Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner

1 - 20 of 35 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
176 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
First of all, I want to say that this is my most visited site on the entire internet besides maybe Yahoo or Google. But, is it just me or is the Enduro Compare-O just a set of paid advertisements under the guise of a bike review. I took nothing away from these articles whatsoever as there really isn't any comparing from bike to bike, and frankly I could look at the geo. numbers on any if these bikes and came to the same conclusions that the reviewers came to after test rides. Not to mention that every bike got glowing reviews. I suppose all $5k+ bikes are excellent riding machines, but I can't help but wonder if the MTBR reviewers are really giving unbiased opinions after either getting paid for the ad space or just getting the pleasure of testing the latest and greatest. Maybe mountain biking is so much damn fun that every bike just makes a reviewer all complementary, kinda like post-coital grin just without the morning after regret.

Rant over.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
535 Posts
95% of the bike reviews I've ever read have been positive. I agree, it's really freaking annoying. I spent the last 18 months shopping for a new bike, and quickly gave up on reviews. I ended up comparing specs and build kits, and testing a lot of bikes myself.

However, everyone's riding style is different, and every rider is looking for something different from their bike. So it's hard to say what makes a good bike. They're all good for something.

I guess this is where your point about comparing different attributes of the bikes comes in. That would be really handy!
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
266 Posts
The Enduro what ever the Hell it was called, did nothing for me. I found it to be to much like MBA, as well. I can only read an article for 5-10K bikes ocassionally. Line up 20+ articles spread out over months and I lose intrest quick.

This use to be a consumer review web site. Not stroke the bike industries ego.

Speaking of reviews. I wish more people would write in the review section here on mtbr. Back in the late 90s through the 2000s it was an excellent source for researching products. With the advent of social media, everyone just starts a new thread. The review section is like a ghost town. It's really to bad.

Searching and wading through countless threads can be tiresume and time consuming. Take tires for example. One can only wade through so many threads with replies like " Brand X tire rocks" being the only statement. Thanks for the help homer, that was useful. With the reviews section. People can read were the poster rides. List likes/dislikes etc.... A tire that works great in AZ, might not work so great in the PNW.

Don't get me wrong. There are thousands of people that take the time to write lengthy post, some including pictures. Which is great. Having a central place to read them in the reviews would be nice. It would also help eliminate some of the useless " brand x rocks" garbage.

It would be nice to see mtbr get back to more of a consumer review site. It's staying further off course each year.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
24,083 Posts
I haven't read it, but I did get lots out of the 29er shootout they did about 8 years ago, it was very good because all the testers tested all the bikes and so could give comparisons between all of them. Not in the market for a new bike, not in that "category" at least (already in line for a Phantom) but may give this a read and see how it compares. I've ridden so many different new bikes belonging to guys and it's definitely true, reality these days is that most bikes do pedal and ride quite well, with slight difference in characteristics, so if you got a reviewer who was more into descending and didn't mind slugging up on the climb slowly, you would get a different opinion than someone who likes to climb and also enjoys the reward of those climbs, but doesn't just live for the DHs.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
424 Posts
As it is now, it's not terribly useful. I did like that they pointed out strengths and weaknesses of each bike - for instance, the Rocky Mountain is a sluggish climber - but I'm hoping the last few articles like the "best of" will give some real comparisons. As things are right now, my preference is for Bike Mag's Bible of Bike Tests.

Sent from my LG-V500 using Tapatalk
 

·
On wuss patrol
Joined
·
5,045 Posts
Oh-My-Gawd! Can you people find something to b!tch about in everything??
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
443 Posts
Nobody will do a bad review. They can't upset there advertisers and risk not getting bikes to test next go round. You have to read between the lines to find out what they really think about a bike. Also these are all 5K+ bikes and you really can't get a "bad" bike at that price. I'm hoping the awards at the end will give readers more of idea of which bikes are best.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
219 Posts
I wish they would actually review bikes that people don't have to take out a second mortgage on in order to purchase it. What about the normal people?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
535 Posts
I wish they would actually review bikes that people don't have to take out a second mortgage on in order to purchase it. What about the normal people?
I see A LOT of people complaining about this, and I don't get it. It's the build kit that makes these bikes so expensive. The way the bike rides is still going to be pretty similar. If you don't feel like you need XX1/CCDB/XTR etc, just downgrade and save the money.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
266 Posts
I see A LOT of people complaining about this, and I don't get it. It's the build kit that makes these bikes so expensive. The way the bike rides is still going to be pretty similar. If you don't feel like you need XX1/CCDB/XTR etc, just downgrade and save the money.
I don't think a $2600-3000 carbon frame with $2500 Carbon wheels, totaling $8000+ is going to ride the same as the entry level AL frame, X7, 2200 gram cheapo wheelset, costing $3300 complete.

I understand bike manufactures want to send their best stuff for testing and reviews. It helps show case their entire product line. Sure it's great to ride bikes only a small percentage can afford. As mtbr is a consumer review web site. They really dropped the ball on show casing what the average consumer can afford to purchase. At the very least get the middle of the road $5000 (still rap) bike with 10 speed xt/xo, AL wheels etc... Atleast it would have given consumers a base line as to be able to move up or down. I already know $2500 carbon wheels ride amazing. I can't afford them. Not everyone wants expensive 11 speed crammed down their throat.

A Subaru STI is a nice ride. It's a far cry from the entry level Impreza.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
219 Posts
I don't think a $2600-3000 carbon frame with $2500 Carbon wheels, totaling $8000+ is going to ride the same as the entry level AL frame, X7, 2200 gram cheapo wheelset, costing $3300 complete.

I understand bike manufactures want to send their best stuff for testing and reviews. It helps show case their entire product line. Sure it's great to ride bikes only a small percentage can afford. As mtbr is a consumer review web site. They really dropped the ball on show casing what the average consumer can afford to purchase. At the very least get the middle of the road $5000 (still rap) bike with 10 speed xt/xo, AL wheels etc... Atleast it would have given consumers a base line as to be able to move up or down. I already know $2500 carbon wheels ride amazing. I can't afford them. Not everyone wants expensive 11 speed crammed down their throat.

A Subaru STI is a nice ride. It's a far cry from the entry level Impreza.

My point exactly, thank you.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
184 Posts
It doesn't seem like too many people read magazines anymore, with the the Internet taking over everything. In other industries I've found great YouTube channels where guys do several videos a week comparing products and discussing things. If a guy with some experience could get manufacturers to send products to review or worked at a LBS and had access to parts to test it would be great for newbs and experienced riders alike.

Things like explaining why you would choose a coil or air fork over the other, then riding and timing it on several different trail types. Comparing SRAM X7, X9, and X0 shifters and what you get for your money. Same thing with narrow bars/long stem and wide bars/short stem. Tire and pedal shoot outs in particular, test 8 or 10 of them in varying conditions. Anyone have the connections and want to volunteer?
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
2,619 Posts
Yeah the Enduro Comparowhateveritscalled was dumb for several reasons

The bikes were absurdly expensive. When the "bargain" bike is $5k, the people writing are completely out of touch with the average bike consumer.

All the bikes were essentially the same. I'm getting tired of reading reviews of 6 inch travel, 27.5 or 29 inch wheeled, full carbon, 1 x bikes with huge price tags. I swear every time I open a bike magazine or a website I see the same bikes being tested. Oh that $10k bike is awesome? It goddamn better be for that price.

There are so many bikes on the market they could have been tested in the "enduro" category but they choose a bunch of bikes that are, more or less the same, and that no one can afford. They also choose brands that are advertised all over the website. As I'm writing this there's an Intense ad on the page. C'mon.

Sorry MTBR. Next time try a bike test that might actually benefit the readers.
 

·
I ride bikes
Joined
·
2,420 Posts
MTBR,

This is what you can do to make the Compare-O 100x better next time.

1. There is this thing called Strava. Use it for these and show where each bike was fast, slow, and the times. Car mags have been doing this for 15 years. It's not that hard. Yes, there are variables, but it will show a lot.

2. Make a short Pro and Con bullet list(similar to what I am doing now) that will show what each bike did well, and where they can improve.

3. Final rating out of 10, 20, 100, 27.5, I don't care. Just some way to show an ACTUAL COMPARISON.

4. Opinion piece. You guys seemed to do that pretty well.

5. Maybe throw in 3 of the same bike with different wheelsizes (ex Transition Covert 26, 27.5, 29)

6. If you need me to come and test ride / write, I am available for a small fee of flight to location, hotel, and beer. I can buy my own food.

Those are my suggestions.

Thank you for hosting this awesome forum!

-The Moefosho
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
424 Posts
The bikes were absurdly expensive. When the "bargain" bike is $5k, the people writing are completely out of touch with the average bike consumer.
I agree that the prices were ridiculous, but they did have a couple bikes under $4000 (Felt Virtue, Norco Range) that rated fairly highly. The Norco especially, and it was the cheapest bike in the test. The problem with reviews like this is that they have to work with what the companies send them. Usually it's something out of their demo fleet, and most companies like to use their most blinged-out bikes for demos (you're more likely to see a difference over your old bike that way, and thus are more likely to go out and buy a new bike).

The WFO wasn't named the "bargain" bike - that would be the Norco at $3150. It was named the "best value" because it had nothing that the editors wanted to replace, excellent performance, and still came in at $5k. Yeah, it's still a lot of money, but every other bike with a similar list of dream componentry was at least a grand more.

All the bikes were essentially the same. I'm getting tired of reading reviews of 6 inch travel, 27.5 or 29 inch wheeled, full carbon, 1 x bikes with huge price tags. I swear every time I open a bike magazine or a website I see the same bikes being tested.
Everyone's reviewing 6-inch enduro bikes because a) that's what's hot right now, b) that's what most consumers (at least those that frequent bike forums) want to see reviewed, and c) that's what the bike companies are trying to sell. In a comparison like this, throwing an XC bike or two in would be pointless - we all know that the XC bikes would smoke the enduro bikes on the climbs, and we all know that the enduro bikes would smoke the XC bikes on the downhills. I mean, look at the results - the most XC-oriented bike in the test, the Ripley, owned the climbs and didn't even show up in the voting for best descender. The other reason why these types of bikes are getting all the press lately is alluded to in the introduction to the comparison. The 5-6" travel 27.5/29er is right now the closest you can get to a "do-everything" bike. This means that a review of those bikes will have the broadest appeal to readers, where a review of XC or DH bikes would be much more focused. And who knows, maybe they'll do an XC compare-o and a DH compare-o next?

They also choose brands that are advertised all over the website. As I'm writing this there's an Intense ad on the page. C'mon.
Who else are they going to get bikes from? There are only so many manufacturers out there, and like any savvy website, I suspect mtbr courts all of them for ad revenue. And I've never seen half of those brands advertised on the site.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
424 Posts
MTBR,

This is what you can do to make the Compare-O 100x better next time.

1. There is this thing called Strava. Use it for these and show where each bike was fast, slow, and the times. Car mags have been doing this for 15 years. It's not that hard. Yes, there are variables, but it will show a lot.

2. Make a short Pro and Con bullet list(similar to what I am doing now) that will show what each bike did well, and where they can improve.

3. Final rating out of 10, 20, 100, 27.5, I don't care. Just some way to show an ACTUAL COMPARISON.

4. Opinion piece. You guys seemed to do that pretty well.

5. Maybe throw in 3 of the same bike with different wheelsizes (ex Transition Covert 26, 27.5, 29)

6. If you need me to come and test ride / write, I am available for a small fee of flight to location, hotel, and beer. I can buy my own food.

Those are my suggestions.

Thank you for hosting this awesome forum!

-The Moefosho
See, now this, I can get behind. Data is good, head-to-heads are good, REAL comparisons are good. There's so much whining in this thread about how expensive the bikes are or that they wanted X bike to be reviewed when the actual problem with the comparison is that it really wasn't one. It's just a collection of capsule reviews. The final "Best Of" article was somewhat helpful, but there still wasn't any actual comparison of the bikes. No "X did this better than Y, but Z was better than X."
 
1 - 20 of 35 Posts
Top