can we believe the magazines?

[LeonF]

This month PBO and Yachting Monthly both review the new Hunter 35. One praises its modest angle of heel, the other invokes its high angle of heel as an 'against' point. Or is it just that one man's modesty is another man's extreme?

<hr width=100% size=1>L.A.R.Ferguson

 

[tillergirl]

Have a look at the Sailing Today tests compared to the YM ones. They have both reviewed identical boats (if not the actual same ones) and the conclusions are quite different. I guess it's like newspapers. You read the one that tell you the kind of things you like to read. I criticised the Sun O 35 test in YM because JJ described the chart table size as reasonable which it didn't seem to be in pictures. In Sailing Today, they didn't even comment on the size. So you wouldn't know from Sailing Today but but you would have a view from YM which I thought looked a very rosy description. In fairness to JJ, he was quite critical of the Sun O's set up whereas ST were not. That's why different mags are interesting to read.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Birdseye]

Tests are inevitably subjective. They are also written with an eye to the advertising spend and, perhaps more importantly, the opportunity to test the next boat along. So you must interpret what is said, particularly in areas that might be critical.

Would you ever buy a boat without trying it yourself? So maybe tests are simply to help form the shortlist.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[warrior40]

Well, all 3 magazines, refer to their test as an 'Exclusive' (!)
so what does that make you think??

<hr width=100% size=1>