This is really interesting isn't it...Time for a bit of controversy.
Jon obviously "loves" this jacket, saying
"the Haglöfs 'Less Is More' philosophy has produced an excellent lightweight Paclite jacket"
And indeed the review of the jacket is positive, albeit with some reservations about usage and the price.
Whereas GT in last months Trail puts it away at the back of the reviews amongst the "rest of the test". Although he points out it's good hood and good fit he is more negative empahsising the "drewbacks of the design". It gets a Trail rating of 3/5, and here's a quote:
"Map pocket doesn't take a map, main zip ver stiff (Maybe that's cos it's a waterproof one GT), lacks pockets, high price...."
What's the beef here? Is this an example of the conspiracy theory thing whereby magazines are slaves to the advertisers and concentrate on big names and brush off the rest? (Haglofs being a relatively less well known brand over here, and hasn't advertised in at least the last two months mags...I couldn't believe this to be true EVER, but it does look that way doesn't it.)
OR is it simply an example to us all to read more than one review of a bit of gear AND then still make our own minds up when we go and "have a closer look" at the item.
Funnily enough, the Karrimor jacket got "best in test"...personal reviewers preferences???
I think you've hit the nail on the head there Alex, when you suggest we read a couple of reviews and then go and make our own minds up.
I now use reviews mainly to get a feel for what features a jacket has. I still take note of any critisisms made by the reviewers, but always check these for myself when I take a look at the item in question.
I'm sure that GT praised the Karrimor jacket on its benefits alone and not for any other reason. I'm a great fan of GT. Just ask Jon!
I suspect - haven't seen the test - that the LIM jacket has been reviewd in the wrong class of product. Like putting an GTi in a supermini group test, and then wondering why the fuel economy is crap. The LIM is an all-out AR jacket and is very, very good. So what of the pocket doesn't take an OS map? How many Ar'ers carry whole OS maps with them?
GT and the rest of Trail can't review for toffee. They're all crap! How can they apparently slate a product, put in rest of test, and then give it 3/5? Surely 1/5 is the logical score?
And they're bloody obsessed with Karrimor. I haven't picked up a Trail for 18 months (Karrimor one everything back then, that's one of the reason I stopped bothering with it) but I assume Karrimor advertises a lot in it? Karrimor are good, and their clothes deserve to be distributed more, but GT's obsession is daft - and extremely obvious.
Dan, not disagreeing with you at all, but... are you having a bad day? Look on the bright side, its halfway through the week! Only 2 and a bit more days and its the weekend!!
The fact they even bother to wear boots, rather than just describing them, is blindinly obviously stupid. The statement 'this boot fitted well' is criminally, insanely, daft, when everyone's feet are different!
If it got 3/5 and it was justified, why did the LIM end up in the Best of Rest, I assume everything else got 4/5, as usual?
I often think the Rest of the test section is where they put the stuff that hasn't been <i>extensively</i> tested. That is, they've been sent one by the company and have just worn it round the house and down to Tesco's for a couple of days. Hence just listing the obvious good and bad points of the jacket rather than a deep review of it.
Poor old GT has an awful lot of things to test, which can't make things easy. One of the things I realised early on with OM is that I can't hope to properly assess everything on the market, so I try to concentrate on the more interesting kit and the new things. Lots of that coming soon...
Without being sycophantic, I think that that policy is a good one.
It is very easy to find the full range of stuff out there, but magazines with their slow lead times and all mean that they are inevitably behind the times...a medium such as this is ideal to find out about new stuff as it is released (or even before, look at the OM front page...) and then to be able to research it better before buying it. The internet review is also not limited by space, leading to a deeper, better more informative review.
Yes, it's much more interesting to read about new & innovative stuff, rather than 94 different boots, or whatever it is Trail do each year.
I honestly don't believe that anything reviewed in Trail gets a decent review, but as Jon said it's very hard. Road testing a car is easy, but I can't see how someone can do eight back packing trips to assess eight different packs... But therefore, I don't rate the Trail reviews at all. Yes, as Si said, they great for pointing out features, but so are manufacturers websites, and I can personally evaluate a product in a much shop much better for myself than any journo writing 30 words in a mag can .
A good example of an interesting review of a new product was Jon's review of the new Berghaus packs, with their new back systems. Just how many times do you need to review SA or APS? Once is enough!
Another plus of the internet is that it's always archived, well at least in the case of OM it is, unless people start deleting threads. Back issues of mags are bulky, and I've just recycled the few Trails I had, as it's much easier just to search for something in OM.
Of course, a nice Boolean search engine (thats one where you can do 'and' or 'or' etc) would make life much easier...
so anyone used any Hägloffs kit. I live in Sweden and here they are recognised as a leading manufacturer (maybe THE leader) but that could be due to good marketing and the limited entry of other brands. However outdoors activities is a norm here, Primus are a Swedish company. If they didn't offer good value and quality I don't think it would be so popular (no fun having something fail when you are 2 days walk from anywhere)
Yes I have. I had a Finnish friend who came to Bangor on exchange. She was a forrester and so had top-line gear to avoid freezing her, er, you knows off while doing field work.
Any way, while we were out I got cold and I'd forgotten my jacket, so she lent me hers. An XCR Solid Q jacket, IIRC. Obviously can't comment on the fit, but it was beautifully well made and very well designed. Excellent 'soft feel', no rustle face fabric. Good pockets. If I ever wanted a new jacket, it would be top 3, at least. She had the matching overtrousers, too, and they looked splendid in black and red. She rated the whole outfit very highly. She'd used it daily in blizzards up there! (Apparently Welsh winters are warm and bright!)
I know a climber with one of the Haglofs packs, he rates it, better than his exisitng Karrimor Alpinist, but I'm not a huge fan. Certainly didn't feel as comfy as my Lowe.
I _think_ it's Ultimate Outdoors in Betws who carry a large range of the kit, and were among the first to import it. I had a good look a the Windstopper fleeces there, again very good but at £150 too expensive. A Marmot Yellowstone is £110 full price, and permanently discounted to about £75 in Joe Browns.
All in all, good stuff. Strong hunting background means some weird items, but it also means low-rustle fabrics across the board and designed to be worn all day comfort. As the Scandanavian climate is even more demanding then ours it's highly evolved, well-honed gear.
Of course, it doesn't always work like that - I reckon Anjungalaik sleeping bags aren't as good as their TNF or Rab counterparts, despite being Norwegian, though again they're very well made and ultra-comfy.
FWIW, when I used the LIM jacekt, it was nice, but not great. I found the cut just a little off, but it was cut for a harness, and so was really cut short at the front.
I also took a bit of time to get used to the waterproof zips, and the pocket wasn't big enough to fit a map into.
Alround it was ok, good if you are a fast moving AR-er, but for walking about in the LIM was not that good.
I reviewed the LIM 30 sack some months back, but it disappeared down a hole in the space-time continuum and never appeared on the site. (The review, not the pack that is).
It's a good pack and has made an excellent daypack with some minor alterations. The back system is the most comfortable of it's type that I have used. Too big for comfortable running though. I'll review it again properly when I have time.
I bought Rach a Haglofs powerstretch top from Bumbler and Stumbler in Betws, it was heavily reduced in the sale (sssh!) as were the Haglofs windproof fleeces. Nice kit that Rach uses a lot - good scooped back, long enough sleeves and with some funky bright orange powerstretch side panels too.
I enjoyed Trails test of ultralight sleeping bags a few years back. They marked the ME dewline down because it had no zip. The fact that THE WHOLE POINT of having no zip was that it kept the weight down completely passed them by, and they gave "best in test" to some >1kg wonder with a nice side zip.
It depends what you are after, but if your priority is pure lightweight there is no justification for having a zip. My dewline has done me proud for the last 10 years. And as I'm sure I've wittered on about before, I still have the correct number of toes despite some interesting himalayan bivvying in it. But if Trail say it's porr, who am I to argue :-)
