Picking one thing to define it is hard.

I reckon if you’re riding stuff on a mountain bike where knee pads would be a good idea, it’s mountain biking. Through a gnarly trail in the woods, down something jaggy in the Lakes – or maybe Torridon loop – for example, or doing an uplift at Inners.

Riding off-road, alongside a river or canal for example, could be riding off-road on a mountain bike, but I wouldn’t call it mountain biking.

That said, I don’t actually wear knee pads very often at all – but know I should.

Who cares?

I think this is valid, who actually does care? Granted people buying a mountainbike magazine could legitimately be a bit miffed if it was cover to cover with people riding gravel bikes along double width farm tracks, but what if it was someone riding a gravel bike along proper old school singletrack (like every other one of my gravel rides and probably all of didnthurt’s 😂).

Or if it was somebody riding a 100km route of predominantly double-track on their gravel bike, but in some wild and remote mountain scenery?

Seems a bit of a myopic outlook for the magazine certainly if it has to be 100% gnarly singletrack ridden on 100% flat barred bikes.

What do I read STW for….tricky one.

I guess I read for the journey – be that a single day or multi day. And the journey needs to be off road. The niche of bike it’s been done on is part of the story, the subtlety if you will, but it does not make the story.

If I think about the extreme range of off road and where I believe STW fits…..

• A canal path or sustrans day or multi day adventure – this is for Cycling UK (CTC)’s mag
• A day in a bike park, or the write up of doing a downhill competition – basically stuff where a full face is mandatory – this is for Dirt magazine

Everything in between is for Singletrackworld/Singletrack Mountain Bike Magazine.

Could I respectfully suggest STW has been getting a little bit Cycling UK mag vanilla/worthy over that 20 odd editions. It’s got a little bit lowest common denominator or sensible. Accessible even. Bring back the daft and the aspirational.

Oh definitely. That doesn’t make it MTBing though. Just like riding your MTB down the promenade to buy an ice-cream isn’t a MTB ride.

Or to put it another way,  start writing articles which don’t look out of place in Cycling UK’s mag. I don’t buy a MTB mag to read about people taking their family for a coffee along a Sustrans route. Fair enough if other people have different views, I can always not buy the mag, but that’s a shame because I’ve bought it since the first issue and there’s never been a problem working out what MTBing is before.

In the UK, mountain land is defined as that over 610m. Therefore, you’re not mountain biking if you are cycling below that altitude.

@Scotroutes whilst my natural inclination is to point out that riding round a typical trail centre is not riding on a mountain and most people don’t actually go mountain biking – you might have taken the definition too far!

Is it not really a Mountain Rescue if they save your ass at 500m?  what you fell from 610m to 590m!

If you go mountaineering from sea level to a summit of 700m, is the whole expedition (which in winter might involve ice axes, crampons, ropes, proper climbing) mountaineering or just the last 90m.

610m is an arbitrary UK definition based on a handy round number of feet.   A 2000′ hill in a wild part of Scotland with no discernable track in winter is undeniably “mountainous”, one in the middle of England on a pleasant summers day, accessed from a road that makes the total climb much less, and with a huge path up the side might be pushing the description.

I don’t and won’t buy a magazine or click open a link that showcases or reviews MTBs with motors.

Zero interest.

I do, however, have an electric cargo bike, but that’s a utility and not a play bike.

@alpin – interesting distinction.  Can you imagine a time when your own fitness might make an ebike the difference between ride and not?  My sister-in-law’s dad is almost 80 and just bought an eMTB so he can keep riding.  What if the article was about helping different demographics or abilities ride bikes in more interesting places, and then show cased the best bikes for the job?  What if that magazine ran an article on the best uplift facilities in Europe? If that’s ALL a magazine was about, or maybe even if thats what it was about every month I could see the gumble.

you might have taken the definition too far!

I suspect you already know that comment was made with tongue firmly in cheek 😀

Whatever you do, if you aren’t doing it exactly like me, you’re doing it wrong.

Sorry, what was the question again?

Having fun with your mates, could be 50 yards to nearest house, could be 50 miles.

Some of you know the sort of riding I do. I know my limitations.

I have adopted some upgrades from when first got into MTBs, hell my first paid upgrade was a pair of M-959s as written about by Shaun. Probably down to the bikes, but I reckon I’m a likely more adept rider than I was say 25 years ago.

Bring back the Armchair Column.

I’ve a gravel bike and a mountain bike, the types of terrain they’re happy on definitely overlap.

Unfortunately for this debate, what I call my ride on my logging platform of choice is down to the bike I rode rather than any other factor such as mud depth or fun index. I have ridden the same route on both bikes, one got called gravel, the other MTB. Amusingly enough, my clothing was pretty much the same for both.

From a wider perspective a true mountain bike ride should probably venture off tarmac and gravel at some point and take the rider a little further away from civilisation. The ‘mountain’ part conjours up visions of wilderness, peace, technical terrain, hills, escapism …. that sort of stuff, so maybe that’s where we need to look in order to work out what mountain biking is?

I don’t think people using uplifts to career down purpose made trails jumping in the air is mountain biking.

It’s fun, I’ll give you that, but it’s a different pastime to setting out to use bikes to travel over terrain because it’s there.

MTB for me means suspension, chunky tyres, no curly bars, riding across uneven terrain off road, wheels leaving the ground occasionally and sometimes falling off. Gravel bikes are just road bikes ridden off-road for people who secretly prefer road riding and like to be uncomfortable. EBikes are for commuting and carrying shit. I bought one for this purpose a few weeks ago. Anyone who claims you get the same workout with an eBike is just lying to themselves or us (when they claim to not use the battery when going up hill).

I with Chipps.

i would expect the magazine to focus mainly on “normal” mountain bikes with periodic glances at other sports, like EBikes, Gravel bikes etc.

but I accept that if people ride on singletrack, then that’s probably classified mountain biking as we know it Jim. Riding on double track, fire roads, tarmac – those things are only a means of getting from A to B for me. They don’t float my boat. And I’d rather read about what really appeals to me.

Admittedly, I’m most attracted to singletrack on mountains. But any trail on a real mountain has a bit of a by-ball. As does any singletrack, even if not on a mountain. So, by this self definition, tarmac on mountains doesn’t qualify. And non-singletrack on the flat doesn’t really qualify either.

I do think that if you exclude e-biking from your remit, for any business then you’re onto a loser.

OK – that was just chosen at random to illustrate my point. Need I go and link something very similar 😉

(Or edit my post to the past tense?)

I wouldn’t wake up at night dreaming about it, in the way I do dream about singletrack.

I wonder if this is part of the definition and how we are drawn to the same thing, but not really.

The joy for me of riding an ATB (increasing feel this should be the catch all term for bikes ridden off road) is often an ‘eyes up’ experience as much as it is and ‘eye down’ one. By that I mean the vista and the environment I am passing through is every bit as important to me as what is beneath my tyres. Some people would be more than happy to ‘session’ a grim bit of quarry if the lines were gnarly and adrenaline inducing. I’m thinking the sort of thing the Atherton’s built in their back yard (big back yard) for training. But that’s not me. Yes, I enjoy the challenge and adrenaline of a bit of swoopy singletrack and a bit of time with wheels in the air – and it’s definitely part of the experience but its, to me, far from the whole experience.

As I said in my post earlier I see the STW mag as a celebration of journeyers not sessioners. But just maybe not journeyers on canal paths!

Please explain John Tomac.

he was training to race on the road. To keep a similar position and to develop the same muscles on his mountain bike as he would on his road bike he fitted drop bars to his mountain bike.

That video up there reminds me of why I like double track too.. multiple line choices. Room to play about a bit, it’s fun.

I reckon if people want to identify themselves as mountain bikers that’s their inalienable right and we shouldn’t show prejudice against them or try to suppress their deeply held feelings and personal beliefs no matter what our own ingrained opinions might be.

But where’s the foetus gonna gestate? Or something.

Whenever I lead a group gravel ride I always make sure there is some tech singletrack included just to prove to everyone that hardtails are better than gravel bikes.

I definitely remember MBR running an article about exploring your local area, trails near you etc and picking up on canal towpaths as being ideal for MTBing.

They naturally decided that to do such cycling, you had to be on a bike (ideally Specialized or Orange…) with 6″ of adjustable suspension at each end.

Gnarr core.

Mountain biking is about learning. It seems that gravel biking is about getting places. Either can be done on Singletrack.