I'd like to see more info in TGO kit tests about how the gear was tested. I reckon TGO tests are as good as any, if not better than most. But all tests have their limitations. A good example was the three season boot test in the April issue. In many ways it was an excellent review - there was certainly a lot of information. But I'd've liked to know more about the testing process and the amount and type of walking the tester did in each pair of boots. I recently bought some new boots and was thinking of writing a review for this forum, but after only 100 miles I'm not sure I've really put them through their paces. For example I haven't tried them in really wet conditions or hot weather - both of which a good 3 season boot should be expected to cope with. Nor can I really comment on durability yet. Ideally I'd like to wear a pair of boots for a year before really commenting on them - but that would be totally unrealistic for a magazine test (not least because by the time the review was published the manufacturers would've launched new models rendering the test completely redundant!). The TGO test included 17 pairs of boots so if the tester walked 100 miles in each that would mean walking 1700 miles! Even if he'd walked at 3 miles an hour for 8 hours a day that would've taken 70 days! So I'm assuming each pair of boots probably got no more than one walk each (which because of the magazine schedules were mostly done in snow - which seemed like a slightly irrelevant test for summer boots!). It would be really useful to have a paragraph at the start of each review to explain what criteria were looked at, how those criteria were tested and how they were scored.

I agree - in particular the terrain also makes a differnce, have they been used on good paths/boggy ground/etc
All makes a differnce when reviewing the results

It would be great if you got a thorough run down of where, when & what weather the gear has been tested in- would give you a better idea of its suitability for what you'll be using it for. For example the lightweight waterproof jackets- have they had more than one outing in heavy rain? Was it west coast rain? Was it west coat rain in June? (surely the wettest rain of all!) Were they tested at Munro height or just on low level routes? Have they survived being washed/ reproofed, then taken back to the west coast for more rain? etc etc etc...

Clamberer I think you are starting to enjoy the west coast rain too much.
A man more famous than I once said "West coast rain is lazy rain. It trys to go through you rather than round you."

With the best will in the world it would be very difficult to expect our reviewers to include such detail in the comparative tests they write. That's why we occasionally feature Trip Reports. These include details of the weather, the terrain and the general conditions experienced in the context of a trip where the writer is testing several items of gear.
In an ideal world it would be great to include all that detail in our comparative tests but I'm afraid it's not practical.

The gear reports and trip reports in TGO are the best I have found given the restraints of selling mags too....LOL.They are more exacting than most.....
Each month I look forward to Mr Townsends travels and Mr Meechans lightweight section.I have been inspired to head for the Sutherland trail this year.

For testing allegedly waterproof boots and shoes, I would suggest a basic test of walking through a quarter of a mile of unmown dewy pasture. In my experience, this would soon determine the waterproofness!

Mole, I do indeed walk through wet grass to test footwear claimed to be waterproof. And through puddles, bogs, streams and any other water I can find. Plus rain of course. But even so all I can do is report on whether the footwear is waterproof when fairly new. Our comparative reviews usually have 15 items in them. If I walked at least 100 miles to test a pair of boots that would be 1500 miles for a feature!

"It trys to go through you rather than round you."

Thought that was an Orkney wind

Mole, I do indeed walk through wet grass to test footwear claimed to be waterproof. And through puddles, bogs, streams and any other water I can find. Plus rain of course. But even so all I can do is report on whether the footwear is waterproof when fairly new. Our comparative reviews usually have 15 items in them. If I walked at least 100 miles to test a pair of boots that would be 1500 miles for a feature!