[Closed] STW Magazine & Forum - For elitest rich people only these days ??

Don't know if the point has already been made up there, but when I buy a mag I like to see high-end, unaffordable (to me) kit reviewed and tastefully photographed. Surely no-one would buy a mag full of reviews of bargain basement tat (that's what forums are for 😆 - reviews direct from the (wo)man on the [s]street[/s] trail).

I love the STW forum but tend to buy WMB as I like the gear reviews and they tend to be aimed at a cross section of riders ability and budget. Ok they don't do the same number of articles as STW but when they do they tend to be more UK based and less biking down some random European mountain that a majority of us wouldn't have the budget to afford. I'd really like to see some more low to mid end budget reviews such as bikes around £500-1000 mark and clothes under a £100 that are not Gore or similar budget. I joined as an online subscriber so I can perv at the mags now and then but for pick up n read over and over when killing some time or sitting on the loo 😳 its WMB everytime. Don't get me wrong I do aspire to owning a £2k full susser but I'm sure I'm not alone when I say that's out of most peoples budget.

I appreciate that STW is not trying to be anything like WMB etc and caters for different riders generally and I respect that hence not buying the actual mag (more here n there if I like a particular article). Not saying it needs a wholesale change but a nod to the more budget conscious here and there would be nice 🙂

Listen to your readers - you should be reporting what we want, not what you think we want...

Therein lies the rub. I'm a reader. I'm not the slightest bit bothered about reviews since the Internet is full of them. They're everywhere and everyone has an opinion to be read on STW, blogs, Bike Radar etc. Not everyone is talented at writing though, so what [b]I[/b] want from STW is high quality articles about cycling and cyclists. Stuff your reviews, the next big thing will be here in a minute...

Agree with above I just flick past all the reviews looking for the cycling articles.
I have rarely seen a review of something I was actually looking to buy.

As said above the internet is my source for reviews , i can't afford the lights in the stw review but i won't hold it against them 🙂 that doesn't mean i don't enjoy reading them if you see what i mean?

Ill read on here and the net for cheaper alternatives and search for reviews of any given product for a price im willing to pay

I'm not bothered about magazine reviews either, the response on this thread is pretty poor though especially from Matt. Half the responnses I see from STW to any kind of criticism seem to be quite arsey and overly defensive. Insulting your customers is generally not seen as very professional for some reason. Ho hum.

And it's not really 'damned if you do damned if you don't' its just damned for pretending cheap lights aren't up to the job when they clearly are.

"we wanted to restrict this group test to lights that were up to the job of proper off-road night riding. Trail illumination costs money.

For me the problem with the above statement is it suggests you have to spend a lot of money for decent trail illumination, which as we and stw know you don't. Now if the statement had said something like 'this is a review of £500 plus lights...' I think that would be better, also supplier support of UK riding could be mentioned.

Anyway, I remember the early days when the mag did have a different take on things, you might say a bit leftfield, which was refreshing; but now it doesn't seem much different to the other mags.

The Dx stuff gets reviewed . Its reviewed on the forums by riders who dont type using multi sylable prose and complex mulit layered syntax.

Recomending those who send freebies , and pay for advertising in the mag, is kinda how it works in the comercial world.

If anyone cared about the reviews , then how come there are so many threads that start with 'Recomend me a......'?

talking about light reviews. Matt and STW had one of my lights now for nearly two years and said they would review it
but never got a word said .

Ever taken out an advert in the mag trout?

nope but not taken adds in MBUK or MBR and got a mention in those .

On the plus side Trout, I know about your excellent products and service via this very website...

talking about light reviews. Matt and STW had one of my lights now for nearly two years and said they would review it
but never got a word said.

Maybe they don't cost enough? 😉

It makes interesting reading, hearing what members of the forum think should go into the magazine. I like the righteous indignation of the posters who criticise magazine staff for apparently taking no notice of them. The sad truth is that only a small proportion of forum users buy the magazine. To quote Mark: "We get 700,000 users per month right here! If just 5% of those decided to subscribe I'd be browsing through the catalog of caribbean islands* on which to build my palace ". You can't determine content on the basis of people who "would buy the magazine if..."
Perhaps STW needs to do some proper market research of it's existing customer base in order to determine it's future?

I like the magazine and forum combo. It's what prevents STW as a whole being the very things it's being accused of being. I used to read EVO when I was more interested in cars than I am now. I never thought I'd own a Porsche or a Ferrari but was interested in the technology, the photography and the trips made with the cars.

The magazine bit of STW has become more like this. Photography and travel articles mixed with the (slightly) more 'real world' epic rides and the latest high end gear. Nice to read / coffee table mag. Makes me feel like going for a ride.

If I want cheaper solutions to what's reviewed (I nearly always do) and relevant reviews for that stuff I get on the internet, including this forum, and start rummaging or speak to my good LBS.

Whether I am rich or elitist is another matter. 😉

To quote Mark: "We get 700,000 users per month right here! If just 5% of those decided to subscribe I'd be browsing through the catalog of caribbean islands* on which to build my palace ". You can't determine content on the basis of people who "would buy the magazine if..."

yeah but - I'm not wild about actually buying a magazine off the shelf, only to be told that said magazine's business model requires that I also subscribe.

I was less peeved by the content or conclusions of the lights test, than by the fact that I bought a magazine that boasted "lights test" on the cover and then found out that the actual test results were largely "subscriber only".

The constant moaning and whinging on this forum makes me want to scream into a towel.....

I'm off, head officially battered by the negativity and constant sniping that occurs....

Trout you possibly need to ride with the staffers call round for coffee now and then schmmoooz up to them make them feel important that may help. Second thoughts just do what you are doing you don't need them, ask for the light back. Common courtesy should have prevailed and they should have sent it back if they didn't intend to use it or maybe they think they can do as they please.

See - they should have just printed this in the mag

http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/trouties-spider-eyes-mk-3-puffer-tested

When I read any of the 3 mags I subscribe to I like to dream and escape to some epic place I'll probably never have the time or money to see.
I also like to read about some new kit that's coming out soon and what it promises to deliver.
I don't want to read about some piece of crap I can bolt onto my bars and almost see enough with.
STW do have the forum to which paying customers are granted equal rights as non subscribers - very socialist, generous and equitable IMO.
They also let people take the piss out of them publicly like in this thread.
I think they deliver a very good product for everybody.
I even appreciate the enforced breaks they give me from this place when their sense of humour eludes them.
My girlfriend loves them too!

I gave up reading the mag some time ago, so as not to be a disappointment to those writing it. Seems things have not changed.

Hilarious.

I was a subscriber from issue 1 of STW, had a gap of about 5 year and now have a digital subscription. As good as it's ever been.

After reading some of the 'Singletrack has lost its way' comments, I raised an eyebrow and randomly had a quick look at Issue 3 from 2001.

If you're interested, it has a review of a 200 quid set of lights on page 35. 😉

Hi folks, sorry for the delay in responding.

Here are some replies to some of the points made. Sorry if they're brief, we're a bit mad finishing the next/new issue. Anyway: DX lights and the like: We try to keep the reviews as brief as we can - which is one reason that we only featured a few lights in the mag and finished the review off online. Grouptests are funny things in that the people who are really interested are really interested. The rest of the world isn't bothered, except to check whether their light/helmet/stem is reviewed. So we're limited in the number of products that we can feature. We split the lights test over two issues to get in as many helmet and bar lights as possible.

In order to get a spread of lights, we listed a bunch of lights manufacturers and sent them all a request for test products. This list wasn't based on who advertises with us, it was based on us all thinking of all the light companies we could, plus a peek around the internet to see what else the shops are selling, it also included a few of the smaller shed-based companies that we'd heard from recently. Once we'd done that, we sent out a general request for products to as many of those companies as we could and shortly we'd had about two dozen product come in, we assigned the lights to testers for a few weeks of riding and the lights were written up and shot.

To be honest about the DX lights and that sort of thing, who should we have approached to get a test set of lights in? Mr DX has never been in touch, so we wouldn't know who to approach. Yes, we could go out and buy a set, but we already had a test full and we actually don't have that much of a budget for each issue of the magazine. So sorry for excluding you Mr DX. The next time we do do a lights test, I'll make sure we get a set in.

We've written many features about riding on a budget ('One ton weekender' which ran for a few years.) And when I've come across people who ride on a budget who would make a good story, I've written about them. In fact I first met Mr Alker here when I wrote a feature about him for Mountain Bike World after he'd written in to tell us that he'd made his own lights out of plumbing spares, showroom halogens and an RC car battery. 🙂

Troutie - I think there's been some emailing between you and Matt/Mark about lights recently, though I might be wrong, but anyway if there's a current model you'd like us to review, then get in touch with me and we'll get one in in time for 24 hour season.

We could of course have tried to review one of every light between £10 and £2000 but it would have been huge and not very in-depth, and the kind of light test that people would criticise. Equally, we could have made our own out of readily available kit but I don't think anyone has any spare time as it is.

Anyway, I hope that helps explain a little of the thoughts that go behind what we get in for a group test. It's one of those funny features that some people expect in every magazine and others don't want anywhere near, so it's a tricky balance - to say nothing of the issue of trying to get a dozen products all sent in to the office within a week of each other. We're reviewing some pedals next issue, for which the deadline was a month or two ago, but some pedals still haven't arrived, so obviously won't be featured in this particular issue. Just because the Jimbob 560 pedal doesn't appear, don't assume that we left it out on purpose.

Cheers all
Chipps

A much more mature and professional response from chipps there 🙂

chipps - I work here

To be honest about the DX lights and that sort of thing, who should we have approached to get a test set of lights in?

There's various UK handlers- if it comes up again you should probably speak to Torchy the Battery Boy or Smudge.

http://www.torchythebatteryboy.com/
http://www.mtbbatteries.co.uk/mountain-bike-lights/

to say nothing of the issue of trying to get a dozen products all sent in to the office within a week of each other. We're reviewing some pedals next issue, for which the deadline was a month or two ago, but some pedals still haven't arrived, so obviously won't be featured in this particular issue. Just because the Jimbob 560 pedal doesn't appear, don't assume that we left it out on purpose.

How about reviewing a bit more of the kit that turns up in the Fresh Goods advertorial then, if you're a bit short? Most of the stuff turning up in the office seems to disappear into a black hole, at least as far as further info on how it fares after use goes.

Have to say, I'm not a great STW reader, I view most reviews in mags with a certain amount of disbelief, but I do appreciate the STW mags fellas approach when this kind of thing is raised.

Good on yer chaps.

Interesting thread. Mag announces change to business model, and then a number of forum users express unease about the direction/evolution of the mag in an, not obviously related, thread?

All I have to add is that as a new subscriber, largely as a result of the new business model as previously described but also a regular reader/forum lurker, the whole experience has been good. Fast delivery of free Tshirt and membership card (before the DD has left my account).

I have no interest in reviews unless I am looking for a product, but I like good photography and well written articles, I find most other MTB mags don't deliver on this front.

It's also interesting to see that the mags owners answer critics on the forum. I'm not sure Chipps's reply above really addressed the points that the thread was making but good to engage.

Looking forward to seeing the new incarnation of the mag, lets face it 30 quid for a year is great value if it's well written and well produced. if it's not I can cancel my sub.

£500 for a set of light??? you're having a laugh right? 🙂

As usual no one read my post!
MrOvershoot - Member

[i]"Dave - Moderator
If any of the naysayers want to check the front page and go to the review of bar lights they'll see Smudge thanking us for the "excellent" review of his XML light.

If you bought the mag you'd know it was one of three I recommended."[/i]

Which is exactly the one I bought after seeing the review, very pleased with it & Smudge's quick service too.

Which sort of flies in the face of the

[i]"There are, of course, plenty of sub-£100 lights out there but we wanted to restrict this group test to lights that were up to the job of proper off-road night riding. Trail illumination costs money."[/i]

comment?

SO

Dave you recommended the light but according to the new thinking they are not really up to the job??

Bit like the obsession on chain devices & bash rings in the reviews, yet on the front page poll they don't feature much on most peoples bikes?

[i]How about reviewing a bit more of the kit that turns up in the Fresh Goods advertorial then, if you're a bit short? Most of the stuff turning up in the office seems to disappear into a black hole, at least as far as further info on how it fares after use goes.[/i]
That's a fair question. Hopefully nearly all the stuff that appears in Fresh Goods makes it into a review, but it can take time. If something turns up this week, say, it goes in Fresh Goods. Then it goes out to a product tester, or one of the staff members for testing. Depending on the product, it might be ages before it can be tested properly, or comprehensively. We had some dry weather 29er race tyres in recently, it might be May until we can do a decent job of trying them. And equally, we like to give a decent time on a product. Some things you can get a feel for right away, but others need longer. Not enough time and we get accused of a cursory glance, too long and next year's version might already be out, addressing any issues we had with this year's one! Then, once a product is written, or returned for photography, it might be an issue before we can get it in the magazine due to a lack of space, in which case it goes in the following issue, which will hold it up for another couple of months. So in all it could be five or six months before a product appears some times.

We've been working with Jon, just today in fact, on trying to get more products reviewed on line in a swifter fashion, though it might still take a month or two between Fresh Goods and a thumbs up or down.

sturmey - Member
I think the mag needs to relate better to the readers also, I have noticed over the last few months that it all feels a bit clique, I scratch your back you scratch mine. Contributors all mates together.

Nothing new there IMO. I cancelled my subscription around four years ago and haven't bought a copy since due to this.

YMMV

I bought STW last month and it's a cracking read, haven't bought the mag in a while (only tend to buy it on content see) but was pleasantly surprised and happy to read last months.. I'm looking forward to the new version.

it all feels a bit clique, I scratch your back you scratch mine. Contributors all mates together.

Or, a lot of the brands / writing people that do well in the UK bike trade do so because they're involved and in touch, out there riding and chatting at events and in places like the NW where there's a lot of good riding, maybe have been in the industry some time etc, they get to know each other and become mates? They end up making / doing stuff they all like and it's all good? Better write about what you're involved with than try to spead yourself too thin and be all to all riders?
It's a pretty small world and a close scene in general and of course you help mates out, that would also go for telling them if they make something junk.. maybe before it's tested officially )

Thanks for the reply Chipps but I don't really think it addresses the point of

"There are, of course, plenty of sub-£100 lights out there but we wanted to restrict this group test to lights that were up to the job of proper off-road night riding. Trail illumination costs money."

which just isn't correct. Now, I hold the ST mag people in pretty high regard generally but I find it hard to match that with an obvious (though hopefully not correct) possibility which is that you're deliberately ignoring sub £100 lights that are demonstrably up to the job because it'd be considered a slap in the face to a lot of the UK companies/distributors who sell more expensive (and quite possibly better though definitely not always) products. But then it comes down to whether your first duty is to your readership, the industry, etc.

I can fully understand how it's hard to try and balance all of these things as the bike industry in the UK is quite cosy IME (that's not necessarily a bad thing) and you can't just hack them all off (even if it's done in your readers' best interests) and expect to be able to run a magazine effectively but at the same time that introduces a massive risk that your readers [b]perceive[/b] that you're not giving the full picture or that you're in the industry's pocket.

DX lights (as the example that's being taken but clearly isn't the only one) are available in the UK as magicshine lights too (£75ish IIRC) - those could have been reviewed and mention made that the same light could be had cheaper from the Far East but with the potential issues of warranty/time/etc. My point really is that while you can't be expected to review every light out there, I think that your readers can expect you to give an reasonable overview of what is available and not make sweeping statements about cost that don't hold up.

We've been working with Jon, just today in fact, on trying to get more products reviewed on line in a swifter fashion, though it might still take a month or two between Fresh Goods and a thumbs up or down.

I think gaining access to more reviews online and quicker is a great idea. Especially as many people will, as I do, browse the net for reviews on gear, ask on forums etc before parting with there hard earned cash.

For what it's worth I would like to say that the various options of subscription are a great idea and I for one are v happy to pay an online only subscription to dip into mags online rather than commit to buying a mag at £5.75, which in all honesty I would not pay for. I will keep up my WMB for hard copy reading as the content generally appeals more to me and my budget. That said, some of the articles in STW are v good.

Keep up the good work but please continue to explore putting more reviews online so we all have access to them much sooner without waiting for the mag review much further down the line (which from what I read on here is not the main reason subscribers buy the STW mag for anyway). A good compromise all round?

Thanks for the reply Chipps but I don't really think it addresses the point of

"There are, of course, plenty of sub-£100 lights out there but we wanted to restrict this group test to lights that were up to the job of proper off-road night riding. Trail illumination costs money."

which just isn't correct. Now, I hold the ST mag people in pretty high regard generally but I find it hard to match that with an obvious (though hopefully not correct) possibility which is that you're deliberately ignoring sub £100 lights that are demonstrably up to the job because it'd be considered a slap in the face to a lot of the UK companies/distributors who sell more expensive (and quite possibly better though definitely not always) products. But then it comes down to whether your first duty is to your readership, the industry, etc.

I can fully understand how it's hard to try and balance all of these things as the bike industry in the UK is quite cosy IME (that's not necessarily a bad thing) and you can't just hack them all off (even if it's done in your readers' best interests) and expect to be able to run a magazine effectively but at the same time that introduces a massive risk that your readers perceive that you're not giving the full picture or that you're in the industry's pocket.

DX lights (as the example that's being taken but clearly isn't the only one) are available in the UK as magicshine lights too (£75ish IIRC) - those could have been reviewed and mention made that the same light could be had cheaper from the Far East but with the potential issues of warranty/time/etc. My point really is that while you can't be expected to review every light out there, I think that your readers can expect you to give an reasonable overview of what is available and not make sweeping statements about cost that don't hold up.

Yep nail on the head.

"There are, of course, plenty of sub-£100 lights out there but we wanted to restrict this group test to lights that were up to the job of proper off-road night riding. Trail illumination costs money."

Its Wrong!

On the other hand chipps is right they can't test every thing and thanks for the post. singletrackmatt thats how its done 8)

I've been a subscriber for a few years now and in my experience the magazine has a pretty good balance of kit focusing on the middle and upper end. The magazine mixes ride atricles on Wales and trips to Iceland. There is an aspirational element and there should be, it's fun to read about.

There are lots of cliches and generalisations on here but I would observe that there are many mountain bikers who spend a relatively large portion of their income on their hobby (bike cost more than their car for example). That's great, live to ride and all that.

FWIW I looked at lights and after going through the options I felt the £400 Hope ones were the best combination of quality, function and price. I bought nothing then as I decided to put that money towards a new bike.

Mountain biking is a notoriously expensive sport, so I'm not surprised by the 'group tests'. But it can only be expensive if you let it - my bargain £100 Fox 36s 'perform' (in my eyes) just as well as some brand spanking new ones, around £900. Ubber-cool-Kashina-FIT-15mm-whatever isn't worth £800 more...

I must admit, I did buy some expensive (to me) lights - Electron Terra 2's - but I use them daily for a commute.

[i]Dave you recommended the light but according to the new thinking they are not really up to the job??[/i]

There is no new thinking, just another reviewer's opinion.

grum - Member
I'm not bothered about magazine reviews either, the response on this thread is pretty poor though especially from Matt. Half the responnses I see from STW to any kind of criticism seem to be quite arsey and overly defensive. Insulting your customers is generally not seen as very professional for some reason

oh look no P by his name - in what sense are you a customer then?

seems some folk who dont pay for a magazine that subsidises a forum are complaining about the magazine on the forum. I think if i was STW I would [s]tell you to all go **** yourself tbh[/s] listen intently to what you thought

I am available for PR work anytime you need me STW towers 😉

One of those really it just depends most stuff for a MTB is expensive and most of what they review is beyond my proce point ...still it is interesting to read generally.

I suppose that he might buy the mag in the shops...

Anyway, I like high end reviews too but that doesn't mean that the cheaper but functionally capable stuff shouldn't be included, particularly in group tests.

oh look no P by his name - in what sense are you a customer then?
seems some folk who dont pay for a magazine that subsidises a forum are complaining about the magazine on the forum. I think if i was STW I would tell you to all go **** yourself

And that's why your customer services role is limited to dealing with doley scumbags. 😉

I do buy the mag from time to time, and if there's really 700,000 visitors a month to this site that must make for a reasonable bit of revenue from ads (that everyone moans about 🙂 )

Miaow 😆

oh look no P by his name - in what sense are you a customer then?

I don't think that's fair Junkyard. You are presuming that by non-premier status, he never buys the mag and has no interest in it. I am non-premier, but buy the mag through a newsagent (when it's available).

Under the new regime, I will hopefully be buying it through my LBS [like I need another excuse to loiter in my LBS!]

Actually, I'd be more hacked off if they included the DX lights in the test - there must be hundreds of threads on here about them, much more than any other lights.

FWIW I have 2 DX lights, both are great and no issues (apart from a battery failure that was sorted out).

When I first started night riding a couple of years ago I bought a £150 Nukeproof allegedly 900 lumen light. It quickly lost a lot of brightness and started failing randomly (not that CRC cared - despite chasing!).

I then got an exposure Spark but not their rechargeable kit, and in looking for and finding rechargeable CR123 batteries and charger found websites like betterbuy and so on.

The prices are crazy and if you shop carefully - looking for relatively light/short torches (usually with a single 18650 cell) you can find absolute bargains, usually about £20, perhaps double that including charger and plenty of good quality cells.

It is a bit hit and miss with beam spread etc but at £20 a pop some experimentation is easy! I now use one 18650 torch on the head and one on the bar, both about 350 lumens, one with a good spread of light (bar) and one with a good beam (head). They last a 2 hour night ride, they handle rain/mud far better than the nukeproof, and as battery performance improves I can just but new ones rather than someone's overpriced "branded" ones.

I believe in "you get what you pay for" in most things in life but with lights you are getting the same LED and usually older than current spec batteries for silly money. Granted you get a fancy case and nice button - but for £200-odd more! Personally I prefer this approach of no cables or external batteries...

FWIW the one ton weekender reinforces the point of this thread. The fact that people struggle to get away for £100 is crazy.

£10 pppn camping (generous) = £20
£30 food for the weekend (generous) = £50
£50 petrol to go pretty much anywhere = £100

Add in a few poeple and weekends as cheap as £30 are certainly possible.

Links to your lights please!

There is no new thinking, just another reviewer's opinion.

Another reviewer who doesn't appear to have a full awareness of the market given his comments (which inevitably lead people to see bias towards certain companies).

For what it is worth, I ride off road at night 3 time a week, use both helmet an bar lights, total retail price about £470.

To be honest, they are actually great, the lamp units are compact, the batteries and connectors do te job brilliantly and when riding at night (no slower than during the day) I want something that is going to illuminate the trail ahead and let me see the trail turnings too!

There are lots of people who can afford and do buy decent lights. So STW please keep reviewing them. Cheap comparisons would make sense though so feel free to add in the torches, Magicshine an DX stuff too!

I want something that is going to illuminate the trail ahead and let me see the trail turnings too!

The thing is, the (good) cheap stuff also does that. It might just not be quite as well built.

I'd argue that people went down a bit of a blind alley by suggesting DX - with Chipps' not unreasonable criteria of only reviewing stuff they get sent, something similar but a little more expensive from a UK supplier makes more sense, but then as pointed out they did review one of Smudge's offerings.

I should point out that I still use lights which are nominally even cheaper than DX ones (if you ignore my development costs), and were at the time of build real cutting edge - far better than you could get by spending several hundred £s. Having done that I appreciate just how much of the value is actually in things like housings - mine are still rubbish if functional.

Pinch of salt - the truth is somewhere in the middle mostly - writing for a mag you have to find a middle ground I presume -

If you get given stuff to review then you don't want to slate it otherwise you'll never be given stuff again but not a perfect review otherwise your readers will not respect your reviews unless it really deserves it??

At Christmas I wanted to get my wife a handbag like her friends. It cost £800 so I didn't buy.Now I know what I am looking at you can't believe the amount of ladies that come in my shop with £500 plus bags. On a recent journey on the train at rush hour 95% of people had an iPhone 4.
There's still a lot of money out there.

singletrackmatt - bearded fellow
I understand that you can have a great night ride with cheaper lights but that isn't really what a gear review is for - that would be more of column or a story really

this begs the question of whether your gear reviews are advertorial space or about telling the reader about what the choices are that deliver what the reader whats (trail illumination, reliability, ease of use etc) if the best option is something that can be bodged for £19.45 from maplin's, bought from a far east company, a UK manufacturer or a man in the shed I would expect to be told.

there seems to be a lot of rehashing of publicity blurbs and little thought into looking at the product from a wider perspective for some of the more expensive kit

[i]If you get given stuff to review then you don't want to slate it otherwise you'll never be given stuff again[/i]

If the stuff deserves a slating why would you want any more of it? 😉

this begs the question of whether your gear reviews are advertorial space

Advertorial would assume that products only appear if they pay for the pleasure. That's not something that we do.

Hmm, Benji's holiday in Jamaica article, though not strictly a product, springs to mind 😕

At Christmas I wanted to get my wife a handbag like her friends. It cost £800 so I didn't buy.Now I know what I am looking at you can't believe the amount of ladies that come in my shop with £500 plus bags. On a recent journey on the train at rush hour 95% of people had an iPhone 4.
There's still a lot of money out there.

More likely it proves what warped priorities our society has developed.

I don't subscribe STW for reviews as I buy next to nothing 🙂 - enjoyed the 'Bike Porn' featurettes though.

If I wanted 0-10 scales and 10 riser handlebars 'faced off' I'd buy WMB. Which I do when I'm bored at a station, but generally I'd rather read something (shame Mike F has had to call it a day).

There will always be cynical people who think mags / websites only survive by companies offering incentives for reviewing their products.

And there will always be people who swear it doesn't happen.

EDIT : I'm on the fence for this - I reckon *some* backhanded dealing does go on, especially when dealing with a large influential supplier (who could stop 70% of your new spangly kit arriving...)

not knocking too hard but you have the same issues as all the other websites/ magazines

Advertorial would assume that products only appear if they pay for the pleasure.

Products appear if they're interesting and [s]we can get hold of them easily.[/s] if people send them to us, unless you are a man in a shed then we'll ignore you

There's a lot to be said for the making and converting your own lights idea, but we don't have the time to do that ourselves

and there's far better info on that kind of thing on the forum or the internet at large, for those who are interested, so we don't tend to cover it.

the the internat is full of stuff, I thought journalism was all about separating the wheat from the chaff

Besides, it's all out of date after a week in the world of LEDs.

There will always be cynical people who think mags / websites only survive by companies offering incentives for reviewing their products.

And there will always be people who swear it doesn't happen.

EDIT : I'm on the fence for this - I reckon *some* backhanded dealing does go on, especially when dealing with a large influential supplier (who could stop 70% of your new spangly kit arriving...)

@xiphon

some years ago I was a regular product tester / writer for a sports magazine in another industry (extreme sports)

I was sent product from a very respected USA brand, and gave an honest review (product fell to bits in very short time frame, under normal conditions)

both I and the editor were then threatened with legal action for slandering the brand / product, and editor forced to sign a legally binding agreement that I would never be allowed to test any of their products ever again

That... Above.. Has never happened and will never happen at Singletrack... I absolutely PROMISE, on my watch here at Singletrack.

A magazine is only as good as the integrity of its owners/editors and I guarantee you that we will never allow a third party company to lean on us to dictate how or who we decide should write for us. The money just isn't so important to Chipps and I that this would ever be an issue.

Perhaps unbelievably we actually enjoy what we do enough to consider the integrity of the work to be an intrinsic part of why we do it.

There's a lot to be said for the making and converting your own lights idea, but we don't have the time to do that ourselves

Still got Chipp's "make your own lights" issue of Mountain Bike World somewhere - I made a set and they were pretty good apart from the super heavy lead acid battery I was using.

Mark, I'm pleased to say that I believe you but that's what makes me struggle to understand why the kind of comment that's been picked up on (the hundred quid one) gets published when it's blatently wrong and it's not the first time I've seen similar in the mag though I'll admit that I can't recall exactly on what.

clubber - Member

Mark, I'm pleased to say that I believe you but that's what makes me struggle to understand why the kind of comment that's been picked up on (the hundred quid one) gets published when it's blatantly wrong

I'm of the same opinion which is why I found the deviation from previous reviews a bit odd!

Chipps

Troutie - I think there's been some emailing between you and Matt/Mark about lights recently, though I might be wrong, but anyway if there's a current model you'd like us to review, then get in touch with me and we'll get one in in time for 24 hour season.

I have emailed you a couple of times over the last couple of weeks and had no reply
just wondering if you have replied ??

Hello Mr Trout,
I've not seen an email from you at my normal email address. - chipps@ etc - are you sure you've been emailing me? Or Mark or Matt instead?
I can't find one in the last couple of years.
Can you try again and I'll keep an eye open.

After ten years of being poor I may come into money soon. Problem is that I'll be abroad working where I probably won't be riding.

So, in my own way I created a light for evening fun. It wasn't lightweight. We nicknamed it, "The Beast".

Small SLR Camera Bag - found in the bins out back
Security alarm battery (of the lead acid, almost motorcycle battery size) - £14
Car tow bar fitment - £4 from a car parts shop
50w Ceiling fitting halogen bulb and holder - £4
Switch £2
Cable - stripped off a lamp in the bins out back
Light Bar clamp from old broken light - found in spare parts bin

I rode into town to meet some mates with the camera bag strapped to my top tube, swinging back and forth and ****ting me on the kneecaps. I knew I had to sort that out later. We turned off the road going down a dimly lit sustrans route and set off. My mates had their road legal basic lights on and I flicked the switch on my light and we discovered the runner coming straight towards us. He looked like he was wearing a white morph suit! He screamed in pain! We laughed hysterically as I switched the light off and we passed the runner who was standing there rubbing his eyes and swearing profusely.

When we got out of town into utter darkness on a track we used to race down top speed at night with our diddy road lights I switched my light on and it got boring. Honestly, it really was, the edge was gone, no fun to be had. We decided to go off the track and up a steep hill looking down onto a field as large as a football pitch. I turned my light on and 2/3rds the pitch lit up. We shrieked in hysterics for a bit before heading off back to town and split up to go our own way home.

I did try a 20 or 25w bulb in the front later, but I discovered the plastic section of the tow bar fitment was starting to melt with the heat of the bulbs and I guess after a couple of bulbs in a row broke from riding over bumps leaving me lightless midride I put it on my shelf and never really got it out to play with anymore. Well, apart from the some thieving bar stewards came for my bike and the cops raced round after my shed alarm went off, jumping over fences with their dog and I brought my light out to demonstrate to the cop with his huge expensive handheld thing that mine was 2-3x brighter 🙂

Keep on with the expensive parts reviews, they make me make do and ride more.