The issue as I see it with earthmovers is because it is a well circulated, print based publication - it is very expensive to make. To cover the expense, they are very keen to get advertising, which as a straight forward advert, isn't so bad. Its the hidden agenda articles, paid for by big manufacturers on clients who have just bought several machines or maybe a new model that piss me off. The article wont focus on the business and how they utilise the plant, but more on the bloody plant dealer and machine spec's. And if I've seen 10 fairly standard spec 13t machines covered in that magazine - I've seen 100!
Our game is so diverse, you're telling me that the best we can do is cover another large groundworks firm who just happens to have bought several of JCB's latest X series but are using it for the same boring standard arse site work and all the operator can comment on is "how smooth it is" and "the cab is really spacious"..... COME ON!!!!! Surely they can do better than that. We've all sat on machines and found bits we like and don't like and I'm damn sure I can find more to say than its smooth.
We have better conversations and "reviews" on here about the pro's and con's of various 1.5t machines than earthmovers have ever done on any new model of any size, and they get to see them all.
Occasionally there are some really good articles, last months one about the Irish firm with the pole planter backhoes was well written and showed the different machines and how he uses them in the work he does. There was also one about a 20t Volvo who seems to be getting the hang of working on his own laying storm pipes. I like that, its new technology being applied in the real world. I know it cant be easy to write an article about a machine, having only played with it in the manufacturers playground, but us plant guys arent stupid and I think we would appreciate a bit of honesty in the writing, good and bad, rather than the usual bland "its a great machine" rhetoric.
