Indian's New Scout 60 in MCN??? Err maybe not...

[bad Chad]

Did you read the article, featured as the cover article in the February Motorcycle Consumer News?   Neither did I, because it doesn't exist, at least not in the copy I received!

I haven't read MCN for a couple years, I let it expire because I felt their coverage of our beloved brand was biased.  Their review of the Cali Black Eagle was hyper critical and off base in several areas.  More recently they smeared the Cal 1400 as well, please don't argue the point, I'm merely giving my opinion, and the reason I gave up on them.   But a month or so back, our northern IL rep, Tim Smith let me and many others know that MCN could be had for a year for $5, for that price, why not.

Got the first issue here, and it features the Indian Scout 60 on the full face of the cover, its the only photo on the cover.  But now I have gone through the thin 32 pages 4 times, and there exist no nothing on the Scout 60!  How do you make a mistake like that???

[pmillar]

Hang in there. It appears David Searle is leaving the magazine so maybe things will change a bit. And yes, there is no article on the Scout 60 despite the cover photo. It makes me wonder what exactly happened.

[EldoMike]

Write up on the new Scout in the latest Cycle World...

[pyoungbl]

Yep, page 51 on CW...full page on the 60.  MCN...don't have any idea how they screwed the pooch on that.

Peter Y.

[Lcarlson]

They didn't actually smear the Cali 1400 as I recall, but I agree, it was not an apprropriate review either. My recollection is that they didn't review it as a cruiser, which it is. IIRC, they concluded that it was trying to be a 700 lb Ducati Monster, or words to that effect. That's nonsense of course, as its competition is HD and other cruisers, against which it stacks up well. Instead of recognizing that it is a really good cruiser, they claimed it didn't really know what it wanted to be. MCN misses the point sometimes, free of advertising as they may be.

[Kev m]

I haven't cared about reviews for years.

The only reason I get MCN is for the source l specs.

[bad Chad]

I do, not so much personally, but for their potential affect on sales.  For a tiny organazation like Guzzi, with next to no advertising, negative reviews in the media may be very powerful.   So with that in mind, if negative reviews are deserved, so be it, but if they aren't, i have no room for them.

[DaSwami]

I haven't cared about reviews for years.

The only reason I get MCN is for the source l specs.

+1, their final specs page on their reviews has info that is often difficult to find, and it appeals to a data junkie like me

[toma nova]

I've been getting MCN for 12+ years and it's the only magazine I save all the back issues.  I also appreciate the data and used the reviews of both the Gen 1 and current Stelvio to confirm my choice.

MCN is far from a slick glossy.  I think the content is tops, but the editing has lots of room for improvement.  Some of the reviewers / writers are better than others but it appears that there are only 2-3 full time staffers (Searle, Seever, Jeff something new reviewer).  All the columnists have day jobs and my guess is that the copy editing and layout are done by non-riders / interns.  Still, I think the subscription is worth it.

It makes me wonder how the others can put out such a professional product for my $5 per year.  LOTS of revenue / influence from advertisers / manufacturers.  Keep that in mind when reading those reviews.

[Two Checks]

Now you know why it was only five bucks.

[kingoffleece]

I can't get on the dislike for MCN.  Maybe it's a tough road for them right now-every mag had had that at one time or another-but it's one of the few that at least attempt to offer a fair objective look at our sport.

I too save all the many years of back issues for that mag only.  They may not be perfect, good lord forgive, but they make, IMHO, by FAR the best attempt at it.  I don't get tweaked when my favorite bikes are less than 10/10 in a review.  Most of the time if I look objectively the reviewer has some good points.  What I don't get is the comments about seats, screens, pegs, and such.  It's a personal fit item and to expect it to be fit for any individual is mistaken, I think.  Most of us understand that I'd imagine.

I'm also a bit put of when things like "the V7 5 speed gear box is (insert comment here like long throw, hard to find first, and the like) well, does that REALLY matter?  have we not figured how to be one with our machines?  Is it really that bad if a false nuetral happens at times, especially since these things fade as a owner learns what his machine likes and does not?

In a broader sense tht's one of the thinks that GUZZI ownership offers.  Most of the riders with these machines I know care not about supposed perfection but instead seek out the lovely experience that the GUZZI offers.

[Gliderjohn]

I have been taking MCN for many years. I must say in recent times it is not the magazine it once was. I will probably give it another year or two to see what new leadership does. If no significant improvement I will probably no longer renew.
Anymore their most helpful information is on accessories and riding gear.
It would be nice if they could do some long term evaluations on at least a few bikes. Another would be some kind of more systematic evaluation of ease or lack of concerning common maintenance items and if any special tools are required. For example there can be a huge difference between bikes in something as common as removing a rear tire wheel. My 2.5 cents worth.
GliderJohn

[blackcat]

The length of valve adjustment with related cost for different Guzzi's with the same engine always made me laugh.