Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

INITIAL REPORT: Montrail Namche - Fuzzy

Expand Messages
  • Fuzzy
    INITIAL REPORT: Montrail Namche - Fuzzy Nice design. Yahooisms blah blah blah… HTML in test folder at
    Message 1 of 12 , May 31, 2007
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      INITIAL REPORT: Montrail Namche - Fuzzy
      Nice design. Yahooisms blah blah blah… HTML in test folder at
      http://www.backpackgeartest.org/reviews/test/TESTS/Montrail%20Namche%
      20-%20Fuzzy/
      - or -
      http://tinyurl.com/yt2a4k

      Can't wait to get out in these.

      Fuzzy (Chuck Kime)
      *************************
      Montrail Namche Boots

      Contents
      • Reviewer Information
      • Backpacking Background
      • Product Information
      • Features and Benefits
      • Initial Report – May, 2007
      o Arrival
      o Description
      o First Impressions
      o Field Testing Plan
      o Things I am/will be looking for
      o My findings so far
      o Things I Like
      o Things I Don't Like

      Reviewer Information

      Name: Chuck Kime
      Nickname: Fuzzy
      Age: 40
      Gender: Male
      Height: 5' 8" (172 cm)
      Weight: 243 lb (110 kg)
      Email address: chuck_kime AT yahoo DOT com
      City, State, Country: Upper Darby (Philadelphia suburb),
      Pennsylvania, U.S.A.

      Additional Information applicable to this test

      Foot size: 9½EEEE (US)
      Shoe size: 8½EEE – 10D (US)

      Backpacking Background

      My family started car/trailer camping when I was about 5. I now go
      on monthly Boy Scout camping/hiking weekends, with similar family
      trips occasionally, and plan to add one or two week-long trips per
      year. Advancing age, arthritic knees and injuries have led me to
      rethink my gear choices, switch to hammocking, make some of my own
      gear, and look closer at my `toys' with an eye for multi-use and
      light weight. I now have a sub-20 lb (9 kg) 3-season load – before
      food, fuel and water – and should be able to reduce it further with a
      little effort.

      Additional Background applicable to this test

      I have been wearing shoes for… lesseee… twelve times four… plus
      three… carry the one… oh, almost 40 years now. I prefer leather to
      vinyl/synthetics on the non-mesh outer part of shoes. I also wear
      my `technical/hiking' clothing at other times, so as not to increase
      the storage space I require (and my wife's ire) by having duplicate
      items, and to give me increased testing opportunities.

      Product Information

      Manufacturer: Montrail
      Model: Namche
      Year of Manufacture: 2007
      URL: http://www.montrail.com
      Listed weight: none
      Measured weight (size 10): 2 lb 1 oz (936 g), scale accurate to 0.1 oz
      Color: Bombay Brown
      Other color available: Celery
      MSRP: none given

      Features (from web site)
      • Animal
      o Thru-hiking
      o Bushwhacking
      o Hot and humid
      o Dry and dusty
      • Comfort
      o Weight-minimizing construction
      o Ventilated abrasion-resistant forefoot
      o Protection of a boot
      o Feel of a running shoe in a mid-height design
      • Performance
      o Gryptonite™ GT sticky traction
       GT is non-marking and has great friction on a variety of
      trail surfaces, while being hard and durable enough for high mileage
      uses.
       GT ensures traction with sharp lugs along the length of the
      outsole and under the heel.
      o Stout ankle support
      o Ultrarunning-proven stability and protection

      ¬¬
      Initial Report – April, 2007

      Arrival
      The Namches arrived on May 21, 2007, in a standard retail box.
      Printed inside the box lid in both English and French are a variety
      of statements and quotes about conservation and protecting the
      planet. Printed in the box bottom, also in English and French, is
      another similarly-themed section that I am happy to see from an
      outdoor manufacturer, titled "Less is more." ("Qui peut le plus peut
      le moins.") It reads "We are doing our best to reduce the
      environmental impact of producing quality footwear. Our initiatives
      include using only maximum recycled content boxes plus eliminating
      stuffing, wrapping, and marketing materials. Please help by
      recycling or reusing this box." Box and contents appeared undamaged.

      Description
      The Namche is part of Montrail's Fusion line, meant to be a
      lightweight, protective option for long-distance hikers. They are
      mid-height (higher than a running shoe, slightly lower than a
      chukka), with a well padded collar and tongue, heel and tongue pull-
      loops, a tension-distributing lacing system, a removable/replaceable
      insole, and a deeply lugged sole. From top to bottom:

      The tongue is thickly padded with a sewn-on pull-loop. The tongue is
      lined with the same fabric as the rest of the shoe, while the outside
      mesh fabric is mostly covered by a perforated `leather' patch. Down
      the center of this patch are some sewn-in webbing details, one of
      which provides a lace-through loop to keep the tongue from sliding
      down into the shoe.

      The collar – also thickly padded – is cut at a slant, just covering
      my ankle bones in front and the most vulnerable portion of my
      Achilles tendon in the back. There is a pull-loop at the rear of the
      collar, sized sufficiently – though barely – for my thick fingers to
      fit through. A little bigger would be nice.

      The lacing system is primarily loops of ¼ in (7 mm) webbing, five on
      each side and one at bottom center, with two plastic/nylon/rubber
      eyelets on each side at the top. The side webbing loops go from the
      laces all the way to the sole of the shoe, distributing the lacing
      tension completely around the foot and not just across the instep.
      The shoes came pre-laced, with the laces run back through the top
      eyelets instead of forward, which helps to lock the lacing down a bit
      more. I will likely try them both ways to see if I notice a
      difference.

      The upper of the shoe is primarily a fairly open mesh, covered on the
      sides with a finer, stiffer clear mesh, presumable for wear
      protection. There is a rubber toe bumper in the front, as well as a
      semi-rigid clear plastic/vinyl reinforcement about 1 in (2-3 cm) high
      all the way around the shoe where it meets the outsole. The outside
      of the collar continues on both sides forward and down to meet the
      outsole near the back of the arch.

      The outsole is fairly thick in the back, tapering to a thinner,
      rounded profile in the front to aid in stepping off. The black
      rubber sole, which Montrail calls their GT formulation, is sharply
      and deeply lugged, which should keep most mud from getting stuck and
      aid in traction on loose soils. Separation between the heel and
      forefoot is noticeable, and an insert of a different material takes
      up the inner portion of the sole.

      First Impressions
      The Namches are full of nice details, pretty much what I expected
      from reading the web site. I look forward to getting some trail
      miles in them.

      Field Testing Plan
      Our Boy Scout troop camps monthly, generally in the wooded areas of
      southeastern Pennsylvania and the Pocono Mountains. Almost all of
      these outings include a minimum of 2 nights of camping, with
      temperatures expected to be from lows around freezing to highs around
      90 ºF (32 ºC) during the 4-month test period. Elevations will range
      from sea level to approximately 1,500' (457 m). We have added
      monthly hikes to our schedule as well. My wife and I, who between us
      have 3 high-ranking boy scouts (ages 15, 16 and 17), are also looking
      into additional camping without the scouts, and there are
      possibilities of some AT section hikes (with overnights) in
      Pennsylvania with my son as he works towards the Hiking Merit Badge.

      We have several trips definitely on our schedule so far for this
      year: a potential rafting trip in June, and summer camp – with *much*
      hiking – in July, along with some parades and hikes with my son.

      I plan to wear the boots on all coming outdoor trips, including
      camping and hiking, as well as wearing them to work and around town
      as the weather dictates, checking for both comfort and durability.

      Things I am/will be looking for:
      • Fit. Do they fit me? Is the sizing accurate?
      • Materials. Is the upper durable? Does the outsole wear much?
      • Comfort. Do they provide good arch support (and, if not, can
      other insoles be used)? Do they hold my feet securely while
      walking/hiking? Do they pad my heel strike well (I ain't small)?
      • Traction. Do they slip at all on wet rocks? How about wet
      pavement? Do they shed mud well?
      • Ventilation. How warm can it get and still keep my feet
      cool? How cool can it get and still keep my feet warm?
      • Smell. Do they hold any stench?
      • Appearance. Can I wear them to work? Out to dinner?
      • Washability. Are there special instructions? Are they easy
      to follow? Do they dry well? Do they hold much dirt in the first
      place?

      My findings so far:
      • Fit. I found the Namches in size 10 to be both too short
      (very unusual for me) and too narrow (not, unfortunately, very
      unusual). I will be exchanging them for a size larger.
      • Appearance. I like them.

      Things I like
      1. Light.
      2. Airy.

      Things I don't like
      1. Sizing is not consistent with other brands.


      ¬
      Field Report

      Look for my Field Report in mid-late July.

      Thank you for your time.

      Chuck Kime
      a.k.a. Fuzzy
    • Andrew Priest
      ... From: backpackgeartesters@yahoogroups.com [mailto:backpackgeartesters@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Fuzzy Sent: Friday, 1 June 2007 1:44 AM To:
      Message 2 of 12 , Jun 2, 2007
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        -----Original Message-----
        From: backpackgeartesters@yahoogroups.com
        [mailto:backpackgeartesters@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Fuzzy
        Sent: Friday, 1 June 2007 1:44 AM
        To: backpackgeartesters@yahoogroups.com
        Subject: [backpackgeartesters] INITIAL REPORT: Montrail Namche - Fuzzy

        INITIAL REPORT: Montrail Namche - Fuzzy
        Nice design. Yahooisms blah blah blah. HTML in test folder at
        http://www.backpackgeartest.org/reviews/test/TESTS/Montrail%20Namche%
        20-%20Fuzzy/
        - or -
        http://tinyurl.com/yt2a4k

        Can't wait to get out in these.

        Fuzzy (Chuck Kime)
        *************************
        Montrail Namche Boots

        Additional Background applicable to this test

        I have been wearing shoes for. lesseee. twelve times four. plus three. carry
        the one. oh, almost 40 years now. I prefer leather to vinyl/synthetics on
        the non-mesh outer part of shoes. I also wear my `technical/hiking'
        clothing at other times, so as not to increase the storage space I require
        (and my wife's ire) by having duplicate items, and to give me increased
        testing opportunities.

        EDIT:> I am struggling to see what value this adds to the report. We all
        pretty much wear shoes. Unless it can shown to add some value, it needs to
        go.

        Features (from web site)
        . Animal
        o Thru-hiking
        o Bushwhacking
        o Hot and humid
        o Dry and dusty
        . Comfort
        o Weight-minimizing construction
        o Ventilated abrasion-resistant forefoot
        o Protection of a boot
        o Feel of a running shoe in a mid-height design
        . Performance
        o GryptoniteT GT sticky traction
         GT is non-marking and has great friction on a variety of
        trail surfaces, while being hard and durable enough for high mileage uses.
         GT ensures traction with sharp lugs along the length of the
        outsole and under the heel.
        o Stout ankle support
        o Ultrarunning-proven stability and protection

        EDIT:> This appears to be just a repeat of the website? If that is correct,
        then again I am struggling to see the point of including it all. I would
        rather see the relevant parts picked up as part of your description/initial
        review of the product.


        Arrival
        The Namches arrived on May 21, 2007, in a standard retail box.
        Printed inside the box lid in both English and French are a variety of
        statements and quotes about conservation and protecting the planet. Printed
        in the box bottom, also in English and French, is another similarly-themed
        section that I am happy to see from an outdoor manufacturer, titled "Less is
        more." ("Qui peut le plus peut le moins.") It reads "We are doing our best
        to reduce the environmental impact of producing quality footwear. Our
        initiatives include using only maximum recycled content boxes plus
        eliminating stuffing, wrapping, and marketing materials. Please help by
        recycling or reusing this box." Box and contents appeared undamaged.

        EDIT:> This whole section needs to be removed as per our recent discussions.
        There is nothing here relevant to the testing of the product. If you want to
        discuss the policies and packaging practices of the manufacturer please do
        so in a group such as BackpackingTalk.

        Description
        The Namche is part of Montrail's Fusion line, meant to be a lightweight,
        protective option for long-distance hikers. They are mid-height (higher
        than a running shoe, slightly lower than a chukka), with a well padded
        collar and tongue, heel and tongue pull- loops, a tension-distributing
        lacing system, a removable/replaceable insole, and a deeply lugged sole.
        From top to bottom:

        <snip...>

        COMMENT: This part is good and does much more than the repeating of the
        website early.

        First Impressions
        The Namches are full of nice details, pretty much what I expected from
        reading the web site. I look forward to getting some trail miles in them.

        EDIT: "Full of nice details" does not tell the reader much at all. Please
        tell us about those nice details. What has grabbed you about the boots?

        My findings so far:
        . Fit. I found the Namches in size 10 to be both too short
        (very unusual for me) and too narrow (not, unfortunately, very unusual). I
        will be exchanging them for a size larger.
        . Appearance. I like them.

        Things I like
        1. Light.
        2. Airy.

        Things I don't like
        1. Sizing is not consistent with other brands.

        EDIT:> This part could go into your first impressions. You also need to
        discuss more about what you like. Your list of things you like don't go with
        your early statement, "full of nice details."

        I look forward to your revised Initial Report Chuck.

        Regards
        Andrew, sir
      • Fuzzy
        ... three. carry ... ... We all ... needs to ... This bit was meant partially to add some levity (a style thing). I can t show any value other than
        Message 3 of 12 , Jun 4, 2007
        View Source
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In backpackgeartesters@yahoogroups.com, "Andrew Priest"
          <apriest@...> wrote:
          >
          > I have been wearing shoes for. lesseee. twelve times four. plus
          three. carry
          > the one. oh, almost 40 years now. I prefer leather to
          <snip>
          > EDIT:> I am struggling to see what value this adds to the report.
          We all
          > pretty much wear shoes. Unless it can shown to add some value, it
          needs to
          > go.

          This bit was meant partially to add some levity (a style thing). I
          can't show any value other than that without serious work. C'es la
          vie...

          > Features (from web site)
          > . Animal
          <snip>
          > o Ultrarunning-proven stability and protection
          >
          > EDIT:> This appears to be just a repeat of the website? If that is
          correct,
          > then again I am struggling to see the point of including it all. I
          would
          > rather see the relevant parts picked up as part of your
          description/initial
          > review of the product.

          Addressing the manufacturer's claims - specifically, whether or not
          the product meets those claims - is part of testing, yes? Plus, this
          section could help the reader determine if this is the style of shoe
          thay are looking for in the first place. I have included an extract
          from the manufacturer in 40+ test series to date - has something
          changed?

          > Arrival
          > The Namches arrived on May 21, 2007, in a standard retail box.
          <snip>
          > recycling or reusing this box." Box and contents appeared
          undamaged.
          >
          > EDIT:> This whole section needs to be removed as per our recent
          discussions.
          > There is nothing here relevant to the testing of the product. If
          you want to
          > discuss the policies and packaging practices of the manufacturer
          please do
          > so in a group such as BackpackingTalk.

          I feel I must disagree on this. Part of the decision-making process
          for some users is the manufacturer's concern - or lack thereof - for
          the environment. If we are to provide information to the readers to
          help them make these decisions, should we not provide all relavent
          information? For example, we are *encouraged* to indicate the level
          of service provided by the manufacturers' Customer Service
          departments - this is reporting on their 'Planet Service'
          department. I will hold my edit for your response.

          > Description
          > The Namche is part of Montrail's Fusion line, meant to be a
          lightweight,
          > protective option for long-distance hikers. They are mid-height
          (higher
          > than a running shoe, slightly lower than a chukka), with a well
          padded
          > collar and tongue, heel and tongue pull- loops, a tension-
          distributing
          > lacing system, a removable/replaceable insole, and a deeply lugged
          sole.
          > From top to bottom:
          >
          > <snip...>
          >
          > COMMENT: This part is good and does much more than the repeating of
          the
          > website early.

          Acknowledged.

          > First Impressions
          > The Namches are full of nice details, pretty much what I expected
          from
          > reading the web site. I look forward to getting some trail miles
          in them.
          >
          > EDIT: "Full of nice details" does not tell the reader much at all.
          Please
          > tell us about those nice details. What has grabbed you about the
          boots?

          Most all of the description is an enumeration of the nice details. I
          will expand this paragraph.

          > My findings so far:
          > . Fit. I found the Namches in size 10 to be both too short
          > (very unusual for me) and too narrow (not, unfortunately, very
          unusual). I
          > will be exchanging them for a size larger.
          > . Appearance. I like them.
          >
          > Things I like
          > 1. Light.
          > 2. Airy.
          >
          > Things I don't like
          > 1. Sizing is not consistent with other brands.
          >
          > EDIT:> This part could go into your first impressions.

          It could. I have a layout I prefer to follow, though, that helps
          remind me to cover everything. As long as it's all there, I would
          say it's a formatting issue.

          > You also need to
          > discuss more about what you like. Your list of things you like
          don't go with
          > your early statement, "full of nice details."

          Hmmmm... I will look at this.

          > I look forward to your revised Initial Report Chuck.
          >
          > Regards
          > Andrew, sir
        • Andrew Priest
          ... From: backpackgeartesters@yahoogroups.com [mailto:backpackgeartesters@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Fuzzy Sent: Tuesday, 5 June 2007 1:37 AM To:
          Message 4 of 12 , Jun 5, 2007
          View Source
          • 0 Attachment
            -----Original Message-----
            From: backpackgeartesters@yahoogroups.com
            [mailto:backpackgeartesters@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Fuzzy
            Sent: Tuesday, 5 June 2007 1:37 AM
            To: backpackgeartesters@yahoogroups.com
            Subject: [backpackgeartesters] Re: MODERATORS EDIT:> INITIAL REPORT:
            Montrail Namche - Fuzzy

            --- In backpackgeartesters@yahoogroups.com, "Andrew Priest"
            <apriest@...> wrote:
            >
            > I have been wearing shoes for. lesseee. twelve times four. plus
            three. carry
            > the one. oh, almost 40 years now. I prefer leather to
            <snip>
            > EDIT:> I am struggling to see what value this adds to the report.
            We all
            > pretty much wear shoes. Unless it can shown to add some value, it
            needs to
            > go.

            This bit was meant partially to add some levity (a style thing). I can't
            show any value other than that without serious work. C'es la vie...

            AP:> Please lets not use a "style thing" as an excuse for including material
            which really adds no value to the report. It comes across as an attempt to
            extend the bio without adding value. Style that adds value, information etc
            I have no problem with. This does not and it should go please.

            > Features (from web site)
            > . Animal
            <snip>
            > o Ultrarunning-proven stability and protection
            >
            > EDIT:> This appears to be just a repeat of the website? If that is
            correct,
            > then again I am struggling to see the point of including it all. I
            would
            > rather see the relevant parts picked up as part of your
            description/initial
            > review of the product.

            Addressing the manufacturer's claims - specifically, whether or not the
            product meets those claims - is part of testing, yes?

            AP:> Yes, but you don't do that Chuck. You just list the stuff on the
            website. You are not testing or discussing those claims at this point. You
            do this later on, but NOT here. You are not adding anything of value here.
            Please remove this section or turn it to a constructive discussion relevant
            to the testing of the product.

            Plus, this section could help the reader determine if this is the style of
            shoe thay are looking for in the first place. I have included an extract
            from the manufacturer in 40+ test series to date - has something changed?

            AP:> Yes. I have the time to start reviewing the reports and address such
            issues and yes it is something I should have jumped on sometime ago. In 40+
            reports I would have hoped we would have seen a improvement in the reports
            we write. Take a look at what your peers are producing for an idea of where
            we are at.

            > Arrival
            > The Namches arrived on May 21, 2007, in a standard retail box.
            <snip>
            > recycling or reusing this box." Box and contents appeared
            undamaged.
            >
            > EDIT:> This whole section needs to be removed as per our recent
            discussions.
            > There is nothing here relevant to the testing of the product. If
            you want to
            > discuss the policies and packaging practices of the manufacturer
            please do
            > so in a group such as BackpackingTalk.

            I feel I must disagree on this.

            AP:> You are welcome to disagree but the decision holds. If you want to
            discuss the packaging there are appropriate forums. This is not it. This is
            a test of the product not the box, not the shipping, not the shipping
            company and so on.

            > Description
            > The Namche is part of Montrail's Fusion line, meant to be a
            lightweight,
            > protective option for long-distance hikers. They are mid-height
            (higher
            > than a running shoe, slightly lower than a chukka), with a well
            padded
            > collar and tongue, heel and tongue pull- loops, a tension-
            distributing
            > lacing system, a removable/replaceable insole, and a deeply lugged
            sole.
            > From top to bottom:
            >
            > <snip...>
            >
            > COMMENT: This part is good and does much more than the repeating of
            the
            > website early.

            Acknowledged.

            > First Impressions
            > The Namches are full of nice details, pretty much what I expected
            from
            > reading the web site. I look forward to getting some trail miles
            in them.
            >
            > EDIT: "Full of nice details" does not tell the reader much at all.
            Please
            > tell us about those nice details. What has grabbed you about the
            boots?

            Most all of the description is an enumeration of the nice details. I
            will expand this paragraph.

            > My findings so far:
            > . Fit. I found the Namches in size 10 to be both too short
            > (very unusual for me) and too narrow (not, unfortunately, very
            unusual). I
            > will be exchanging them for a size larger.
            > . Appearance. I like them.
            >
            > Things I like
            > 1. Light.
            > 2. Airy.
            >
            > Things I don't like
            > 1. Sizing is not consistent with other brands.
            >
            > EDIT:> This part could go into your first impressions.

            It could. I have a layout I prefer to follow, though, that helps
            remind me to cover everything. As long as it's all there, I would
            say it's a formatting issue.

            AP:> You seem to miss my point, I don't have a problem with the layout, I
            have a problem with the lack of content. The three things we like and the
            three things we don't like should be a summary of same, i.e., your report
            should tell us why you have reached these conclusions. That was the there
            purpose from day one. They are there to help you as the writer write about
            six things.
            This is NOT a style issue, it is a quality issue. Reading the report I have
            no idea why you have reached a conclusion that the you like them being
            "light" or "Airy" or why you have a problem with sizing.

            > You also need to
            > discuss more about what you like. Your list of things you like
            don't go with
            > your early statement, "full of nice details."

            Hmmmm... I will look at this.

            > I look forward to your revised Initial Report Chuck.

            AP:> I look forward to your revised report.

            Regards
            Andrew
          • Andrew Priest
            ... From: backpackgeartesters@yahoogroups.com [mailto:backpackgeartesters@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Fuzzy Sent: Tuesday, 5 June 2007 1:37 AM To:
            Message 5 of 12 , Jun 5, 2007
            View Source
            • 0 Attachment
              -----Original Message-----
              From: backpackgeartesters@yahoogroups.com
              [mailto:backpackgeartesters@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Fuzzy
              Sent: Tuesday, 5 June 2007 1:37 AM
              To: backpackgeartesters@yahoogroups.com
              Subject: [backpackgeartesters] Re: MODERATORS EDIT:> INITIAL REPORT:
              Montrail Namche - Fuzzy

              --- In backpackgeartesters@yahoogroups.com, "Andrew Priest"
              <apriest@...> wrote:
              >
              > I have been wearing shoes for. lesseee. twelve times four. plus
              three. carry
              > the one. oh, almost 40 years now. I prefer leather to
              <snip>
              > EDIT:> I am struggling to see what value this adds to the report.
              We all
              > pretty much wear shoes. Unless it can shown to add some value, it
              needs to
              > go.

              This bit was meant partially to add some levity (a style thing). I can't
              show any value other than that without serious work. C'es la vie...

              AP:> Okay with further thought I can live with your take. I just missed your
              point.

              > Features (from web site)
              > . Animal
              <snip>
              > o Ultrarunning-proven stability and protection
              >
              > EDIT:> This appears to be just a repeat of the website? If that is
              correct,
              > then again I am struggling to see the point of including it all. I
              would
              > rather see the relevant parts picked up as part of your
              description/initial
              > review of the product.

              Addressing the manufacturer's claims - specifically, whether or not the
              product meets those claims - is part of testing, yes?

              AP:> Yes it is, but you don't do that Chuck. You just list the stuff on the
              website, not even picking up relevant points which you can focus on. Nor do
              discuss these claims at this point t nor do you give any indication of doing
              same. You do with some key points later on, but NOT here. You are not
              adding anything of value here. Please remove this section or turn it to a
              constructive discussion relevant to the testing of the product.

              Plus, this section could help the reader determine if this is the style of
              shoe thay are looking for in the first place. I have included an extract
              from the manufacturer in 40+ test series to date - has something changed?

              AP:> Yes but is that what you are doing? I sentence of two from you
              describing the style of the shoe would be much better. It also shows how you
              as a tester see the shoe.

              In respect to your second comment. I now have the time to start reviewing
              the reports and to address such issues and yes it is something I should have
              jumped on sometime ago (my bad). In 40+ reports I would have hoped we would
              have seen a improvement in the reports we write. Take a look at what your
              peers are producing for an idea of where we are at. I must admit mind you I
              find it scary sometimes when I look at the quality of others reports but
              then it provides soemthing to aim for.

              > Arrival
              > The Namches arrived on May 21, 2007, in a standard retail box.
              <snip>
              > recycling or reusing this box." Box and contents appeared
              undamaged.
              >
              > EDIT:> This whole section needs to be removed as per our recent
              discussions.
              > There is nothing here relevant to the testing of the product. If
              you want to
              > discuss the policies and packaging practices of the manufacturer
              please do
              > so in a group such as BackpackingTalk.

              I feel I must disagree on this.

              AP:> You are welcome to disagree but the decision holds. It has been for
              that matter our decision for probably most, if not all of those 40+ tests
              you mentioned Chuck. If you want to discuss the packaging there are
              appropriate forums. This is not it. This is a test of the product not the
              box, not the shipping, not the shipping company and so on. If the packaging
              has some relevance to the use of the product, e.g., instructions, I wouldn't
              have an issue, but from what you have written that does not appear the case.
              If I have it wrong then you are wecome to change your wording to reflect
              this.

              > First Impressions
              > The Namches are full of nice details, pretty much what I expected
              from
              > reading the web site. I look forward to getting some trail miles
              in them.
              >
              > EDIT: "Full of nice details" does not tell the reader much at all.
              Please
              > tell us about those nice details. What has grabbed you about the
              boots?

              Most all of the description is an enumeration of the nice details. I
              will expand this paragraph.

              AP:> That maybe to you, but to me as a reader I am not getting that. One
              thing with edits Chuck is that you are getting feedback from someone reading
              what you write. Often that reader is seeing something or missing something
              you MAY think is there. I find people giving me this sort of feedback as
              being invaluable as they are looking at from the reader's perspective
              whereas I am coming from my perspective as the one with the product in my
              hand so to speak.

              > My findings so far:
              > . Fit. I found the Namches in size 10 to be both too short
              > (very unusual for me) and too narrow (not, unfortunately, very
              unusual). I
              > will be exchanging them for a size larger.
              > . Appearance. I like them.
              >
              > Things I like
              > 1. Light.
              > 2. Airy.
              >
              > Things I don't like
              > 1. Sizing is not consistent with other brands.
              >
              > EDIT:> This part could go into your first impressions.

              It could. I have a layout I prefer to follow, though, that helps
              remind me to cover everything. As long as it's all there, I would
              say it's a formatting issue.

              AP:> You seem to miss my point, I don't have a problem with the layout, I
              have a problem with the lack of content. The three things we like and the
              three things we don't like should be a summary of same, i.e., your report
              should tell us why you have reached these conclusions. That was the there
              purpose from day one. They are there to help you, as the writer, write about
              six things related to the product.

              So this is NOT a style issue, it is a quality issue. Reading the report I
              have no idea why you have reached a conclusion that the you like them being
              "light" or "Airy" or why you have a problem with sizing.

              > You also need to
              > discuss more about what you like. Your list of things you like
              don't go with
              > your early statement, "full of nice details."

              Hmmmm... I will look at this.

              > I look forward to your revised Initial Report Chuck.

              AP:> I look forward to your revised report.

              Regards
              Andrew
            • Andrew Priest
              Hi Fuzzy I may have missed you reply/indication of action taken so if so, can you please repost. If not, we need to get this sorted please. Please advise when
              Message 6 of 12 , Jun 16, 2007
              View Source
              • 0 Attachment
                Hi Fuzzy

                I may have missed you reply/indication of action taken so if so, can you
                please repost. If not, we need to get this sorted please. Please advise when
                done.

                Thanks
                Andrew, sir

                -----Original Message-----
                From: backpackgeartesters@yahoogroups.com
                [mailto:backpackgeartesters@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Andrew Priest
                Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2007 10:51 AM
                To: backpackgeartesters@yahoogroups.com
                Subject: CORRECTED:> RE: [backpackgeartesters] Re: MODERATORS EDIT:> INITIAL
                REPORT: Montrail Namche - Fuzzy



                -----Original Message-----
                From: backpackgeartesters@yahoogroups.com
                [mailto:backpackgeartesters@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Fuzzy
                Sent: Tuesday, 5 June 2007 1:37 AM
                To: backpackgeartesters@yahoogroups.com
                Subject: [backpackgeartesters] Re: MODERATORS EDIT:> INITIAL REPORT:
                Montrail Namche - Fuzzy

                --- In backpackgeartesters@yahoogroups.com, "Andrew Priest"
                <apriest@...> wrote:
                >
                > I have been wearing shoes for. lesseee. twelve times four. plus
                three. carry
                > the one. oh, almost 40 years now. I prefer leather to
                <snip>
                > EDIT:> I am struggling to see what value this adds to the report.
                We all
                > pretty much wear shoes. Unless it can shown to add some value, it
                needs to
                > go.

                This bit was meant partially to add some levity (a style thing). I can't
                show any value other than that without serious work. C'es la vie...

                AP:> Okay with further thought I can live with your take. I just missed your
                point.

                > Features (from web site)
                > . Animal
                <snip>
                > o Ultrarunning-proven stability and protection
                >
                > EDIT:> This appears to be just a repeat of the website? If that is
                correct,
                > then again I am struggling to see the point of including it all. I
                would
                > rather see the relevant parts picked up as part of your
                description/initial
                > review of the product.

                Addressing the manufacturer's claims - specifically, whether or not the
                product meets those claims - is part of testing, yes?

                AP:> Yes it is, but you don't do that Chuck. You just list the stuff on the
                website, not even picking up relevant points which you can focus on. Nor do
                discuss these claims at this point t nor do you give any indication of doing
                same. You do with some key points later on, but NOT here. You are not
                adding anything of value here. Please remove this section or turn it to a
                constructive discussion relevant to the testing of the product.

                Plus, this section could help the reader determine if this is the style of
                shoe thay are looking for in the first place. I have included an extract
                from the manufacturer in 40+ test series to date - has something changed?

                AP:> Yes but is that what you are doing? I sentence of two from you
                describing the style of the shoe would be much better. It also shows how you
                as a tester see the shoe.

                In respect to your second comment. I now have the time to start reviewing
                the reports and to address such issues and yes it is something I should have
                jumped on sometime ago (my bad). In 40+ reports I would have hoped we would
                have seen a improvement in the reports we write. Take a look at what your
                peers are producing for an idea of where we are at. I must admit mind you I
                find it scary sometimes when I look at the quality of others reports but
                then it provides soemthing to aim for.

                > Arrival
                > The Namches arrived on May 21, 2007, in a standard retail box.
                <snip>
                > recycling or reusing this box." Box and contents appeared
                undamaged.
                >
                > EDIT:> This whole section needs to be removed as per our recent
                discussions.
                > There is nothing here relevant to the testing of the product. If
                you want to
                > discuss the policies and packaging practices of the manufacturer
                please do
                > so in a group such as BackpackingTalk.

                I feel I must disagree on this.

                AP:> You are welcome to disagree but the decision holds. It has been for
                that matter our decision for probably most, if not all of those 40+ tests
                you mentioned Chuck. If you want to discuss the packaging there are
                appropriate forums. This is not it. This is a test of the product not the
                box, not the shipping, not the shipping company and so on. If the packaging
                has some relevance to the use of the product, e.g., instructions, I wouldn't
                have an issue, but from what you have written that does not appear the case.
                If I have it wrong then you are wecome to change your wording to reflect
                this.

                > First Impressions
                > The Namches are full of nice details, pretty much what I expected
                from
                > reading the web site. I look forward to getting some trail miles
                in them.
                >
                > EDIT: "Full of nice details" does not tell the reader much at all.
                Please
                > tell us about those nice details. What has grabbed you about the
                boots?

                Most all of the description is an enumeration of the nice details. I will
                expand this paragraph.

                AP:> That maybe to you, but to me as a reader I am not getting that. One
                thing with edits Chuck is that you are getting feedback from someone reading
                what you write. Often that reader is seeing something or missing something
                you MAY think is there. I find people giving me this sort of feedback as
                being invaluable as they are looking at from the reader's perspective
                whereas I am coming from my perspective as the one with the product in my
                hand so to speak.

                > My findings so far:
                > . Fit. I found the Namches in size 10 to be both too short
                > (very unusual for me) and too narrow (not, unfortunately, very
                unusual). I
                > will be exchanging them for a size larger.
                > . Appearance. I like them.
                >
                > Things I like
                > 1. Light.
                > 2. Airy.
                >
                > Things I don't like
                > 1. Sizing is not consistent with other brands.
                >
                > EDIT:> This part could go into your first impressions.

                It could. I have a layout I prefer to follow, though, that helps remind me
                to cover everything. As long as it's all there, I would say it's a
                formatting issue.

                AP:> You seem to miss my point, I don't have a problem with the layout, I
                have a problem with the lack of content. The three things we like and the
                three things we don't like should be a summary of same, i.e., your report
                should tell us why you have reached these conclusions. That was the there
                purpose from day one. They are there to help you, as the writer, write about
                six things related to the product.

                So this is NOT a style issue, it is a quality issue. Reading the report I
                have no idea why you have reached a conclusion that the you like them being
                "light" or "Airy" or why you have a problem with sizing.

                > You also need to
                > discuss more about what you like. Your list of things you like
                don't go with
                > your early statement, "full of nice details."

                Hmmmm... I will look at this.

                > I look forward to your revised Initial Report Chuck.

                AP:> I look forward to your revised report.

                Regards
                Andrew



                Yahoo! Groups Links
              • Fuzzy
                ... can you ... advise when ... Sir Andrew, I have been slammed at werk for most of the past 2 weeks as I ve been missing days to deal with some things at
                Message 7 of 12 , Jun 19, 2007
                View Source
                • 0 Attachment
                  --- In backpackgeartesters@yahoogroups.com, "Andrew Priest"
                  <apriest@...> wrote:
                  >
                  > Hi Fuzzy
                  >
                  > I may have missed you reply/indication of action taken so if so,
                  can you
                  > please repost. If not, we need to get this sorted please. Please
                  advise when
                  > done.

                  Sir Andrew,

                  I have been slammed at werk for most of the past 2 weeks as I've been
                  missing days to deal with some things at home. I am getting caught
                  up, albeit more slowly than I would like. I have looked back over
                  your edits with a more objective eye, and agree that I could be more
                  helpful to the reader. I hope to get the updated report up in the
                  next couple days. Thanks to all for your patience.

                  Fuzzy
                  Nemche Tester
                • Andrew Priest
                  Thanks Fuzzy. Hope things are getting better at work and home. Andrew ... Sir Andrew, I have been slammed at werk for most of the past 2 weeks as I ve been
                  Message 8 of 12 , Jun 21, 2007
                  View Source
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Thanks Fuzzy. Hope things are getting better at work and home.

                    Andrew


                    -----Original Message-----

                    Sir Andrew,

                    I have been slammed at werk for most of the past 2 weeks as I've been
                    missing days to deal with some things at home. I am getting caught up,
                    albeit more slowly than I would like. I have looked back over your edits
                    with a more objective eye, and agree that I could be more helpful to the
                    reader. I hope to get the updated report up in the next couple days.
                    Thanks to all for your patience.

                    Fuzzy
                    Nemche Tester
                  • Andrew Priest
                    Hi Fuzzy Any movement on this? Regards Andrew, sir ... From: backpackgeartesters@yahoogroups.com [mailto:backpackgeartesters@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
                    Message 9 of 12 , Jun 30, 2007
                    View Source
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Hi Fuzzy

                      Any movement on this?

                      Regards
                      Andrew, sir

                      -----Original Message-----
                      From: backpackgeartesters@yahoogroups.com
                      [mailto:backpackgeartesters@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Fuzzy
                      Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2007 12:54 AM
                      To: backpackgeartesters@yahoogroups.com
                      Subject: CORRECTED:> RE: [backpackgeartesters] Re: MODERATORS EDIT:> INITIAL
                      REPORT: Montrail Namche - Fuzzy

                      --- In backpackgeartesters@yahoogroups.com, "Andrew Priest"
                      <apriest@...> wrote:
                      >
                      > Hi Fuzzy
                      >
                      > I may have missed you reply/indication of action taken so if so,
                      can you
                      > please repost. If not, we need to get this sorted please. Please
                      advise when
                      > done.

                      Sir Andrew,

                      I have been slammed at werk for most of the past 2 weeks as I've been
                      missing days to deal with some things at home. I am getting caught up,
                      albeit more slowly than I would like. I have looked back over your edits
                      with a more objective eye, and agree that I could be more helpful to the
                      reader. I hope to get the updated report up in the next couple days.
                      Thanks to all for your patience.

                      Fuzzy
                      Nemche Tester





                      Yahoo! Groups Links
                    • Fuzzy
                      ... Sir Andrew, I uploaded it last week. I thought I notified the list but I can t seem to find the posting. Fuzzy
                      Message 10 of 12 , Jul 2, 2007
                      View Source
                      • 0 Attachment
                        --- In backpackgeartesters@yahoogroups.com, "Andrew Priest"
                        <apriest@...> wrote:
                        >
                        > Hi Fuzzy
                        >
                        > Any movement on this?
                        >
                        > Regards

                        Sir Andrew,

                        I uploaded it last week. I thought I notified the list but I can't
                        seem to find the posting.

                        Fuzzy
                      • Andrew Priest
                        Thanks Fuzzy. Do you have the URL by any chance? Regards Andrew ... From: backpackgeartesters@yahoogroups.com [mailto:backpackgeartesters@yahoogroups.com] On
                        Message 11 of 12 , Jul 2, 2007
                        View Source
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Thanks Fuzzy. Do you have the URL by any chance?

                          Regards
                          Andrew

                          -----Original Message-----
                          From: backpackgeartesters@yahoogroups.com
                          [mailto:backpackgeartesters@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Fuzzy
                          Sent: Monday, July 02, 2007 9:09 PM
                          To: backpackgeartesters@yahoogroups.com
                          Subject: CORRECTED:> RE: [backpackgeartesters] Re: MODERATORS EDIT:> INITIAL
                          REPORT: Montrail Namche - Fuzzy

                          --- In backpackgeartesters@yahoogroups.com, "Andrew Priest"
                          <apriest@...> wrote:
                          >
                          > Hi Fuzzy
                          >
                          > Any movement on this?
                          >
                          > Regards

                          Sir Andrew,

                          I uploaded it last week. I thought I notified the list but I can't seem to
                          find the posting.

                          Fuzzy





                          Yahoo! Groups Links
                        • Fuzzy
                          ... http://tinyurl.com/2stvb5
                          Message 12 of 12 , Jul 2, 2007
                          View Source
                          • 0 Attachment
                            --- In backpackgeartesters@yahoogroups.com, "Andrew Priest"
                            <apriest@...> wrote:
                            >
                            > Thanks Fuzzy. Do you have the URL by any chance?
                            >
                            > Regards
                            > Andrew

                            http://tinyurl.com/2stvb5
                          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.