Singletrack latest issue WTF

right everyone off to the front page and do the survey

There’s a front page?

for Scotroutes
http://singletrackworld.com/

The reason why I buy Singletrack is because it has a broader spectrum of articles.

right everyone off to the front page and do the survey

And make sure you read the question more carefully than me… 😳

Not looking good for the “i hate everything but MTB” crowd so far according to the poll

What about bikes that don’t get ridden on mountains?

+1

I find it amusing that a load of trail centre warriors are complaining that the latest issue of STW isn’t “mountain bikey” enough for them 😉

What about bikes that don’t get ridden on mountains?

What like the Orange 5’s that get ridden mostly on the Col du Surrey Hills, Alpe de Cannock, and the Dalby glacier?

Might have to complain about one of the road bike mags. They had a whole multi page article with Boardman HT and some other bikes with bars that were nearly flat, and tyres wide enough that you can actually see them.

It’s winter – of course there’s gonna be articles that deviate a bit from what is done much more during the main season.

I enjoy having my eyes opened to all types of bike riding. The pics of different riding locations are great and informative, some are simply sublime.

Gear reviews are honest with a good cross-section of products.

The very first piece that Mike Ferrentino wrote in the mag was brilliant but unfortunately he never again reached that dizzy height.

I’ve no complaints whatsoever. 😀

ST lost me when they started putting roadie stuff in

Where? When?! They would’ve lost me too, but they’ve never done this.

There was a threat, but it wasn’t followed up.

“mountain bikey” enough

: )
and what is ‘mountain bike’ these days anyway? Do we need to redefine it because of what some riders on some bikes can do? Where on the sliding scale of XC racing>Ultra racing>bikepacking>just trails / trail centres>EWC>DH is this ‘real MTB’ that gets mentioned? Is that even in the right order? Prob not.

Ah f-it I’m just taking my bike up the woods to do some tracks. Been doing that since I was 12, nothing’s changed.

Lets not forget MBUK of oldish days featured mtb, jump/DJ etc all in the mag

It also did features on riding through the Channel Tunnel before it opened to trains, attempting to mountain bike across/under the Channel in scuba gear, uphill riding being dragged by a parachute and helidrop riding with the RAF team getting dropped off by Wessex then blown over by its downdraft whilst riding back down again!

The good old days!

A cyclocross bike is not a mountain bike. The clue is in the name.

rOcKeTdOg – Member

How do you lot turn corners with those blinkers on? “i only ride mtb, I only want to read about mtb, nothing else exists”

That’s hardly the point. I’m interested in other things, but this is a mountain bike magazine, advertised as such. Maybe there’s a case for them to change that, and start producing Singletrack Assorted Biking Magazine… but in the meantime they should deliver what they promise. If I buy a steak I expect a steak, it doesn’t mean I hate oranges.

But I can see that there’s room to deviate into parallel interests; that’s been done effectively in the past after all. But cx-porn component reviews are a daft way to go about that. If you want to engage mountain bikers on the subject of cyclocross, write an engaging article about cyclocross. That could be of interest even to people who’ll never do it.

Cyclocross would’ve been a good name for ‘mountain biking’. When those French guys were riding in the dirt and over jumps on fat tyres in the 40s they should’ve called it le cross. But some Americans got IP on the name ‘Mountain Bikes’ in the 70s and here we are. They were also called ATBs when I started riding off-road. That’s a better name too.

jump/DJ

Seeing as this has been mentioned, dirt jumping isn’t mountain biking either, and given the choice of that or ‘cross, I’d rather read about ‘cross.

If I buy a steak I expect a steak

Any particular cut? And how would Sir like it cooked? Pepper sauce, garlic butter, no sauce? )
(spot on about articles on riding cx bikes vs cx bike tests btw)

For me cx riding is like going back in time to my MTBing in the 90’s.

Yeah it’s great have 150mm travel each end and big brakes, but sometimes its fun going back to basics and having your teeth rattled about

Enjoying your subscription hora?

A cyclocross bike is not a mountain bike. The clue is in the name.

So…..?

Should the mag only feature bikes that meet your precise definition of a mountain bike?

What would that be exactly? Hardtails only, with mid-length front forks, short stems, 26 inch wheels, 2.1 tyres, triple chainsets, disk brakes..

That photo up there ^ that Northwind posted looks as much like “mountain biking” as any else to me. Why should it be excluded based on the shape of the handlebars?

(Blimey – and I thought roadies were supposed to be the snobs)

If you want to engage mountain bikers on the subject of cyclocross, write an engaging article about cyclocross. That could be of interest even to people who’ll never do it.

That I do agree with! 😀

personally, cycling mags are too focussed on … cycling.

it’d be great to see the occasional article on climbing / kayaking / paragliding / ski-touring / spelunkying / fell running / etc.

i’m not suggesting STW start writing these articles, i’m sure they could ‘buy’ old articles from other niche mags for a knock-down price.

(or maybe, it would be an interesting job for the journos to write articles for a wider audience – where a little background explanation is required)

Enjoying your subscription hora?

Nope.

As with any mag I visit WHSMiths when the new ones are released and flick through- if its a good month I’ll buy it and do. Very rare but I bought mbr this month as I liked the Sticks Pass/Hevellyn route that they had in there (going to do it as soon as its spring).

If I see a heavy 29’er-bias in STW mag etc I wont buy.

aren’t most CX bikes sold to commuters anwyay, because there is a bit of a pothole at the end of their road that looked at them funny once?

applause 😆

Saying CX is as close to MTBing as DH is ludicrous.

I was about to say CX is closer to the riding that I normally do than DH, but pedants will point out CX is racing around a field for an hour, so I’ll change it to I could ride a CX bike on most of my local trails and enjoy it while a DH bike would only be fun on about 2 tracks and would sap my will to live on anything else.

Some of you are starting to sound like the old timers in the CTC moaning about anything except touring bikes appearing in their magazine – CTC is now a cyclist organisation not specifically a touring one, some people seem to have issues with this. Lots of threads on here about CX and road bikes so the odd appearance in the mag seems sensible and really doesn’t bother me. ST seems to me to be an offroad focussed cyclist magazine and I like that about it, I guess mainly coz I consider myself to be an offroad focussed cyclist.

OK I’ll check out Cyclist.

Front page poll is interesting. I think the point is that we all want different things so it’s hard for one magazine to try and please everybody!
However, one thing is for sure- BMX is bottom of the barrel 😆

I like Singletrack, in the same way that I like Cyclist and liked Privateer, they have proper articles aimed at the type of riding i do myself, I ride all types of bikes, I enjoy a pint of brown beer and i’m not adverse to a bivvy trip.

When I look at MBUK or Dirt, they are fun, but they are essentially catalogues full of shiny stuff and i know i am never gonna do backflips on my bike (on purpose) or ride a DH bike at full chat.

In MBUK, every photo seems to be in the sunshine with some guy wearing flouro pyjamas, i can’t relate to that, i’m middle aged, spend most of my riding time in the dark and mud it seems, and ride for pleasure and for the social aspect, not to win medals and be “gnarly”.

I’m going with the original poster here. I stopped buying ST a few years ago as everything seemed to have taken on a hipster vibe with too much lycra and discussions on different coffees. FFS at least talk about tea!

TBH though it just saved me £4 a month so i wasn’t too fussed, same with Dirt really. My issue comes from the idea we should pay for some form of subscription in order to read articles on the sodding website… so i go to enduro or pinkbike instead!

FFS at least talk about tea!

Hear hear!

hatchleader – you think that all website content should be provided free, or you don’t think the standard makes it worth paying for?

ahwiles +1, i assume we all have other outdoor interests or generally just enjoy being out. I would like to see a feature once a month on a different outdoor topic. Trail running, rock climbing, anything outdoors. Buy it in, get the team to do it, all good.

FFS at least talk about tea!

I agree with this.

My issue comes from the idea we should pay for some form of subscription in order to read articles on the sodding website

The idea of readers paying for content is slowly gaining ground again in web circles, thanks in large part to The Sun’s paywall. Good on ST for charging, I say.

Then you are not the demographic that ST is aiming at.

When you’ve spent £4k on the Orange and £40k on the Audi, a £40 annual subscription is pocket change.

I agree with the post above – the articles seem to be aimed at people with huge amounts of disposable cash. Why not review more stuff that is within the average rider’s range of affordability? Perhaps its not as fun as a journo to ride around on avg-good stuff when someone’s willing to lend you a 6k bike to test for a month… OK, its nice to see some high end gear but not all the time.

I do however like a lot of the lifestyle type pieces, overseas trips, photography etc.

TBH though it just saved me £4 a month so i wasn’t too fussed, same with Dirt really. My issue comes from the idea we should pay for some form of subscription in order to read articles on the sodding website… so i go to enduro or pinkbike instead!

So if no one buys the mag, and no one pays for site content, how does it get produced? Advertising only? My free newspaper tells me this isn’t a great model.

FWIW I’ve subscribed since the start and found every issue worth the cover price in terms of a mild diversion from everyday tedium every few weeks, I’m not sure what people expect from a hobbyist magazine. Sometimes I like more content than others, sometimes I think the articles are complete crocks others are really interesting.
Keeping this site running is a pleasant side effect 🙂

For the record, the most I’ve paid for any bike bit is £600 (Superlight frame, from an ad here, 2001) and my daily drive is a 2001 Pug 205 🙂

Cyclocross has no place in a mtb mag IMO, and that’s coming as someone who rides one and has occasionally raced them over the last 15 years. Cyclocross is essentially a roadie winter activity, based on riding around fields.

To me mtbing is about riding forests, hills and mountains.

I still love STW, I look forward to the next issue coming out and even have a little ritual when I get it.
It has changed over the years, but then so has everything else?
I look at the latest issues of WhatmountainbikeriderUK? and sometimes can’t tell who’s version I’m reading.
STW is different and all the better for it.

Good on ST for charging, I say

It’s fair enough if the content reflects it, mag or site. You can choose to pay for more content n TV, same can apply online. I’m far less likely to pay to read longer web articles though, simply as I really dislike e-readers etc, videos aren’t that much of interest generally either. Ipads are better but I don’t have one and prefer paper and content that’s less throwaway.
Bunyan Velo is full of the escapist weirdo stuff that I find motivating, they could get up to tenner a time off me for a fair qty of that sort of content. Quarterly, good volume, loads of imagery. But as an e-reader I generally CBA with doing more than looking at the trip pics briefly.

TBH though it just saved me £4 a month so i wasn’t too fussed, same with Dirt really. My issue comes from the idea we should pay for some form of subscription in order to read articles

Digital Sub is only £25 – so about £2 a month for full website access, plus 8 digital mag issues, Premier card and discounts, and an archive of all previous mags and books.

Seems pretty reasonable to me to be honest.

I too would like to see more articles for the common average earning man BUT stw isn’t that kind of mag, I see it as an aspirational mtb mag. I also flick through it in smiths and buy it if there’s enough in it to interest me. Whenever I see reviews of kit priced upwards of £200 I switch off. I’d like to see articles aimed at the everyday british MTBer. Things I’d like to see:

.best chinese light from ebay under 30 quid. I’m not gonna buy one of these 200 quid jobbies, I bought 2 cree lights from ebay and they’re great. Or how about ‘the best way to cable tie a cheapo light to your helmet’ I can see why they include reviews of the expensive kit though, it’s so they can encourage the makers to take out the advert on the opposite/next page. Fair enough the mag is a business and has to make profit but high end kit just doesn’t interest me.

.Best pedals under 60 quid
.Best helmet under £100
.Best mech under £100
etc etc

.Loads of route and ride reports – I’m out every week on 2 wheels and info on routes is the single most useful/interesting aspect of any mag I buy. If there was a mag that did maps and report of 5/6 routes every month then I’d buy that all the time. How about a section entitled ‘local rides’ where a local from a differnt place every time explains and shows off his/her favourite local ride. Can I do the first one? It isn’t all about the riding in iceland on glaciers!

anyway.. meh.

hatchleader – you think that all website content should be provided free, or you don’t think the standard makes it worth paying for?

Bit of both- these sites have adverts down the side for a reason. Why do i have to pay for articles i will only read a few of when i can get better quality journalism elsewhere for free.

Then you are not the demographic that ST is aiming at.

When you’ve spent £4k on the Orange and £40k on the Audi, a £40 annual subscription is pocket change.

Its down to a question of value. by that note you would say that a £40 sandwich is pocket change! A £40 subscription is a lot of money when theres nothing your interested in reading!

I don’t want to see ‘best X under £Y’. I don’t want to read about shopping for bike parts.

I would rather read about riding and interesting stuff, which is why I’d read STW over most mags. It can be a bit up itself occasionally but that’s better than endless bike roundups. There are other shopping based mags for that.