Trail Magazine

Just curious, people in this forum seem dislike the magazine alot.

I (so far) think its great, its one of the reasons why the trailwalking/wildcamping bug has bitten me.

I have subscribed to it on a 6 monthly basis but if it does get crap like MBUK did then I won't hesitate to cancel it.

Just curious...

It's already going the way of MBUK. I remember Trail having an article on 'How to bunk off work when it snows'. Trashy or what?

Trail has some good stuff in it. This month’s Pyrenees feature is great; admittedly it’s a bit Adventure Traveller but still pretty good. I think it has to be remembered that trail is pitching at all levels so it can’t please everyone. What I might find interesting, the dedicated mountaineer might consider utterly boring.

It seems like they struggle to fill it sometimes. A case in point was the article where they treated an ascent of Snowdon (Watkin path I think) to a summit attempt on Everest. That was their contribution to the 50th anniversary of the first successful climb of Everest.

Another thing that really irritates me is the reviewing system. A personal favourite is the way that they say that a tent costing £500+ gets 5 trail tents in value for money where in the same test a tent that cost £100 got 2. I don’t understand how this can be an accurate reflection of their findings.

OM gives us the perfect platform to criticise Trail; sometimes it is unjust, most of the time it isn’t.

Can't say for others, but its not a case of being hated, just wish it was a bit better.

Afterall if it was perfect we'd have nothing to moan about!

i also think that the thread 'FHM sneers at Everest Climbers' has a little to do with the sudden outpouring of critisism.

although not directly responsible for the article- the fact that the journo writes for Trail is not good for the mag.

I think healthy critisism of magazines etc is good- as long as its justified. i think the mag definitley offers a service to the outdoors community- but like most things- it does have it's faults.

Well I read Trail and haven't missed an issue for ages. It has some good moments and some frankly cringing ones.

Like most mags there is the interesting articles and the not so.
I havn't bourght Trail in ages I buy tgo, then I have a beard, smoke dope and I am a hippy at heart.
Tgo can get boring at times just like trail but you pays your money and makes your choice.

I don't think Trail is hated, just that it has it's bad points, but as John says it's trying to pitch itself at all levels. I subscribe and generally enjoy it, although some articles seem dumbed down. I also occasionally buy TGO, which probably has more articles on hiking, but can be a bit too old-school sometimes. As long as what you read is inspiring enough to get you outdoors without irritating you, then it's probably worth reading.

I only read Trail occasionally. I just don't find it all that interesting, and very few of the articles are at all thought-provoking.

The most recent issue I read (from a couple of months ago) had a big photo of a pint of beer with a short paragraph about a drink at the end of a walk being nice. If they have blank pages to fill, that's not the way to do it.

The route descriptions are pretty unimaginative, too, and don't tell you much you can't work out from a map. Compare and contrast with something like Steve Ashton's "Ridges of Snowdonia" (Cicerone) and you'll see what I mean.

TGO can take a walk on the weird side sometimes, and there's always the McNeish factor to take into account, but generally the content seems better balanced and better written.

Just a personal view.

I get it every month but I am still very critical of it at times. It can be great but it can also be terrible - filled with soundbite articles that don't really say that much.

I think that the standard of writing has overall gone down recently, but that new fella's article about Cottages is really well written and so I think that things are looking up.

On the whole (now there's a "Trail-ism" if ever there was one!) I think that it's a case of 'You always hurt the one you love'. And I do genuinely love the mag, it's got such great potential and the graphic layout of it is just superb. It's a shame it's such a let down at the moment.

It's hard to shake the sensation that many articles in Trail are exercises in product placement. Frequently articles come "in association with" a certain kit manufacturer, and so in essence they are written rather to order.

A friend (who has previously had articles published by Trail) approached them with a cracking article for their old "Big Weekend" section IIRC, accompanied by great photos. He was told that it was fine but the photos didn't show the correct sponsors logos, and so couldn't be used.

Similarly I gather the cover photos specifically require young, attractive types wearing clearly identifiable flashy kit.

Now I could be barking up the wrong tree here but if the above observations are genuine I can't help feeling it's a triumph of style over content, fashion ovcer substance. Acres of non-discriminatory kit reviews probably aren't that helpful either, other than as a selective round-up of possible purchases - in which case, why bother attempting to review them?

I used to be a regular Trail reader, and then got increasingly disillusioned with it's move from "outdoors" to "The Outdoors LifestyleTM".

I'm not sure I need officially snactioned Trail recipes to suggest what to eat on the hill, or afterwards. (That's what Pete's Eats and Wilf's were invented for anyway!)

I think I gave up when it published a letter from a bloke who was upset when he got a parking ticket for blocking an access road in Langdale. He decided that because the park didn't have huge carparks taking up the valleys he could park anywhere and sod the consequences, it was his right to drive to the hills and park where he wanted. When ticketed, he complained to Trail!

He did redeem himself by then writing something along the lines of "if that's how they treat visitors I for one will not return to the Lake District". Thank God for that....one less moron :-)

The same issue that carried the "pint of beer" articlette also devotes a page to "how to make a BLT buttie".

It's really quite a shame that good writers like Graham Thompson get published next to that sort of wadding.

Come on then Guy. I know you read these pages.

What do you have to say to all this then?

Well I got my free silva compass for subscribing for 6 months so atleast it is a good compass.

I kinda like flashy kit, just got my titanium spork they advertise wrongly in the mag.

titanium... hmmmmmmm

(can you tell I'm a mountain biker?)

So upto what point do I beleive the review are you infact saying they are biast?(sp?)

I was kinda thinking of getting that recommended TNF tent they said was good.

I like the magazine ATM but I have an open mind, though the mag does seem to get a little bit thin on content, least thats the impression.

But hey a free compass!

Now that I've read what I wrote some of it makes no sense what so ever!

~lart me for not proof reading

Err, no. I don't think that there is any significant bias in the reviews. The reviews tend to be of items sent in, and therefore the manufacturers tend to be selected out to the ones who send in gear...however that should be made clearer, rather than implying that the reviews are exhaustive. Eg the "Definitive Guide to Uktra-lightweight Kit" which mentioned neither the Polaris tent nor the OD 2 man goretex tent reveiwed by Jon here. Let alone the Stephensons Warmlite 2R...

I do think the mini-test reviews are non-discriminatory. How can you possibly review 10 different thermarests other than by looking at them and maybe spending a few nights on one or two of them. Similarly, the jacket specials "review" hundreds of jackets - how can they possibly be of any use in determining how well they work on the hill where it matters? Of course they can't wear all the jackets, all you can do is in effect try them on in the shop and look at the hoods, pockets etc.

I'm still waiting to review my new Montane SuperFly jacket: it just hasn't rained since I got it!

Used to get Trail every month. Got bored with it and haven't got an issue in ages.
Sometimes have a shufty at a mates copy, but haven't seen an edition recently that I would have wanted to have shelled out money for.

I don't hate it, just don't like it.

Si(C)

Found it...

May's Trail 2003.

Basecamp tent tests

Cheapest was a Gelert Blue Ridge Tunnel at £85 and got a score of 3 out of 5 in value for money.

Most expensive was the Lightwave T3 Arctic £495 and got a score of 5 out of 5 in value for money.

I don't doubt that the Lightwave tent is a fantastic piece of equipment but at the end of the day they are both tents and they do serve the same purpose and that's top give you a shelter in which to sleep.

I think Trail is patchy, but still much improved on what it was like a couple of years ago.

I agree that there is a blurring between editorial content and advertising/ product placement. Hence my earlier posting about recommending a top of the range £500+ mountain tent for more 'comfortable' camping.

Saying that, I do like the new 'used and abused' section.

Maybe Trail would benefit from going bi-monthly, that would fill it out a bit.

I must admit I am a bit of a gear freak, but yeah it does wind me up with all the product placement. Base camp is good and the product reviews have helped me make purchases in the past.

Yet at least we do have a quality mag dedicated to our interests, we'd be complaining if there wasn't!