Is C+ still worth buying?

[Arch]

Road racing probably is male dominated and as far as I can see C+ is dominated by road geeks. Touring and recreational cycling, however, has far higher levels of female participation but given the absence of people with an interest in these activities at C+ it may be that the mag is doomed to be male dominated.

Catch 22 I guess. Tourists see the mag as 'sport', so don't read it, so it's not worth catering for them....

I think touring and recreational cycling perhaps don't 'need' or suit a magazine in the same way. Touring and leisure is such a wide field (from a pootle with kids to riding round the world) that everyone has their frame of reference and motives and maybe are happy to rely on their own judgement or by chatting to friends, whereas in the sporty C+ side, it's pretty much "go further, faster" so there's a more focused common aim to write around. I guess the CTC mag covers it better, but does anyone buy that, as opposed to get it with membership?

 

[Chuffy]

Catch 22 I guess. Tourists see the mag as 'sport', so don't read it, so it's not worth catering for them....

C+ has always given a lot of coverage to touring. Cass Gilbert and Cara Coolbaugh are primarily tourers (as well as writing for C+ Cass organises tours in the Himalayas) so there have always been plenty of touring bike reviews and kit reviews. There are plenty of touring articles by a number of other writers too, Graham Finch springs to mind. If anything, C+ caters more for the touring/leisure/family end of the market than the pure race end. It's just that people see a £3k road bike on the cover and assume that there isn't anything else inside...

Oh and they seem to have a new female writer/kit tester, Farah Azirah. There is still room for more though.

 

[TheDoctor]

Catch 22 I guess. Tourists see the mag as 'sport', so don't read it, so it's not worth catering for them....

I think touring and recreational cycling perhaps don't 'need' or suit a magazine in the same way.

There's been a few touring recreational type magazines launched - I think the most recent was 'On your Bike' about 18 months ago. lasted 2 issues IIRC. New Cyclist lasted much longer, but was a somewhat broader church. Still didn't save it in the end, sadly. That was the first mag I ever subscribed to.

Touring and leisure is such a wide field (from a pootle with kids to riding round the world) that everyone has their frame of reference and motives and maybe are happy to rely on their own judgement or by chatting to friends, whereas in the sporty C+ side, it's pretty much "go further, faster" so there's a more focused common aim to write around. I guess the CTC mag covers it better, but does anyone buy that, as opposed to get it with membership?

I've never seen it on sale anywhere. Ever.

 

[Arch]

There's been a few touring recreational type magazines launched - I think the most recent was 'On your Bike' about 18 months ago. lasted 2 issues IIRC. New Cyclist lasted much longer, but was a somewhat broader church. Still didn't save it in the end, sadly. That was the first mag I ever subscribed to.

"Enjoy your Bike" it was. And I was pictured in it, in an article about commuting. The perils of going on rides with one of Britains leading cycle photographers.

I suppose you're right Chuffy, there is touring in C+, but I've found more and more that it's not sufficient to make me wade through the sport and high end kit bits... Well, I don't wade, I flip, and that's why I get through it in half an hour and feel dissatisfied...

 

[Andy in Sig]

C+ has always given a lot of coverage to touring. Cass Gilbert and Cara Coolbaugh are primarily tourers (as well as writing for C+ Cass organises tours in the Himalayas) so there have always been plenty of touring bike reviews and kit reviews. There are plenty of touring articles by a number of other writers too, Graham Finch springs to mind. If anything, C+ caters more for the touring/leisure/family end of the market than the pure race end. It's just that people see a £3k road bike on the cover and assume that there isn't anything else inside...

Oh and they seem to have a new female writer/kit tester, Farah Azirah. There is still room for more though.

I'd say the touring/recreational coverage was about 15% of the mag. The rest is very road oriented.

 

[Chuffy]

I'd say the touring/recreational coverage was about 15% of the mag. The rest is very road oriented.

The last issue that I bought had a large review of kiddie trailers.
Admittedly the picture had one hitched to a Storck superbike...

There was a purely recreational/family/leisure mag from the same publisher. It was launched about 5-6 years ago, very similar format to C+. Lasted about 2-3 issues iirc. I think C+ does a very good job of covering all bases, but the main draw is always going to be the road stuff.

 

[Andy in Sig]

It probably is the case that the road stuff will continue to be the main draw as masses (probably by far the majority) of leisure cyclists are probably content to pootle around on their bikes without a thought ever entering their heads to buy a mag on the subject, which is probably why the mags aimed at that market fail.

It must be a cultural thing becasue e.g. in Germany their are three mags competing for the leisure/touring readership and IMO they all have a much better quality of journalism than C+. That said, I'm quite happy to continue my subscription.

 

[Tim Bennet.]

I'd say the touring/recreational coverage was about 15% of the magazine

It depends on your definition of 'recreational riding'. Lots of cyclists 'recreate' by getting fit, doing charity rides or sportives, the odd 10TT, etc. The only riding I would classify as definitely not recreational is pro racing - that's done (partly) for the money.

But then coverage of pro racing actually fills a very small part of C+ (they have a dedicated magazine for that) and is mainly restricted to coverage of the Tour de France and Tour of Britain and the odd classic. I think this coincides well with the interest of most 'recreational riders' - I will show an interest in them, whereas the minute details of Stage 3 of the Tour of Qatar passes me (and C+) by.

C+ reflects mainstream recreational riding. The reason the 'Fred Whitton' fills up on the first morning entries open is that's what people want to do. The average cost of a bike in the field will be about £1500 with the range running from £400 to £5000, ridden by people (mainly, but not exclusively blokes) dressed in five hundred quids worth of shoes / clothing / helmet, etc. Most people will have done quite a lot of training and will have had some passing interest in training techniques and nutrition, etc (even if they didn't follow it).

C+ reflects this reality. If this is not your profile, then either 'get with the program' or read something else. But this is where the 'resurgence' of recreational road riding has happened over the passed few years. Magazine buyers know it, advertisers know it and you can be sure Future publishing knows it.

 

[TheDoctor]

"Enjoy your Bike" it was.

Well done! How did you remember that?

And I was pictured in it, in an article about commuting. The perils of going on rides with one of Britains leading cycle photographers.

I might have guessed. Is there anywhere you haven't been pictured?

I suppose you're right Chuffy, there is touring in C+, but I've found more and more that it's not sufficient to make me wade through the sport and high end kit bits... Well, I don't wade, I flip, and that's why I get through it in half an hour and feel dissatisfied...

You could always spend the money on chocolate. Of course, that might only last half an hour too..

 

[Yellow Fang]

I must admit I don't read as much of C+ as I used to. I used to read it cover to cover. It still has a lot of good articles. I especially like wotisname's articles about the old racing days.

 

[Cathryn]

Just back from work - thanks for the general consensus that I should submit my photo to C+. I might just do that for a giggle!

I'd really like a touring magazine but I don't feel the need for it - there are online resources which are almost unbeatable in my view (crazyguy springs to mind) and I do think C+ do a decent amount of coverage for touring.

I guess my 'Vogue' analogy explains where C+ fits in my mind. I'm not built like a proper cyclist, I don't go for speed, I actually don't want a new bike and am very happy with Liesl but it's kind of the drool factor that I like about C+.

 

[Chuffy]

it's kind of the drool factor that I like about C+.

Is this why you're going to sub your photo, eh?
Sales of Kleenex to middle aged male CCers will soar exponentially...

 

[Cathryn]

Ew.....hadn't thought of that!!

 

[Chuffy]

Ew.....hadn't thought of that!!

For wiping drool off chins. Honestly... Standard reaction to any lady offering up photos of herself.
But don't let that stop you!

 

[Dave5N]

I must admit I don't read as much of C+ as I used to. I used to read it cover to cover. It still has a lot of good articles. I especially like wotisname's articles about the old racing days.

Roger St. Pierre?

Don't know much about him but he does communicate a real passion for his subject. Talks about the heroes of yesterday, not himself unlike other cycling historians.