SoulOnIce
New Member
- Location
- Robin Hood territory
Got hold of a couple of free copies courtesy of a thread somewhere on CC (I can't recall where) where you could just e-mail and ask for them.
So here's a quick review of the magazine (when I have more time I will post more):
1. It is different to the general bike mag stuff you find - highly commendable
2. Trikes, recumbents and and tandems and other multi person bikes) are well covered.
3. Production values of the mag are not quite as high as "professional" corporately produced mags, but it is good enough and this slight "non corporate" feel actually makes it better IMHO. Not low tech but "nicely less than perfect tech"
4. Writing quality is not up to professional journo quality, in my view, but nonetheless it is way good enough. What it might lacking journalist skill and style it more than makes up for in passion and enthusiasm.
5. If you want specialist "bike porn" about MTBs with the latest "super fly feather lite suspension" or road bikes with the latest "500g di-lithium racing frame" this is not the right mag for you. But if you want to see "the other side of cycling" e.g. trikes, bikes as delivery vehicles, weird tandems, HPVs, etc you should give this mag a go.
And lastly I would say I own a £300 hybrid that I use for commuting so I am no bike geek, but I loved this mag and the stuff it covered. Last comment relates to my wife - who is has no interest in bikes - and she spent a good half hour with the mag making all sorts of exclamatory comments about the weird and wonderful bikes in the mag. But she, as a non bike geek, was engrossed in it and I guess that shows how good the mag is.
And yes, I have subscribed to it.
More info here:
http://www.velovision.com/
So here's a quick review of the magazine (when I have more time I will post more):
1. It is different to the general bike mag stuff you find - highly commendable
2. Trikes, recumbents and and tandems and other multi person bikes) are well covered.
3. Production values of the mag are not quite as high as "professional" corporately produced mags, but it is good enough and this slight "non corporate" feel actually makes it better IMHO. Not low tech but "nicely less than perfect tech"
4. Writing quality is not up to professional journo quality, in my view, but nonetheless it is way good enough. What it might lacking journalist skill and style it more than makes up for in passion and enthusiasm.
5. If you want specialist "bike porn" about MTBs with the latest "super fly feather lite suspension" or road bikes with the latest "500g di-lithium racing frame" this is not the right mag for you. But if you want to see "the other side of cycling" e.g. trikes, bikes as delivery vehicles, weird tandems, HPVs, etc you should give this mag a go.
And lastly I would say I own a £300 hybrid that I use for commuting so I am no bike geek, but I loved this mag and the stuff it covered. Last comment relates to my wife - who is has no interest in bikes - and she spent a good half hour with the mag making all sorts of exclamatory comments about the weird and wonderful bikes in the mag. But she, as a non bike geek, was engrossed in it and I guess that shows how good the mag is.
And yes, I have subscribed to it.
More info here:
http://www.velovision.com/