[Closed] Bike reviews

I genuinely think we’ve got to a point now where there are no ‘bad’ bikes, it’s all just personal preference, So while a bike tester knows it might not be his cup of tea, he also knows it isn’t a bad bike so wouldn’t be fair to give it a pasting.

Manufacturers know now their audiences too. No one is going to send their wc dh rig to bikepackers monthly, and vice versus, sick bikes aren’t going to market to stw. Because the bike press has gone off into all its little niches, you’re always going to find a mag that likes what you do

Tomhoward puts it better than I could. Bang on.

If I know and trust a journalist's opinion, then yes, I find them useful.

I trust the people at STW and much of the older crowd.  Steve Worland had it right.

Never really found the MBR reviews useful. They rarely mentioned how much fun the bikes were to ride and seemed to be too hung up on spec.

MBUK was the Bible back in the old days. I like the fact some of those people are still writing now - it's interesting to see how everything has evolved.

I like this question. And I'am not a reviewer.

I like to read the reviews. And I don't trust them too much. But it's not possible for me to get hold of 200 bikes or so and ride them.

But also clear: the bike companies will try to get close to the reviewers. Maybe without "bad intentions". But both live from the same stuff: bikes! And both need each others. So even if the reviewers try to stay independent - sooner or later friendships will form and stuff like this. And this will influence the reviews. And yes - in the worst case they start to flatter certain companies...

Recently saw something about medicine and scientists. There the big companies exert lots of power. A scientist with the "wrong opinion" might not be able to continue with his/her career. But doubt that the bike companies have comparable power. They are too small?

But what is indeed strange: those "long term reviews" where nearly nothing fails. And if they state that they were biking in the worst mud and rain conditions possible.

Appears like they have totally different bikes from the ones I bike. There is always failing "some" stuff. The same stuff which was lasting 8 months or so in the long term review???

And yes: there are some sources for reviews which are complete crap. There I have indeed the impression that they were set up as sales tool only.

The question was prompted by an article I was reading about a new up and coming restraint in London a load of stuff posted online literally had critics reviewers and the rich and famous types bending over to get a seat.

Problem was it didn't exist , was completely made up

The bike mags remind me of audio/hifi mags with their reviews.  Always need to take them with a pinch of salt.  I like to think that if a review is absolutely glowing then the bike is at the very least not shit.  I often use reviews to help bolster a decision i've already made.  More of a justification i guess.

Didn't one of the bike mags suddenly pull a bad review of an Orange 5 last year only for the review to reappear with slightly better marks?

What gets me is the inconsistency: i.e. for bike A a, higher than is considered cool,bottom bracket is unbalanced, yet for bike B the same B.B. height is “good pedal clearance”.......this is just one example that I can think of to hand.

To be fair STW have a decent mix - they had a zombie escape review a while ago when they had three very different bikes (including a BTR which isn’t a million miles away from Sick).

Don’t trust some of the other mags but interesting to read sometimes anyway.

Some years ago Ride BMX magazine gave a KHE a bad review, not spiteful, just bad. KHE put loads of pressure on the magazine to try and get them to amend what they'd said. Instead they published all the correspondence to show the bullying and stated loud and clear what a shitty company KHE were. Awesome!

As long as you remember it's just opinions, it's fine. Often well informed opinions from people who ride a lot of different bikes, but also often people who've not bought a bike of their own for a decade, or who've forgotten that what they like =/ good, or who might be a riding god or a total knobber, or who've been asked to generate 2 pages of words based on a brief test ride on unfamiliar terrain with limited setup time. And no matter what their opinion is totally unimportant compared to your own.

MBR still take the prize for me, for "This is a £3000 bike test so we've included an Orange that costs £3100, specced £400 worth of optional upgrades, and we're giving it bonus marks specifically for those upgrades. Meanwhile the £2700 Lapierre can have a point off because it had bad brake pads"

Or the 50% of Steve Jones reviews that basically said "I rode a bike, and I am quite tall. It looks nice/not nice, delete as appropriate"