Forum menu
I’ll warrant there are more miles done by MTBs along canal towpaths than all the MTB centres in the UK combined.
Possibly true, but miles is a useless definition of MTB effort.... hohenmeter or metres is much better definition
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.
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.
I think we place kneepads in a different spot on the spectrum.
Personally I'd say [no kneepads : kneepads] sits on the [downcountry : trail] cut off.
But wear what you like, there are no rules, only attempts to categorise things so we can discuss them online and buy things.
I’ll warrant there are more miles done by MTBs along canal towpaths than all the MTB centres in the UK combined.
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.
Stay a niche or adapt to the trending market?
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.
scotroutesFull Member
I don’t even own knee pads and if I’ve not been mountain biking in the past 30 years, that comes as a surprise.
Posted 12 minutes ago
Yeah, I get that, I'm 49 and I bought my first pair this year. Worn them twice so far, both for uplift days.
Plenty places I've ridden home and abroad where I knew they were probably a good idea for what I was riding.
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.
To be honest, I don't care what the definition of 'mountain biking' is.
There's not a right answer and it can be on whatever bike you like - have you seen the guys riding gnarly Northshore stuff on Boris bikes? Point proven. Similarly - what about the street racing stuff? Tyres aren't on dirt, but that's definitely mountain biking.
If the real question is what should Singletrack Magazine write about then my answer is mountain bikes and NOT GRAVEL. I've ridden gravel bikes, I'd done gravel rides, I don't want to read about it in Singletrack magazine. I want to read about mountain bikes and trail rides.
It's definitely gone a bit too Cycling UK recently, and I get trying to appeal to the masses, but trying to please everyone is a fool's game.
you might have taken the definition too far!
I suspect you already know that comment was made with tongue firmly in cheek 😀
See, I think that bimbling around on fire roads and rail-trails is mountain biking
im with chips here. Bumbling along fire roads or old railways is at best leisure cycling. It certainly isn’t what I consider mountain biking. To mets single track trails whether they are in woods, mountains or open land. Fire roads are no more than a means of getting to the trails. They are the cycling equivalent of driving on the motorway. Quick efficient ways to cover distance with no enjoyment
Whatever you do, if you aren’t doing it exactly like me, you’re doing it wrong.
When you bimble along an unfamiliar logging road, you never know what you may find. Often singletrack appears or an interesting spark gap to the next road. Often you go out with little idea what if any technicalities you may meet.
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.
@poly..... if and when I get to that stage in life then I'll start looking at magazines and opening links that talk about them. Until then I'm not interested.
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 ride a gravel bike on gravel roads in Colorado infrequently these days. But when I was riding more, one of my riding buddies decided to switch from 29" with 45mm tires to 27.5 with 2.1-ish tires because the quality of the roads was so poor. I was finding the limit of my 32mm tires on almost every corner. The roads had loose, chunky stones all over them. The dirt became sand anywhere there wasn't rock. And there were often random deep ruts. I found it difficult to maintain speed through corners because of the lack of grip and control.
I use my hardtail for gravel roads and my gravel bike for the local trails. The trails have a more consistent surface, making them ok for my gravel bike. So, mountain biking is riding something that a gravel bike is less suitable or less enjoyable for. Making my gravel bike into what is almost my hardtail, but with drops and rigid forks, isn't what I want it for. And my hardtail can go anywhere, comfortably enough for me to cover almost any terrain in the mountains.
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.
Riding on double track, fire roads, tarmac – those things are only a means of getting from A to B for me
So this isn't mountain biking?
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 do accept that there are more interesting double tracks. But honestly ( I didn’t watch the video), riding wide, double jeep tracks doesn’t often float my boat. Maybe one time in 20.
edit: so I flicked through the video. And most of the trails in that video would not personally appeal to me. I don’t really see the attraction. However, I don’t think you’d ride that on a road bike. So I accept that, while it’s not to my taste, it totally qualifies as “mountain biking”, and would be highly appealing to many mountain bikers, singletrack or not. But, honestly, I wouldn’t wake up at night dreaming about it, in the way I do dream about singletrack.
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!
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.
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.
I like ATBs. A to B on my ATB. Singletrack, lanes and natural trails along the way. Riding fat tyres off road is fun and I don't mind riding them on tarmac either.
That's about it really... I don't really care what is or isn't mountain biking now. It's a broad church isn't it, far broader than it was in the late 80s and you can't really define something subjective like this. It's just, like, your opinion man.
Both Hannah and Chipps are saying things I agree with.
I suppose one bit about MTB that loses me is when it's suggested it has to be 'extreme' in some way to count. It can be, but that doesn't define it.
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.
If I think about things that differentiates mtb from other kids of biking, I have to think what it’s not.
It’s notmotorcycles, so apparently it must be light enough to move about, and move only when propelled by gravity or your legs. (E-bikes are definitely a grey area here.
It is also not gravel or road cycling, so it must have some technical challenge, and some kinestetic joy: swooping around alternating left right berms, floating a jump, seeing if you can make it up or down something, or whether you can make it up or down that tech bit at faster speeds.
Obviously this is all nebulous, so that’s where I have to give it to Chipps. As long as the majority of the mag covers “trail riding” or whatever you want to call it, absolutely add in articles about things slightly further off that “center line”.
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.
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.
All depends how you define better. I am now riding an old rigid MTB and enjoying it more than gravel type bikes (CX bike with bigger tyres) I have had in the past. It also feels like riding in the 90's which again I enjoyed. So to me that is better.
Looking at loop times on Strava the MTB is slower so you could argue the gravel type bike was better using that as a measure.
I ride an old MTB off road on single track, double track and anything else I come across so to me I am mountain biking.
Obviously you can use these routes to access proper trails but you don’t go for a MTB ride along the canal. 😀
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.
All depends how you define better.
Specifically being able to easily ride up or down singletrack tech without looking like you're trying to pass a camel through your urethra.
Mountain biking is about learning. It seems that gravel biking is about getting places. Either can be done on Singletrack.
Regardless of the cycling you actually do, what's the picture you conjure up in your head about the ideal ride that you dream of? If its on a mountain bike on some glorious endless alpine descent, then you get to call what you do mountain biking.
The point about the mag being called Singletrack is an important one for me, it's not just mountain bikes, but all the family of off road bikes - gravel, e-bikes included, eve small recumbents around a school play ground, as long that ideal picture of what you actually like to be doing is in your head.
The point about the mag being called Singletrack is an important one for me, it’s not just mountain bikes, but all the family of off road bikes – gravel, e-bikes included, eve small recumbents around a school play ground, as long that ideal picture of what you actually like to be doing is in your head.
It's an important point - as all the previous replies show, MTBing is different things to different people which is why the mag can never ever please everyone.
There could be an issue entirely based on riding HT and FS bicycles (that generally match the "MTB" description) on nothing but singletrack and I bet there'd be a number of folk on here saying that it didn't match what they did on MTBs...
I think the mag has usually struck a pretty good balance with telling the stories of MTBing - history, destinations, adventure - rather than just looking at the latest bling bike that's going to be bought by about 6 people in the country. That's what did it for MBi when Chris Porter took over as editor - every issue became yet another "let's take a £10,000 DH bike to the Alps and spend 4 pages talking about its suspension rebound". Dull as **** and relevant to maybe a handful of people at most.
There could be an issue entirely based on riding HT and FS bicycles (that generally match the “MTB” description) on nothing but singletrack and I bet there’d be a number of folk on here saying that it didn’t match what they did on MTBs…
Interesting aspect. 'People like us do things like this' .. people like to have what they do validated, whether that's by mainstream adoption confirming them as being part of a movement or mainstream rejection confirming them as part of a niche.
It's hard to read something that you see as representing a 'thing' and not feel like it reflects on you somehow. I feel fairly immune to that as I don't see myself as a mountain biker, or a gravel or road rider - I just ride bikes. So whatever someone is doing on a bike might have some relevance. At the extremes it can be hard to find that relevance in the feat or action itself but the rider's personality or the way they talk about what they do can make it as interesting as anything else. I mean, a rider does a ride just like I do and describes it in a dull matter of fact way ..boring. A rider clears a new canyon gap and talks at length about what goes through their mind in that split second of no return - fascinating.
Maybe I'm still influenced by what grabbed me about MTB in the early days - pictures of Pearl Pass tour type of riding in the US, talk of wilderness races or days up in the mountains, the capability to explore the woods and ride steep chutes.
Now, I could do a ride that covered all of that on either an MTB or a gravel bike. I think there's something in the attitude of the rider that makes it 'mountain biking' though - to me gravel bikes never were or will be anything like 90s MTB as some say it is. The attitude (towards the tricky stuff or risks) we had on MTBs back then were different to gravel biking now. Gravel bikes dissuade that attitude generally whereas MTBs encourage it. The emphasis on the different aspects of the ride change.
Why did we even get an article like this? I honestly think it is your job as editor at large/managing editor to have these discussions and then present us with what you think we want. I think you do a good job at getting the balance right and no one needs to "win" this discussion.
As a business you need to look at what has kept people coming back for more over the last 20+ years, surely you have some idea? Just looking at the track record it would appear Mark/Chipps knew what worked, but it obviously needs to be kept up to date (whatever you as editors decide that is). I agree with Chipps about how fantastic the UK trails are, and, sorry to say this, think it shows a lack of imagination to say otherwise. The same trail ridden at different times of the year can give a host of experiences and different images. I have ridden High Street quite a few times and riding it in the middle of the 2010 winter gave me one of my most memorable days out ever.
Singletrack for me has always been about the inspiration to ride, a bit about the gear and a bit about the people and that seems a good balance. I ride old railway tracks a lot and enjoy them for what they are and the experiences I have had on them with my kids, but they do not inspire me.
Another point is that those of us who have been long term supporters are all getting on a bit, and probably shouldn't be listened too much if Singletrack isn't going to become a version of the Oldie magazine for ex adrenaline junkies.
If you are really stuck for a direction to go in why not try getting in some guest editors for certain editions, covering the whole spectrum of where off road riding is today?
P.S. Could Benji do a mini guide to all the technical trails in the Calder valley he keeps going on about riding (a bit like the bouldering topos you get for climbing)?
FWIW I started reading Singletrack precisely because it seemed a bit more grown up than MBUK/Dirt/MBR, had a wider focus around off-road cycling and didn't feel like is was just being sold the latest and greatest.
In recent years I've come to a point where I'm reticent to describe myself as a mountain biker, as it tends to conjure up an image in other people's heads that doesn't match up.
Mountain biking is about learning.
Not for me. I've been on skill days where I've deliberately spent the day learning to ride better but they are the exception. I normally mountain bike to er.....ride a bike, and never go out the door thinking of learning objectives.
Off road I currently am lucky enough to have the choice of a beefily built gravel bike, a fat bike and a full suspension 29er. When I have a free pass - be that a quick evening or a multi day I conjure up the journey in my head (or a map) and pluck the bike out of the shed which looks like it'll best reflect the journey. And it's fun whichever choice I make.
I'm with Hannah on this one.
My favourite articles are always the ones that are focused on people rather than trails or bikes. Of course, the trails and bikes these people ride and how they ride them are an essential part of the story but I'm more interested in the culture that made this person or group into what they are.
There was a great story a few issues ago where Hannah went to the US and spent time talking to and riding with a lot of people and it was one of my favourite articles in recent times.
In contrast, there was an article about Nesbyen that really didn't work for me. There was a lot about the trails and a fair bit about mythical creatures but pretty much nothing about the local mountain biking culture or individuals and I know for a fact there is an interesting culture and interesting individuals in Nesbyen. Not to mention how it fits into the bigger picture of mountain biking in Norway.
I think if anyone calls themselves a mountain biker (and even if they don't call themselves mountain bikers but look a bit dirty) then I want to know about their culture, what they ride, where they ride, and how local circumstances brought them to where they are today.
So yeah, for me it's about the people and the culture rather than the specifics of the hardware they happen to be using.
I thought the recent issue did a good job at staying true to Singletrack.
The mums-bikepacking article wasn’t mountain biking or Singletrack, but it was related (still on bikes), and it had a very informative point about how to define accessible and what trails are needed for everyone to enjoy, something we can all stand to expand our views on.
The article about the trail-behind-the-Nationwide IS about single track mountain biking, and had some great though behind it.
The article about the sunrise ride in the Pyrenees was mountain biking, and smack in the middle of Chipps line.
So all in all, I think it was great, and keep going.
(Sorry Hannah, I love your writing, but this time I have to go with Chipps)