MBUK comparison nonsense

[nickfry]

I used to look at the reviews with great interest, but I happen to think (although they fiercely deny this) that they favour whoever gives them the nicest freebie.

Personally, I use the mags as a headsup, and disregard their reviews. I search for USER reviews ie. people who've spent their own cash!!!!, and use them as a reference.

[Mr.SandmaN]

You gotta remember that these magazines make most of thier money through companies paying for advertising space not from us buying the mag , so most tests are biased towards the products they actually sell in the mag or which ever company pays the most for advertising .
A good example of this was MBUK about 8 years ago , they were allways blowing 24/7's trumpet about how damned good they are , I thought ok i'll invest in some of this product , got some 24/7 pedals and cranks, 1st set of pedals sent to me were both left hand threaded sent them back got another set which lasted about 1 month before huge play in the bearings developed to the point that the bearings almost fell out , sent them back got told it was a 'bad batch' got another set same crap... this is after MBUK gave them 5/5 for reliablity !!! same problem with the bearings in the cranks too which also scored very highly with MBUK . now i find it very hard to trust a lot of reviews other then dirt mags as they seem to properly test the stuff they get sent , and you can see them testing the stuff for your self if you ride forest of dean/monmouth area and often they are ridden into the ground by most of the dirt office so you tend to get a much fairier opinion in general

[iain1775]

You gotta remember that these magazines make most of thier money through companies paying for advertising space not from us buying the mag , so most tests are biased towards the products they actually sell in the mag or which ever company pays the most for advertising .

Yup and just go through all your MBR back issues and check what company has had the outside back cover advertising spot (the most prominent one) for pretty much every issue since issue 1!?
QED!!
Answers on a postcard!

[nickb]

well guess i must be a sucker for reading mountain bikes and then basing my purchase of a Meta 55 on its excellent reviews.
Without magazines alot people wouldn't invest their hard earned money on lesser known brands such as Commencal Lapeirre Ghost etc because they wouldn't know anything about them so instead they would buy a bike from the big companies such as trek,specialized,giant.    
I do agree though that the tests are odd regarding testing bikes of differents specs/values against each other.Its like pitching a cheap Focus against an expensive Golf gti then saying the VW out performs the FORD well thats obvious.
I agree alot of writers have big ego's but its no different to car,hifi,pc mags,newspapers etc.
Still i love my Meta 55 with its nice new 2010 frame its a joy to ride and it gets lots of positive feedback when out on the trails

[stackmeister]

You can't diss Doddy! He's probably done more for commencal than any other mtb journalist out there, he loves his 08 55 vip and is still seen riding it now despite having no end of free bling constantly thrown at him! In the 'if you could only have one bike' feature he picked the commie hands down.
Agree about a lot of reviews being bulls**t tho. Why is the Orange 5 pro trail bike of the year every year? It got a 10 in last years test despite the review saying that the slack head angle compromised its climbing abilities. As far as i'm concerned a good trail bike should be an all rounder which means climbing as well as descending. And how the f**ck did the 09 meta 552 get a great review in what mountain bike but mbuk (sister mag) marked down the 55uk? Its the same frickin bike but with better components and fork for f**ks sake!!!(I was just pissed off because i've got a 55uk!)

[jmj]

hehe, I have to say I bought my Meta because of Doddy's constant praise for them in MBUK, so I guess I'm easily lead.

J

[Mark W]

You can't diss Doddy! He's probably done more for commencal than any other mtb journalist out there

I remember reading one of his reviews, might have been long-term test or something- funny though, you read the words and he does indeed sing its praises. So much so it sounded worthy of a 10, or at least 9. Then it comes out as an 8. So I'd guess magazine politics moderated the score down. Shame you have to read between the lines to get something useful, but I guess that's how most of these mags are run...

[marki3boy]

And how the f**ck did the 09 meta 552 get a great review in what mountain bike but mbuk (sister mag) marked down the 55uk? Its the same frickin bike but with better components and fork for f**ks sake!!!(I was just pissed off because i've got a 55uk!)

It’s also black, which deserves an extra star.