What bikes would you like us to do long-term tests of?

lovewales

Mrs Toast wrote:

I think you should do long term tests of women specific bikes. If none of the chaps on the team fancy it, I'll volunteer my testing services!

I do think it's about time that us women don't get the raw end of the deal. I haven't bought a mag for over a year because I feel that they are very male orientated, when the number of women coming into mountain biking is steadily increasing.

I would be interested in this idea of testing womens specific bikes as in the near future I will be looking at buying 2 :shock: for my daughters, plus I am fancying trying something with a bit of bounce for myself.

Also why doesn't anyone ever test kids bikes??? I know there are lots of questions in the family section, but we had a right job trying to find kids bikes, let alone being able to compare them, with 50ish miles between each model it became a nightmare.

PS if your wanting any female/child test riders I will volunteer myself and my daughters

adun1408

I'm sure one of the mags tested kids bikes not so long back.

The Northern Monkey

boardman full susser.

toasty

Although this goes against the grain completely but....

-1 for £500 bikes.

Test them, yes. Infact you already do, every few months it seems. A couple of pages is enough, they have a range of about 2 forks, Darts or Suntour XCR, brakes are one of about 3/4 bottom of the line disc brakes and all the other components follow the normal X5 or Deore standands.

How on earth could you take 1 of these bikes and write an action packed summary every month about how your gearing is still, err, fairly normal and clunky and that Darts are quite springy. It just doesn't make good reading, "This month I've been tinkering with all of the Darts features, I used the lockout while going up a steep incline".

£2000 is a lot to spend on a bike which is why people like a slightly longer test, much like anything really. If I were buying a £50 digital I might just go in the shop, try a couple, pick one I like and buy it. If I were buying a £1k SLR though I'd spend a hell of a lot longer researching and gathering as much info as I can. A half page writeup would suffice for the compact, you'd want a much bigger writeup on the more complicated model though.

I'd quite like a long term test of a Carbon Blur personally, not because I want one I just think it would make interesting reading. I'd also like to hear how a hub geared bike of some sort fairs in the long term from someone who puts lots of miles in, how viable would it be for marathon bikes? I agree with the new Cannondales as well, the Rush or Rize would be interesting too.

toasty

Mrs Toast wrote:

I think you should do long term tests of women specific bikes. If none of the chaps on the team fancy it, I'll volunteer my testing services!

Oh and +1, buy my wife a bike. Hehe.

:P

supersonic

Toasty wrote:

Although this goes against the grain completely but....

-1 for £500 bikes.

Test them, yes. Infact you already do, every few months it seems. A couple of pages is enough, they have a range of about 2 forks, Darts or Suntour XCR, brakes are one of about 3/4 bottom of the line disc brakes and all the other components follow the normal X5 or Deore standands.

How on earth could you take 1 of these bikes and write an action packed summary every month about how your gearing is still, err, fairly normal and clunky and that Darts are quite springy. It just doesn't make good reading, "This month I've been tinkering with all of the Darts features, I used the lockout while going up a steep incline".

£2000 is a lot to spend on a bike which is why people like a slightly longer test, much like anything really. If I were buying a £50 digital I might just go in the shop, try a couple, pick one I like and buy it. If I were buying a £1k SLR though I'd spend a hell of a lot longer researching and gathering as much info as I can. A half page writeup would suffice for the compact, you'd want a much bigger writeup on the more complicated model though.

I'd quite like a long term test of a Carbon Blur personally, not because I want one I just think it would make interesting reading. I'd also like to hear how a hub geared bike of some sort fairs in the long term from someone who puts lots of miles in, how viable would it be for marathon bikes? I agree with the new Cannondales as well, the Rush or Rize would be interesting too.

Couldn't these comments be applied to more expensive bikes too? Infact some Darts have more features than Floats or Vanillas if looking at lockouts! Not sure I agree that a 1500 quid bike is more exciting to ride than a 300 quid one and would provide a better article. In fact I would argue it may be better as the tester might have to use more skill if the bike really is that inferior!

I don't see why we can't have common choices from a number of price bands to see how they last and perform over a period of time - which is the point. This will also allow useful comparisons between the price points.

grantway

I first thought £ 600 quid was expensive
But then relised I had to dig alot deeper to ride what I wanted to do.

Saying that the £ 500 barcket is most covered in What Bike magazine and MBR
so what is there to sayabout them?

The higher cost bikes that we aim for is really what we need to cover more
of, being this is a worrying sum of money to hand over and get wrong.

But some how they dont seem to put in order what we actualy want tested
side by side.

But thats utopia?

xtreem

I don't know if someone has mentioned, but it would be nice if you can test some RAM
bikes. Lots of people use them here at the Balkans.

Almost every model is at reasonable price, and for under £1500 there is a bike that suits everyones needs.

ScottAspect45

For me..

Cove Stiffee and Santa Cruz Chameleon. I'd like to see how the cove stands up long term and also if the rider of the chameleon can still stand up!

Would also like to see the Orange Five to see how it pairs up long term against the Meta and 5Spot which have already been put through their paces it seems.

Banned!

seems to me like some of you want to see your own bikes tested so that you can sit all smug and superior when it comes out top of the list.

but thats not what this is supposed to be about. its not a round up of 'cheap' bikes, its a loing term test of the sort of bikes that the majority of people are riding.

we dont need a long term test of bikes that have been on the market for a coupleof years and have high end spec, we alrady know that those bikes are capable of handling whats thrown at them. what we want to see are bikes like the Boardman really put through thier paces over a long period of time and not just a days riding in the woods to see how they feel for an hour or two.

toasty

its not a round up of 'cheap' bikes, its a loing term test of the sort of bikes that the majority of people are riding.

The majority of mountain bikes which sell are £200 Halfords models, I bet the average bike price on these boards is far more than £500. Look at the posts in here for example, on this page alone, there's a couple of carbon bikes and few full sus trail bikes. I ride trail centers quite a lot as well, the most common bike there I'd say is a £1200-£3000 trail bike.

Given my bike was the focus of one of the long term tests I was quite intruiged to hear what Doddy had tried on his, the carbon 150mm Pace forks he gave a shot for example. I found the Turner interesting as well, its something you don't see much of. A low end hardtail I really couldn't care less to hear about every month, call me elitist if you like, this is purely my opinion much as you've given your own.

I did have an Avalanche 1.0 for a while recently, the page long review told me all I needed to know though.

I just don't think the people buying a £500 bike care quite so much about the finer details and tinkering which are mentioned in long term reviews, would they consider swapping to a maxle dropout for another 20% the value of their bike? I doubt it. Try out a Hammerschmit for a few months? No, probably not. See how the scary looking Crank Bros Cobalt wheelsets fair over a few grimey months? The innovation isn't at the entrance level in the sport.

Banned!

no. the so called majority of people you see at trail centres are riding trail centre type bikes.

these people do not in any way represent the majority of riders. however,your attitude is pretty typical of quite a few riders ive met. you just want everybody to know how much your bike cost soyou can sneer at people on cheaper models.

this test isnt about innovation, its about how well a bike copes over a long period of time.

nevinkeville

+1 for the £500 - £1000 bracket. Totally agree with everything Jesus has said ( did I actually just write that ) lol.

Thewaylander

hmmm anything 16" short travel HT duel bash guard to play on street or hack on a trail.

and Britney Spears!

toasty

Jesus_Christ wrote:

no. the so called majority of people you see at trail centres are riding trail centre type bikes.

The vast majority of £500 bikes are general xc/trail bikes too. I don't see where you're going with this. Avalanches, Rockhoppers, Furys etc. Trail Centers are just places where you happen to see big collections of riders. I ride natural stuff as well but it's obviously harder to pass comment as I generally don't see anyone around these parts. Infact we live an hour away from the nearest trail center so going there is a rarity if anything.

What does this majority ride then that you're talking about? Are they the main demographic who would buy the bike magazines in the first place?

Jesus_Christ wrote:

your attitude is pretty typical of quite a few riders ive met. you just want everybody to know how much your bike cost soyou can sneer at people on cheaper models.

Why is wanting to hear reviews of expensive products sneering at the cheaper ones? Quote anything I've said which gives that impression, I'm lost. My first statement was that they should continue testing cheaper bikes. I'm purely giving my opinion. You seem to have some sort of small terrier type syndrome going on here, get over it.

this test isnt about innovation, its about how well a bike copes over a long period of time.

Well yes but if you wanted to know the lifespan of a component, for example a set of Darts you could ask on here and get 50 opinions. If you wanted to know the lifespan of something new, say the swingarm on a new Orange Alpine you'd be hard pressed to get any conclusive word back. Much like when the shadow mechs and things came out, it's interesting seeing whether the new design can stand the test of time. The older designs have been there for years, technology passes down the chain to the lower end.

supersonic

If anything, I found when working in a bike shop, the budget riders take more care over components and asking questions than those who wanted more expensive gear. I really think this is relevant for a lot of riders, and would be a very welcome test. There are loads of cheaper drivetrain components that never get covered for example, and in todays climate, people will be cutting back.

A mix would be best to cover all groups.

I would say the average price of a bike on the trails around here is much less than 1k.

Banned!

I dont want to read about some cheap hardtail I couldnt care less about


more or less your exact words.

pure snobbery.


i think that fact that a lot of people have agreed with my ideas or similar ideas from other poisters here proves that most people dont want to see a test of a bike that only a few of us can aford or will even ride if we could.

we want to see a sustained test of a £500ish bike that will be used for a variety of disciplines, including trail bashing and riding to work.

deadliest

I would personally like to see some Lapierres and Cannondales put through there paces for a year.

Would be nice to see one of the Boardmans given a years worth of hammer as well.

grantway

Parts ? this is about bikes. Lets not diverse here.

But I too understand where your coming from Supersonic
and still have a true understanding to costs
whens parts need replacing.

Regarding the Alpine 160 Swing arm Orange dont know if its
stronger than the one on the Orange 5.
This was written in the MBR test. But the main triangle is a little stronger
but not much. Not covered in MBR but info from Orange.

Jesus I couldnt give my £ 600 bike then a thrashing it wouldnt last?

But this price range is fine for Canal Paths/ riding to work and not to
far off the beaten track as to speak.

Nodnol

To be fair, I do agree with the £500 mark for test, as I think this is probably the average price of the first bike a MTB enthusiast will buy. My first was a Hardrock Pro for about that, after I got back into MTBing last year. I went to my LBS to upgrade, and quickly realised it would work out better to buy a new bike, so I bought an Orange Crush, and used the money from part-exing my Hardrock to upgrade the Wheels and pedals. With care and attention, the only parts that should ever need replacing are things worn from use. I'm a more aggresive rider, so a full on XC steed isn't my instant choice, but in the beginning we all ponder around on £500 bikes that quite truthfully, will probably last longer than our patience will when we all walk into a LBS and think "Oooh that's nice."

The thing is, a lot of people who ask for buying advice on here are new to the sport, and so naturally ask for a cheapish ride for around 350 to 500 quid. To say this is the most sort after price bracket seems odd, as EVERYONE I ride with have 1000k bikes and up, with the diehards riding Trek Fuel Ex.9's.

Honestly, my Crush will withstand most of the trails I CURRENTLY ride just fine, but as I venture out over the Peaks, Wales, and I'm even planning to do the Alps and without doubt Whistler, a FS is on the cards. Bikes over 2k are always in demand, but I think, for the purpose of a yearly test, it would be good to see what bikes they begin with, and how much the spend on replacements and upgrades over the course of a year, while still maintaining a sufficient level of "rideablility" for off-road MTBing.

The winner can be whoever spends the less, with as little compremise when it comes to the ability of the bike.

supersonic

But some 600 quid bikes really are tough! My GT Ruckus was extemely tough and took some pretty severe abuse. Plenty of jump bikes too, and budget long travel rigs. But it is not always about bikes that need to be thrashed, but the trail and XC riding which the majority of riders do. You can break any bike if you push it hard enough or for something beyond its design scope.

The bikes are made up of parts - surely it encompasses that?

Banned!

grantway wrote:

Jesus I couldnt give my £ 600 bike then a thrashing it wouldnt last.

yours might not, but lets see which one will. isnt that the whole point?

I bought a carerra banshee and have put a set of Jr T's on it and a Fox Vanilla R rear shock too. this pretty much disqualifies me from the test criteria as the parts i replaced were the major ones that were going to die first in all likelyhood.

I have given it several thrashings and its holding up pretty well so far. I dont think the original shocks could have taken this sort of a beating though, but other bikes in this range have better forks and shocks so maybe they could.

i know quite a lot of newbies who have bought bikes around £500 and are looking to test them out on the trails, surely a test that showed which bikes could and most certainly cant handle this sort of thing are better tested than a £1200+ high specced ride that we all know will take it?

xtreem

[b]supersonic[/b] wrote:

I would say the average price of a bike on the trails around here is much less than 1k.

We'll find out.

petegoodyear

hi
i am in favour of the testing and upgrading of £500 bikes. As i think it will allow some one like me a noob, with limited cash and knowledge to see how to up grade my bike.(student up grades would be good)

As i bought my bike a cape wrath D27 over a year ago and have spent very little on it, as for one it has taken everthing i do with it well and i have no idea where to start with more major changes.

The components i have on the bike have stood up to the test of time, except for a little crash and some attempted theft damage it has worked fine. i have learnt how to fix basic things.

Now i want to change the forks from the suntour XCR's to someting better. it would be a real benifit to see, both someone with the product expereince you all have, and with the riding experience that you have making the chages to the bikes to suit the way and what you are riding more. as you would be making the changes starting at the bottom again, seeing where to spend money and where to save for the next frame or bike.

It might also make you realise that there is no need to make instant changes to a bike, if it can be riden it can be enjoyed, and that the most important thing after all - well for me it is.

Pete

Banned!

petegoodyear wrote:

it would be a real benifit to see, both someone with the product expereince you all have, and with the riding experience that you have making the chages to the bikes to suit the way and what you are riding more. as you would be making the changes starting at the bottom again, seeing where to spend money and where to save for the next frame or bike.

excellent point. a lot of what goes on at the higher end of the market isnt upgrading, its simply moving across the grades. here, we can see how and when to upgrade and what to upgrade with.

toasty

Jesus_Christ wrote:

I dont want to read about some cheap hardtail I couldnt care less about


more or less your exact words.

pure snobbery.

You can't make up a quote then slate it, it doesn't work like that :roll:

I bought one of these in 2007 for example, I didnt get on with the shorter frame much but the brakes and forks were fine. The Stumpjumper (which was ebayed, I came in at a profit when I flogged the Avalanche frame) in my sig is using Suntour forks and Tektro brakes. Nothing wrong with them, I just don't require 12 months of reviews to describe them

Anyway, my opinion is still the same, yes lots of £500 bike tests, no long term tests though. I don't think that demographic would need such a comprehensive test. The general deal with long term tests is swapping to new gear and commenting on the change, I don't think this would happen as much with low end bikes.

Banned!

A low end hardtail I really couldn't care less to hear about every month


thats your exact words. not much difference.

you just want to see the bike you own have praise heaped upon it. ive seen a thousand riders like you.

anyway, this isnt about how much positive or negative reinforcement you need, its about what bikes should be tested and the majority have opted for the £500 ish range.

you dont have to read the review you know.

having said that, the mag could just totally ignore us and do its own thing.

toasty

Jesus_Christ wrote:

you just want to see the bike you own have praise heaped upon it.

I suggested a Carbon Blur as it's new and unknown, the old one was rated as the best bike of last year a few times over. I'm intruiged to see what the new one is like. Given carbon normally shows off about being flexy a trail full susser would probably fair better being stiffer I'd have though, hmm!

I also mentioned the Rize and the Rush as they both seem crazy good value. Neither has been mentioned as much as the Prophet though. They also seem mysteriously hard to find anywhere to demo as well.

I mentioned hub gearing as well, it's one of those things that has been lingering in the background for ages. Genesis have been speccing bikes with hub gears recently and a few companies do wheel builds onto geared hubs. I'm just curious how they'd fair for maintenance over the months.

Jesus_Christ wrote:

having said that, the mag could just totally ignore us and do its own thing.

As it probably will, the bike journos seem to have their own interests at heart quite often on these tests

Jesus_Christ wrote:

ive seen a thousand riders like you

Indeed, you might even want to use the word "majority". Those of us who want to read articles relevant to our interests, on things we might one day buy.

Mr Wu

JamesCW wrote:

The editorial team here at BikeRadar have decided to get in some long-term test bikes, and we'd like you to tell us what you'd like to see reviewed.

The idea is that we'll hang onto them for a while and see how they cope after months, rather than weeks, of testing.

We don't want £7k superbikes (well okay, we wouldn't mind them, but the tests wouldn't be relevant for most of our users), just the kind of rigs the average rider can afford.

We'll be making small changes based on personal preference - stem length, saddle design - but will be leaving the bikes largely as they are to see how they stand up to some use and abuse.

So, what do you think? Is there a bike you've had your eye on for a while that you'd like to see put through its paces?

I think what would be good/useful is a decent feature on say the top TEN bikes you can get on the cycle to work scheme. (HT and FS, say five of each cat) The majority of people will be using that scheme, people starting out in mountain biking etc. Much much more useful and relevant than testing bikes that the majority of us just cannot afford to buy.

I think it must be at least the top ten bikes, not just three or four. Get your bums on the same seats and set-ups as the rest of us! Most people that are just starting up at mountain biking, will be put off, if picking up one of the magazines they open it to see a whole section devoted to bikes over a grand. The only thing this will make them do is buy a shiite bike from a garage (you know the ones i mean!), not knowing that for a bit more they can get something that will last them years rather than a few months.

More information for the complete begginner would be much more useful i think.

Ta.

toasty

Mr Wu wrote:

The majority of people will be using that scheme, people starting out in mountain biking etc.

I wish, the company I work for can't be bothered with the paperwork. Bizarrely they also said it didn't sound fair to give perks to cyclists but not people who drive in, I kid you not.

I'm sure a lot of poeple will be in the same boat.