Lastest issue of Mountain Biking UK.

2»

Comments

  • jairaj
    jairaj Posts: 3,009
    lochussie wrote:
    ... I sometimes can't tell if they like a reviewed product or not....

    That's why I like their reviews lets you make your own mind up if the product is good for you or not. They just describe how a bike feels and rides and you decide if that appeals to you or not.

    eg. Dirt would say something like: "the steering is stable when the terrain is steep and rough"

    Makes me think for example "hmm sounds good, I was after slowing the steering down a touch for those steep sections, maybe I'll add this to the shortlist"

    Where MBUK would say something along the lines of "The steering is awesome because of the wide bar and short stem"

    which makes me think "errm what is awesome steering and are they just trying to look fashionable with the wide bar etc..
  • 97th choice
    97th choice Posts: 2,222
    Mbuk could save time and angst by simply posting links to the relevant products press release...
    Too-ra-loo-ra, too-ra-loo-rye, aye

    Giant Trance
    Radon ZR 27.5 Race
    Btwin Alur700
    Merida CX500
  • supermike
    supermike Posts: 33
    dusk wrote:
    that booklet does annoy me, how on earth Thetford makes the list is beyond me


    +1 Thetford isn't MTB'ing!
    :roll:
  • rockmonkeysc
    rockmonkeysc Posts: 14,774
    Save your money and read a much better magazine for free, online. A bit more gravity oriented than the usual mags but a good read.

    http://wideopenmag.co.uk/magazine/issue-20
    Transition Patrol - viewtopic.php?f=10017&t=13070235
  • bennett_346
    bennett_346 Posts: 5,029
    I've yet to find a bike mag that actually answers the questions i want the answer to. Things that they have access to like equipment and locations that i don't. The brake power diagrams on bikeradar are the kind of thing i'm talking about. It's all well and good having a magazine say "these were more powerful than your average brake but we feel the lever is a bit fragile blah blah" but i want solid numbers to compare equipment to others.

    How long did this groupset last in the same conditions as this other one, and how much longer did it last than the cheaper version of it when tested on the same rides on the same days?

    Which of these chainsets felt the stiffest when subjected to this particular test and what that test was, and how does that compare to its price point?

    The majority of these, when answered in a bike mag, seem to be poorly tested and superficial, such as testing a single groupset and saying it lasted 6 months but not comparing it to anything or saying how often it was used and in what conditions or saying this particular chainset "felt a bit stiffer than this other one" but not saying what the weight of the rider was and whether he tested the other one or not.
  • colin747
    colin747 Posts: 77
    Haven't gave this a proper go yet but looks interesting and more importantly free!

    http://www.imbikemag.com/
  • felix.london
    felix.london Posts: 4,067
    bennett_346 wrote:
    I've yet to find a bike mag that actually answers the questions i want the answer to. Things that they have access to like equipment and locations that i don't. The brake power diagrams on bikeradar are the kind of thing i'm talking about. It's all well and good having a magazine say "these were more powerful than your average brake but we feel the lever is a bit fragile blah blah" but i want solid numbers to compare equipment to others.

    How long did this groupset last in the same conditions as this other one, and how much longer did it last than the cheaper version of it when tested on the same rides on the same days?

    Which of these chainsets felt the stiffest when subjected to this particular test and what that test was, and how does that compare to its price point?

    The majority of these, when answered in a bike mag, seem to be poorly tested and superficial, such as testing a single groupset and saying it lasted 6 months but not comparing it to anything or saying how often it was used and in what conditions or saying this particular chainset "felt a bit stiffer than this other one" but not saying what the weight of the rider was and whether he tested the other one or not.

    I don't get why it matters. Are you gonna go and buy another crankset because someone said the one you have is cr@p? Fair enough for the odd occasion that you're in the market for a new bike or building a bike but for those occasions surely just some web searching and forum asking will give you the answers you want.

    Personally I'm far more interested in reading well written articles about a new Swedish bike park that's been built by some guys that are completely new to the sport or a photographer that does the WC circuit or whatever than some numpty telling me how stiff a set of cranks are. But maybe that's just me...
    "Why have that extra tooth if you're not using it?" - Brian Lopes

    Votec V.SX Enduro 'Alpine Thug' 2012/2013 build

    Trek Session 8
  • bennett_346
    bennett_346 Posts: 5,029
    felix.london wrote:
    bennett_346 wrote:
    I've yet to find a bike mag that actually answers the questions i want the answer to. Things that they have access to like equipment and locations that i don't. The brake power diagrams on bikeradar are the kind of thing i'm talking about. It's all well and good having a magazine say "these were more powerful than your average brake but we feel the lever is a bit fragile blah blah" but i want solid numbers to compare equipment to others.

    How long did this groupset last in the same conditions as this other one, and how much longer did it last than the cheaper version of it when tested on the same rides on the same days?

    Which of these chainsets felt the stiffest when subjected to this particular test and what that test was, and how does that compare to its price point?

    The majority of these, when answered in a bike mag, seem to be poorly tested and superficial, such as testing a single groupset and saying it lasted 6 months but not comparing it to anything or saying how often it was used and in what conditions or saying this particular chainset "felt a bit stiffer than this other one" but not saying what the weight of the rider was and whether he tested the other one or not.

    I don't get why it matters. Are you gonna go and buy another crankset because someone said the one you have is cr@p? Fair enough for the odd occasion that you're in the market for a new bike or building a bike but for those occasions surely just some web searching and forum asking will give you the answers you want.

    Personally I'm far more interested in reading well written articles about a new Swedish bike park that's been built by some guys that are completely new to the sport or a photographer that does the WC circuit or whatever than some numpty telling me how stiff a set of cranks are. But maybe that's just me...
    Why do you care about that? You're probably never going to go and if you do you would read online and ask in forums for answers. Why read what some numpty whose never been has said in a magazine about it?
  • adamfo
    adamfo Posts: 763
    RockmonkeySC wrote:
    Save your money and read a much better magazine for free, online. A bit more gravity oriented than the usual mags but a good read.

    http://wideopenmag.co.uk/magazine/issue-20

    Most magazines, including Mountain bike ones UK and foreign, can be downloaded free in pdf form. Google the title you want. These are sample issues. You can't get all 12 published in a year but can get most.

Categories