[Closed] Singletrack latest issue WTF

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

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 [b]only[/b] feature bikes that meet your [i]precise[/i] 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.

[i]That[/i] 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?

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

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 [i]cyclist[/i] organisation not specifically a [i]touring[/i] 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 [i]cyclist[/i] 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.

[quote=hatchleader]so i go to enduro or pinkbike instead!

Then you are [b]not[/b] 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

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.

Its down to a question of value. by that note you would say that a £40 sandwich is pocket change!

For a years worth of sandwiches, I'd think its a bargin, even if i got a egg mayo one every week so. Egg Mayo doesn't interest me so I'd just skip to the next ham and cheese.

I would be pretty annoyed if i got a baguette though as i only like white bread sarnies.

I don't want to see 'best X under £Y'.

No, me neither. Isn't that what WMB's for, anyway?

If the mag was trips, places, people, product, pics all from a non-test POV, etc; the web for reviews, forum, product features, I think ST would have a more sellable / sub-albe mag that has longer shelf-life as well as a site where more people would be prepared to pay for reviews and test content, the faster-moving consumer stuff content that may be a few months interest at a time for many, as buying decisions loom. Ideal balance between long and short term content presentation imo.

Product test and ad content dates paper copies and means the longer-term interesting content is lower. A pile of old ST mags doesn't have enough leaf-through-a-few-years-later content to make them all worth keeping that long as much of it dates. More 'timeless' stuff makes the mag subscription more appealing perhaps. Worth 'collecting'. Maybe mags these days need to be more book-like in value to the reader?

I don't want to see 'best X under £Y'.

No, me neither. Isn't that what WMB's for, anyway?

Only had a quick scan over 5(!) pages of this thread, so apologies if these sentiments have already been said...

I have subs to Cyclist and ST - currently enjoying Cyclist much more - the photos are better and the articles seem a bit fresher and different. As its only about a year old, I'm waiting for the day when the next issue just seems like they're churning it out to meet the month's production deadline. The photos in ST seem to have become very 'green/brown' background with rider somewhere amongst it.

It almost seems as though the people writing the mag have lost a little interest in producing the mag too? Its hard to find new slants on the same thing.

Maybe I'm just losing interest in mtbing.

the web for reviews

They'd need to significantly up their game if that was the case. ST are often later than the other sites with new kit and worse just print the press release as a review. I mean they can't even be arsed updating it from US marketing bullsh*t to English.

For a years worth of sandwiches, I'd think its a bargin, even if i got a egg mayo one every week so. Egg Mayo doesn't interest me so I'd just skip to the next ham and cheese.

I would be pretty annoyed if i got a baguette though as i only like white bread sarnies

What if all you get is egg mayo and you don't like it? everyone on here is bitching and moaning because i won't pay for ST but why should i pay for something i wont read. No one would expect to pay for a gym they never go to.

Oh should have said another fan of Cyclist here, really nice mag.

What if all you get is egg mayo and you don't like it? everyone on here is bitching and moaning because i won't pay for ST but why should i pay for something i wont read. No one would expect to pay for a gym they never go to.

Yep, i don't get it. (why people are moaning at you)I like the mag. Read and enjoy about two thirds each month. Don't care if other people don't like, if you don't, don't buy it.

As for the website, its free for a reason - Traffic. If they don't get loads of traffic they don't get ad's. Dont want to see ad's?? The pay premier.

But some Americans got IP on the name 'Mountain Bikes' in the 70s and here we are.

You mean when 'some Americans' started riding their bikes down mountains? I agree, it was a totally bloody stupid name to call it. They should definitely have called it something other than mountain biking.

GrahamS - imagine (if possible) a customer walks into a bike shop. He/she is approached by a salesperson and asked how they can be of service. The customer says he/she would like to purchase a mountain bike. Does the salesperson take that customer to have a look at a cyclocross bike, walking straight past the bikes with suspension, disc brakes, big bars, 2.4" tyres? No. Do they ****.

Road bike = a bike best suited to riding on the road.
Mountain bike = a bike best suited to riding up and down mountains, other great big hills, rocks and stuff.
Cyclocross bike = a bike best suited to riding cyclocross (ie, a muddy field in the depths of winter)

Of course, you could ride a cx bike up and down a mountain just the same as you could ride one on a road. Hybrids are well suited to that crossover rubbish.

For me though, a mountain bike magazine should cater for mountain bikes. In that respect, MBR have got it bang on as I've never seen anything road or cross related in there (admittedly I've not bought it for years).

Sorry, but a cyclocross bike is not a mountain bike in exactly the same way that a mountain bike is not a cyclocross bike.

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?

Because that would be dull, and is already covered by CRC and Wiggle's websites (amongst others). Or you can just ask here - loads of people have real experience of 40€ tyres, but how many have had a chance to compare 4000€ bikes?

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.

But CX has evolved to be a niche all of it's own. It's no longer something done for 4 months of the year on flat grassy fields. I mean, 10 years ago you'd have to look pretty hard to find off the peg CX bikes - most riders got their frames from Alan or Dolan and bodged a load of old roadie gear onto it.
Now Shimano sell specific CX groupsets, most major manufacturers have at least one CX bike in their range and it's grown to become a "range" in very much the same way as road bikes have evolved into road race range and the "Sportive" range.

I'm glad you added the "to me..." in your last sentence. MTBing to you might well be that but to other people it might mean something else entirely.

And for what it's worth, I ride my CX bike in forests, hills and mountains.
It's less about the bike you're riding and more about the actual riding. IMHO.

Because that would be dull, and is already covered by CRC and Wiggle's websites (amongst others). Or you can just ask here - loads of people have real experience of 40€ tyres, but how many have had a chance to compare 4000€ bikes?

+1

MBR's Bike of the year was a cheap hardtail. They said it was an amzing ride for the money, The next months letters section was how that was a load of crap and that no one cares about cheap bikes.

The occassional cover photo shot in the UK would be good....though not as exciting for the journos obviously. Not seen many mud based cyclocross cover shots.

GrahamS - imagine (if possible) a customer walks into a bike shop. He/she is approached by a salesperson and asked how they can be of service. The customer says he/she would like to purchase a mountain bike

Alright.. same scenario but the customer says he'd like a bike to have some fun doing some nice cross-country rides, nothing too extreme, just sheep tracks and the like to some hilltops, nice views and maybe some cake. Like what you see in those magazines that say "not jumpy, not grumpy" on them.

What's better suited to him then: an Orange 5 or a CX bike?

I have been buying and reading ST for about 10 years now but I think we have come to the end of the road. This will be my last subscription year. In the past I wouldn't commit to a subscription for mags because I couldn't be sure there would be something I was interested in every issue. ST changed that for awhile but I am now back to the same position. ST no longer has something I want to read every issue. I don't wear the print off like I used to.It's not about too much/too little CX, it's about an interesting read. I am unlikely to do any mega trips across wherever but I don't mind reading about it if well written and illustrated.
I can accept that it could well be about me. I have been riding MTBs for nearly 30 years and am getting a bit jaded with mags [NOT riding]so in future I will probably stick to web based journalism which at least if you don't like it , you haven't committed!

DBW, I agree, I'm just saying it's a name that was settled on for whatever reason, it's just a tag, nothing literal right? Mountain Bikes was a great brand name that stuck and became the term for off-roading that's all.

The customer says he/she would like to purchase a mountain bike. Does the salesperson take that customer to have a look at a cyclocross bike, walking straight past the bikes with suspension, disc brakes, big bars, 2.4" tyres? No. Do they ****.

Sorry, but a cyclocross bike is not a mountain bike in exactly the same way that a mountain bike is not a cyclocross bike.

I can kind of understand people not wanting £5k+ bikes and £2500 wheelsets all the time in a mag. but the idea is that these technologies trickle down to a level that hopefully we'll be able to afford in a few years.

If you look at the bike forum on here and threads that people actually start, it is nearly always expensive bikes, or bikes that look good or new/ top end components or things of interest. People don't tend to start threads on here about "look at my Deore or SLX cranks" here is "my lovely Alex Rims wheels", even though a good percentage of use gear like this because it works, it just isn't much fun to read about.

All those who say, oh this mag or that mag are so great, why don't you bugger off to [i]their[/i] forums then eh?
Hmph, yeah thought so.

DaveyBoyWonder - Member
GrahamS - imagine (if possible) a customer walks into a bike shop. He/she is approached by a salesperson and asked how they can be of service. The customer says he/she would like to purchase a mountain bike. Does the salesperson take that customer to have a look at a cyclocross bike, walking straight past the bikes with suspension, disc brakes, big bars, 2.4" tyres? No. Do they ****.

To be honest ST doesn't get me too excited. When it comes through the letter box each month there's an initial excitement (of sorts). Give the mag a quick flick though and that's as far as it goes. Nothing seems to pull me in further. It looks and feels nice, there are a few nice pics. But I don't feel like I'm being seduced.

Take the other mags I subscribe to Dirt, The Albion and Privateer (until recently) All of them are sexy in a way. They pull me in and I'll usually end reading the whole thing cover to cover in one sitting. Where as the ST experience lasts 15 mins (tops) and it's put to one side and never picked up again.

I'm not a massive fan of Factory media, but they do sexy very well. Look what they did with Boards. Under the guidance of Bill Dawes / Yatchs & Yatchting Boards magazine was extremely bland. Factory took over and they've managed to make windsurfing look (slightly) cool.

In short ST isn't sexy enough. It's like a quick shag under the covers with the lights off, then roll over and go to sleep.