limestone covering?

[thirdcrank]

I've no idea who might have such a list and I'd be surprised to find there was one.

If you decide to create a definitive record, I'll start you off with the Kirklees Greenway (Ravensthorpe - East Bradford) which has a tarmac surface.

[mjr]

With sufficient resources, it may be possible to compile a list from the www.cyclestreets.net/photomap/ and the underlying Open Street Map data which includes most former lines. More examples which may help to compile a list: King's Lynn-Hunstanton is tarmac as far as South Wootton Edward Benefer Way (for now - part of it is under threat of conversion into a road); Norwich Barn Road - Costessey Hellesdon Road is tarmac, but was unsurfaced beyond that in the late 1990s; Dereham-Wendling is mostly the concrete A47; Yatton-Cheddar (Strawberry Line) is crushed limestone except for the section taken by the A361 to bypass Axbridge.

[Jon Lucas]

Sustrans did a complete review of all their paths a couple of years ago and ought to have this information somewhere. AFAIK they used two cycle-mapping companies who also produce complete cycle netowk maps and who may well have much of this knowledge between them - Realistic Solutions based in Lincolnshire and FourPoint Mapping (who used to be Cycle City Guides) based in Frome in Somerset.

The Bristol & Bath Railway path has a tarmac surface throughout the whole length. When it was originally started in shorter sections, these mostly had a crushed limestone surface, but when it was completed in the 1980s the whole length was tarmac surfaced by the local authority and widened to 3 metres throughout. I understand there is now consideration being given to widening some sections in Bristol due to sheer volume of numbers using it.

The recently opened Two Tunnels path in Bath has a tarmac surface throughout Bath and the two tunnels to just past the Midford access point (about 5 miles in length), where it connects to the original Sustrans path to Wellow, which has a crushed limestone path that has eroded badly in a few places though is generally ok. This route then joins lanes for a few miles before becoming another tarmac-surfaced path from Shoscombe to Radstock. From Radstock there is a tarmac surfaced path to Midsomer Norton, while the Colliers Way path from Radstock towards Frome is, IIRC, mostly tarmac-surfaced.

[Mick F]

The few we have round here are a mixture. The surface changes quite suddenly from tarmac to fine gravel, to rough ground, and back to tarmac.

The tarmac surfaces vary too. Some are smooth and some are rough, or some have a fine dusty gravel on them.

How you could catalogue all this I don't know.

[Rittmeister]

The reason why I posted this is because the crushed limestone is unsuitable for road bikes and the type of bikes many people bought under the Cycle to Work scheme. For this reason, you often have to go on the road!

In Manchester/Salford, there is an old railway from Eccles to Little Lever. If converted from wood shavings, it would basically take all of the cycle traffic off the woeful (east of Boothstown) East Lancs Cycle Path to Manchester and anyone that wanted to ride on the road.

If this path was converted to tarmac, there would provide a traffic-free route virtually all the way to MediaCityUK but instead you need to go down the busy A6 or East Lancs.

[NATURAL ANKLING]

Hi,

The reason why I posted this is because the crushed limestone is unsuitable for road bikes and the type of bikes many people bought under the Cycle to Work scheme. For this reason, you often have to go on the road!
In Manchester/Salford, there is an old railway from Eccles to Little Lever. If converted from wood shavings, it would basically take all of the cycle traffic off the woeful (east of Boothstown) East Lancs Cycle Path to Manchester and anyone that wanted to ride on the road.
If this path was converted to tarmac, there would provide a traffic-free route virtually all the way to MediaCityUK but instead you need to go down the busy A6 or East Lancs.

I thought thats what road bikes were used for, cycling on the road
I spent years like others here riding on / off road with a bike suitably booted for such paths.
I would never expect to ride off the road on any path without coming across a myriad of surfaces and I like it that way.
I would call for all the tarted up paths (the ones with fancy signs) to have been graded when they publicised them and spent all that mayor approved money on the contractors to at least graded with a code or even a graphic or something.
I never know what to expect.
This subject has been discussed at detail before, I wont hold my breath, the roads still are just as bad as they ever were

[Mark1978]

The reason why I posted this is because the crushed limestone is unsuitable for road bikes and the type of bikes many people bought under the Cycle to Work scheme. For this reason, you often have to go on the road!

Not so. I have a carbon road bike running 23c slicks and it's just fine on crushed limstone - for the most part. Sure you're speed is more like 12-15 rather than 20mph+ but it's doable. The main issue is that it takes more effort, and that your bike gets dirty really quickly, which isn't an issue in itself but it wears the components.

However I agree there's a world of difference between a gravel surface and tarmac and if all the gravel routes near where I live were given a tarmac surface we would have one of, if not the best network of off-road leisure routes in the entire country, as it is most of them are still gravel.

But there is progress being made, between Consett and Sunderland I'd say about 50-60% of the route is now tarmac, but the problem remains that if you want to get to the tarmac sections you often have to use significant bits of gravel.

Now of course; if I wanted to do all of my rides on the railway paths, I wouldn't have a road bike, but I don't, I do 95% of my riding on the road, but occasionally I'll want to use a railway path as a cut through or alternative route but then I have to think, is it worth the work I'm going to have to do cleaning my bike, is it worth getting shaken up on the dodgy surface?

The main objection I have is that we (as a country) seem to have no issue slapping down tarmac pretty much everywhere we can think of, but a cycle route? OMG that's too expensive! OMG "lycra louts" might use it.

As discussed elsewhere in this forum -- a lot of riders, even those with road bikes, would rather not be riding with motor traffic if they can help it, and providing a decent surface for these sorts of routes goes a long way towards that.

[gentlegreen]

I'm always surprised at all the road bikes on the Bristol to Bath path - and it's not just the speed merchants - but then there have always been rough sections on road races.

It's definitely where my roadified MTB comes into its own. It lets me ride right on the edge when it's narrow or busy - or I'm slower than others or riding a little faster than perhaps I should.

Quite frankly most of the tarmacked roads I commute on (and on my Sunday rides) are rough enough to make me feel safer with wide tyres.

[irc]

Quite frankly most of the tarmacked roads I commute on (and on my Sunday rides) are rough enough to make me feel safer with wide tyres.

Me too. The crushed stone towpath surface I use is better than many sections of road. But I agree with the OP that tarmac would be better. It would make the routes all weather. After a few days of freeze/thaw the towpath becomes unrideable.

Once properly tarmaced a cycle path should almost never need redone. It is HGVs that wear the roads. My street sees only cars and, slow bin lorries once a week. It hasn't needed resurfaced since it was built circa 1970.

[Mark1978]

Once properly tarmaced a cycle path should almost never need redone. It is HGVs that wear the roads. My street sees only cars and, slow bin lorries once a week. It hasn't needed resurfaced since it was built circa 1970.

Indeed, of course only if it's done properly; there's a section of the Lanchester valley path where you go from new crushed limstone to old tarmac, and the limestone is a better surface! But very true if done properly it's cheap because you put it down and pretty much forget about it. Whereas it seems the gravel surfaces need attention once a year, but I think some local councils would rather spend e.g. £100k per year to keep the path maintained than spend £250k putting down tarmac which would last for 20 years.

[NUKe]

Not an old railwayline but just to add to the BoK. The Portadown to Newry canal tow path is now a purpose built Cycle path which is metalled all apart from one very short section of limestone Hugging. The canal is disused and almost non existant in parts. One of my favorite routes when we visist NorthernI Ireland.

[Mark1978]

They are making progress here. e.g. There was a section between Annfield Plain and Consett where you had the choice of.
1. Quiet road but a monster hill - down and up again.
2. A flat but narrow and very rocky railway path
3. A flat but busy A-road

Most of the time I'd choose option 1 and suck up the hill climbing.

However option 2 has now been widened and tarmacced so it's the obvious choice every time.

[mjr]

Once properly tarmaced a cycle path should almost never need redone. It is HGVs that wear the roads. My street sees only cars and, slow bin lorries once a week. It hasn't needed resurfaced since it was built circa 1970.

Many former railway lines have trees either alongside or sometimes along them (if the trains have been gone a while) and their roots do disrupt the tarmac.

[gentlegreen]

Tree roots are quite a significant problem on the BB path ... the last bits that were re-surfaced are starting to get bumpy again after only a few years...

And the coarseness of the underlying ballast is starting to reveal itself on the most exposed part of the path.