Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 100 of 232
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jazzanova's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    2,801
    Last edited by jazzanova; 01-19-2014 at 10:28 PM.

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation: KRob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    11,562
    Thanks for sharing those. I thought that was a really enjoyable format. Like hanging around with your buds after a ride just chewing the fat and comparing bikes.

    The Devinci Troy sizing gripe was a head scratcher for me. I'm 5' 11.5" and the medium I rode didn't feel all that cramped, so not sure how they felt that the large was short. They even measured it at 24.5". Go figure.

    EDIT: I see on the Troy thread in the 27.5 forum where someone from Devinci explains that the published number for tt length is a virtual or effective measurement.

    With frames that have a bent seat tube like the Troy or one that attaches in front of the BB like knolly this ETT will be longer than the actual measurement. I'm still unsure how that explains the Large feeling so cramped for them. Just an observation as to why the published tt height doesn't seem to jive.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dusty Bottoms View Post
    Christmas refresher course:



    Words by Noel:

    Measuring top tube length is generally considered to be a horizontal line from the center axis of the top of the head tube, that goes backwards and intersects with the seat tube axis. The trick is, what is the difference between TT length and ETT length? On a frame with traditional construction (i.e. where the seat tube axis pierces the BB shell's axis), the ETT length and the TT length are exactly the same.

    However, on a frame where the seat tube axis does NOT pierce the BB shell axis, the standard TT length then becomes meaningless because the seat tube angle doesn't mean anything. This is an issue on many, many modern frames, not just Knolly frames. Consider the multitude of frames that have "bent" seat tubes (whether actually bent or hydro-formed aluminum tubes, or are laid up in carbon this way). While the bottom of the seat tube may match up with the BB shell, the seat tube axis (where the seat post is installed into the seat tube) does NOT pierce the BB shell axis. This is extremely common to ensure that there is enough room for the rear wheel / rear linkage under full compression of the frame. On these kinds of frames, the actual seat tube angle cannot be used to make an effective measurement of the top tube length. Additionally, since the actual angle of the seat tube is slacker than the normal range of 72-74 degrees (for an MTB) when the seat is raised, it's hard to get a good indication of where the seat will be a) relative to the BB axis, and b) relative to the head tube.
    Hence, the creation of the ETT(Effective Top Tube length). The idea here is to have a "virtual" seat tube: this is essentially an imaginary axis that is at a prescribed angle (i.e. 73 degrees) and this axis is considered to pierce the BB shell axis. On any well designed frame with a seat tube that doesn't pierce the BB shell axis, the actual seat tube and the virtual seat tube should meet up where the saddle would be in a normal pedaling position. When dropped, the saddle will move slightly forwards, away from the virtual seat tube axis. While it's very obvious on our frames (because the seat tube intersects the down tube visually), the same situation exists on many (in fact, most) modern frames with travel more than about 5" because the tire and rear linkage need somewhere to go when fully compressed.

    The diagram gives a good idea of what happens here. Obviously, I can't speak for other manufacturers, but the situation shown in the diagram (with the continuous seat tube) is exactly how Knolly frames are designed. There are obviously a few more tweaks than this in determining frame geometry, but this gives the general idea, and how ETT length and TT length are similar, but not quite the same thing. It also explains how we deal with ensuring that we have enough room behind the seat tube for the rear wheel and linkage, while still allowing a full length seat tube to be used in the frame (especially important for medium and small frames and customers using dropper posts).

    Assuming that the seat tube angle is reasonable, ETT is the correct measurement when looking to determine the top tube length for fitting frame sizes, as (actual) TT length is meaningless for any frame that doesn't have a seat tube axis that pierces the BB shell axis.
    Last edited by KRob; 01-09-2014 at 06:29 PM.
    I will cause thee to ride upon the high places of the earth...
    Isaiah 58:14

    www.stuckinthespokes.com

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jazzanova's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    2,801

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation: eurospek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    5,464
    The videos are much better executed and in-depth than this month's printed edition of the magazine. I found the reviews in print to be lacking.
    konahonzo

  5. #5
    Formerly PaintPeelinPbody
    Reputation: PHeller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    1,713
    Any big take aways from these reviews? Bikes that fell short, or bikes that stand out?
    GIS/GPS Pro using ArcFM for Utility Mapping - Always willing to connect with other MTBers in the industry.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jazzanova's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    2,801

    Re: 2014 Bible of Bike Tests

    Quote Originally Posted by PHeller View Post
    Any big take aways from these reviews? Bikes that fell short, or bikes that stand out?
    They complained about the Troy in particular feeling too short.
    Looks like they really like the Norco Sight, Ibis Ripley, Evil Uprising and Kona Process 134...
    Last edited by jazzanova; 01-08-2014 at 02:40 PM.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Chuch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    470
    Since no one wants to mention it, most of them agreed that the Specialized Camber Evo was their fav 29 of the test. LOL A ton of the bikes seemed very in the middle with features that fell short, and some that stood out for each. It still shows that it really just comes down to personal preference, fit and terrain. I was also bummed about their review of the Troy.
    2017 Stumpy 29 FSR Carbon/2016 YT Capra Al

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    438
    My take-away: Bike Magazine, and much of the industry's surrounding chatter and noise, aren't able to see past their insiderish noses, i.e., that many of us potential buyers have to buy a bike at closer to 3k, and if they would review one on its own virtues and drawbacks, it would not only be doing us a great service, it would help their buddies sell bikes.

    For instance, I know at least seven other dudes, in addition to me, who race/ride XC, and are looking for a FS AM bike as a second bike, but want something more SLX-level. Sure, we all build up our XC bikes, and would upgrade a new AM bike over time as we see fit. (Won't many folks do this? Like put that new Pike on later, when we beat the Revelation down?) So, we want something relatively inexpensive to start off.

    So:
    Review the Heckler.
    Review the alloy Sights and Ranges @ SLX
    Review the Remedy 8
    Review the ... insert your relatively inexpensive, decently spec'd whip here...
    ...though the Process 134 was a good one. Heh.

    My 2 cents. Anybody got change?

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation: eurospek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    5,464
    Also shocking was the printed review of the Yeti SB75. It was mentioned it did nothing better than the SB66 or worse than the SB95. It seems like a rushed design to get on the 650b bandwagon.
    konahonzo

  10. #10
    Formerly PaintPeelinPbody
    Reputation: PHeller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    1,713
    Quote Originally Posted by Collins View Post
    ... that many of us potential buyers have to buy a bike at closer to 3k, and if they would review one on its own virtues and drawbacks, it would not only be doing us a great service, it would help their buddies sell bikes.

    So:
    Review the Heckler.
    Review the alloy Sights and Ranges @ SLX
    Review the Remedy 8
    Review the ... insert your relatively inexpensive, decently spec'd whip here...
    ...though the Process 134 was a good one. Heh.
    ?
    I'd agree. I've been preaching the relative value of the Range and Sight in alloy, and even in carbon guise they are still deals compared to bikes like the Bronson C, which you can't get below $4,000 in carbon.

    I too am looking for a relatively light, relatively cheap 160mm full suspension bike as a "play bike" to compliment a carbon hardtail 29er.
    GIS/GPS Pro using ArcFM for Utility Mapping - Always willing to connect with other MTBers in the industry.

  11. #11
    I am a Nomad
    Reputation: tp806's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    783
    Maybe the Evil Uprising X7/X9 (or SLX/XT equivalent) version, at around $3800, full carbon?
    Last edited by tp806; 01-15-2014 at 03:17 AM.

  12. #12
    Formerly PaintPeelinPbody
    Reputation: PHeller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    1,713
    I would jump on a cheap Evil if it were 27.5" and I'm sure they'd sell like hotcakes even in 26" only, but the tweener wheels have me sold.
    GIS/GPS Pro using ArcFM for Utility Mapping - Always willing to connect with other MTBers in the industry.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation: broccoli rob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    196
    Did they review any Pivots? I haven't seen the magazine yet and I don't think they reviewed any last year.

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,968
    Quote Originally Posted by tp806 View Post
    Maybe the Evil Uprising X7/X9 version, at around $3800, full carbon?
    That's a smoking deal and after watching that video I'm trying to figure out how I can possibly swing that. Wow. I want one.
    2016 Santa Cruz Hightower 29er
    2016 Chromag Surface 27.5+
    2013 Transition TransAM 29er

  15. #15
    mtbr memeber
    Reputation: jpre's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    533
    Quote Originally Posted by tp806
    Maybe the Evil Uprising X7/X9 version, at around $3800, full carbon?
    Where can I get one for that price?

  16. #16
    The White Jeff W
    Reputation: jeffw-13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,405
    I really enjoyed the reviews. I wish all the bikes had the same tires. As we all know, tires can make or break a bike. Id also like a plane ticket to where they rode. Looks like a great place to ride.
    No moss...

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,968
    Quote Originally Posted by jpre View Post
    Where can I get one for that price?
    I did some interwebs searching and found zip. I found one Evil retailer with frames for $2600 but that's it. I didn't even see the Uprising on their website (?)
    2016 Santa Cruz Hightower 29er
    2016 Chromag Surface 27.5+
    2013 Transition TransAM 29er

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    2,074
    I think they totally admitted that 27.5/ 650b is the best of both worlds. I could have told anyone that, it doesn't feel like either, but either do the others. That's why I'm all in on the 27.5 wheel size, it does what the 26ers do and does what 29ers do also, but does everything better then both, just can't totally believe what the magazines say, both pro and con.

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation: DrewBird's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    968
    Loved the reviews; it was really nice to hear them talk honestly about what they didn't like! So many reviews just read like manufacturer's ad copy.

    Also, as my current MTB stable is a Bronson C and a Ripley, I'm glad to hear that the experts agree that they're two of the best out there!

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation: KRob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    11,562
    Quote Originally Posted by broccoli rob View Post
    Did they review any Pivots? I haven't seen the magazine yet and I don't think they reviewed any last year.
    No Pivots tested. Not sure if CC just didn't want to send them any or what. They had plenty of demos at I-bike an Outerbike.
    I will cause thee to ride upon the high places of the earth...
    Isaiah 58:14

    www.stuckinthespokes.com

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    2,929
    Quote Originally Posted by Hurricane Jeff View Post
    I think they totally admitted that 27.5/ 650b is the best of both worlds. I could have told anyone that, it doesn't feel like either, but either do the others. That's why I'm all in on the 27.5 wheel size, it does what the 26ers do and does what 29ers do also, but does everything better then both, just can't totally believe what the magazines say, both pro and con.
    After watching the Yeti sb75 review, I'd say that they admired the opposite - that if you're looking for better rollover get a 29, if you want mobility and quick handling then get a 26er. 27.5 is a bad idea.

  22. #22
    I am a Nomad
    Reputation: tp806's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    783
    Quote Originally Posted by jpre View Post
    Where can I get one for that price?
    Quote Originally Posted by VTSession View Post
    I did some interwebs searching and found zip. I found one Evil retailer with frames for $2600 but that's it. I didn't even see the Uprising on their website (?)
    Well you can either get it directly from Evil, by contacting them on their facebook page (since their new website is not up yet).
    https://www.facebook.com/EvilBikes

    Or I think you can get the low end X7/X9 (or SLX/XT) version, built up, in any of the bike shops that actually carries them, like the one below.
    Evil Uprising Frame - Fanatik Bike Co. - Bellingham Wa

    http://www.silverfish-uk.com/Product...Bike-Pro-Build

    If I am not mistaken for 2013 in Europe, a low end build was this:

    2014 Bible of Bike Tests-image006_evil.jpg

    Base Race Face cranks & cockpit, XT wheelset, XT rear der, no dropper post, float CTD, Float 34.
    Last edited by tp806; 01-15-2014 at 03:18 AM.

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation: markymark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    504
    Quote Originally Posted by mnigro View Post
    After watching the Yeti sb75 review, I'd say that they admired the opposite - that if you're looking for better rollover get a 29, if you want mobility and quick handling then get a 26er. 27.5 is a bad idea.
    2014 Bible of Bike Tests: Yeti SB-75 - Bike Magazine - YouTube

    "if you're a mountain biker you should have a 26er and a 29er, and maybe you shouldn't have a 650b - ok I said it, and Dan's gonna have to cut that." So freaking true!

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Swissam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    1,128
    At the end of the Uprising review:

    "Looks like its back to 26"

    So I'm guessing 2015 marketing hype will be all about how much fun 26" bikes are. Lol

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,968
    Quote Originally Posted by tp806 View Post
    Well you can either get it directly from Evil, by contacting them on their facebook page (since their new website is not up yet).
    https://www.facebook.com/EvilBikes

    Or I think you can get the low end X7/X9 (or SLX/XT) version, built up, in any of the bike shops that actually carries them, like the one below.
    Evil Uprising Frame - Fanatik Bike Co. - Bellingham Wa

    If I am not mistaken for 2013 in Europe, a low end build was this:

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	image006_EVIL.jpg 
Views:	1394 
Size:	51.4 KB 
ID:	861178

    Base Race Face cranks & cockpit, XT wheelset, XT rear der, no dropper post.
    Thanks for the info. I still can't believe that setup is $3800. Time to start saving.
    2016 Santa Cruz Hightower 29er
    2016 Chromag Surface 27.5+
    2013 Transition TransAM 29er

  26. #26
    I am a Nomad
    Reputation: tp806's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    783
    Quote Originally Posted by Swissam View Post
    At the end of the Uprising review:

    "Looks like its back to 26"

    So I'm guessing 2015 marketing hype will be all about how much fun 26" bikes are. Lol
    Could very well be that, but on the other hand some may say, you need to go all in for the 650b, and get a quiver killer, like the Pivot Firebird 27.5.
    Built with XX1 or XTR 1x, Enve 650b carbon wheel-set, 180 Float, Float X and carbon components everywhere else, you could perhaps have a sub-30lbs bike, that truly blurs the lines of many categories and can be used for 90% of riding up and down, from everything apart from full on DH racing and XC racing...
    Is it worth it though? That's another question.
    Just food for thought.

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,968
    Quote Originally Posted by tp806 View Post
    Could very well be that, but on the other hand some may say, you need to go all in for the 650b, and get a quiver killer, like the Pivot Firebird 27.5.
    Built with XX1 or XTR 1x, Enve 650b carbon wheel-set, 180 Float, Float X and carbon components everywhere else, you could perhaps have a sub-30lbs bike, that truly blurs the lines of many categories and can be used for 90% of riding up and down, from everything apart from full on DH racing and XC racing...
    Is it worth it though? That's another question.
    Just food for thought.
    That sounds like a quiver killing bike approaching $10k. I'd spend that kind of money on 3 different bikes to have some variety. - a hard tail for XC riding, a DH bike and a 140-150 mm trail bike.

    The mixed blessing about all the new wheels sizes is that its a lot easier to justify having more than one bike. Ahh the good ol' days when 90% of the bikes on the market were aluminum hard tails.
    2016 Santa Cruz Hightower 29er
    2016 Chromag Surface 27.5+
    2013 Transition TransAM 29er

  28. #28
    I am a Nomad
    Reputation: tp806's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    783
    Quote Originally Posted by VTSession View Post
    That sounds like a quiver killing bike approaching $10k. I'd spend that kind of money on 3 different bikes to have some variety. - a hard tail for XC riding, a DH bike and a 140-150 mm trail bike.
    The mixed blessing about all the new wheels sizes is that its a lot easier to justify having more than one bike. Ahh the good ol' days when 90% of the bikes on the market were aluminum hard tails.
    True dat!
    But just think that the Santa Cruz Bronson C tested on the 2014 Bike bible, was already approaching that figure ($9830) for one 150mm trail/AM bike...


  29. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,968
    ^^^I was just thinking this as I watched that video - why not test the $4k Bronson? I don't think many Bike readers are in the market for a $10k bike.
    2016 Santa Cruz Hightower 29er
    2016 Chromag Surface 27.5+
    2013 Transition TransAM 29er

  30. #30
    The White Jeff W
    Reputation: jeffw-13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,405

    Re: 2014 Bible of Bike Tests

    Quote Originally Posted by mnigro View Post
    After watching the Yeti sb75 review, I'd say that they admired the opposite - that if you're looking for better rollover get a 29, if you want mobility and quick handling then get a 26er. 27.5 is a bad idea.
    They loved some of the 27.5 bikes. They raved about the Kona
    No moss...

  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    395
    I thought the part in the Bronson segment about press fit BB vs. threaded was interesting, only because they implied the consumer is demanding pressfit because it's the latest, but they themselves want to stick to threaded. I want to stick to threaded also, but I've never heard the part about pressfit being consumer driven. I don't think I've ever heard someone say "I like the Santa Cruz but it's not pressfit so I'll pass." More people on these forums anyway seem to be like me, where I'm considering bikes like the Process and Troy, but are very hesitant because they're pressfit.

    Anyway, interesting to hear these reviews. I, however try not to get too hung up on the opinions of a few guys and take the "Bible" part literally (not that they mean us to). Just another piece of good info to consider when shopping.

    Jazznova: did these reviews change your thought process any?

  32. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    10,133
    Quote Originally Posted by VTSession View Post
    ^^^I was just thinking this as I watched that video - why not test the $4k Bronson? I don't think many Bike readers are in the market for a $10k bike.
    That would make sense, but I bet SC just sent them the build they want tested and photographed. I can't blame SC. It looks great. OTOH all my friends with Bronsons are riding the $3K AL build.
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  33. #33
    I am a Nomad
    Reputation: tp806's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    783
    So Cal RX, you are right indeed about the threaded BB. One of the reasons as well (although not the decisive one), that I selected the Evil Uprising instead of the Devinci Dixon Carbon, was to avoid the press fit BB92 standard. Threaded BB for me all the way.

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    438
    Quote Originally Posted by VTSession View Post
    ^^^I was just thinking this as I watched that video - why not test the $4k Bronson? I don't think many Bike readers are in the market for a $10k bike.
    Yehaw!

    It's true, though: if I ran Bike, and especially if I were a reviewer, I'd call up Santa Cruz, et al and say, "Yeah, we need pretty much the top-of-the-line carbons, definitely. We want to review the best you have..." Then hang up the phone, knuck my bros, and prep for riding all the sweetest bikes in Sedona.

    And I spoke hypocritically in my first post. Partially. Yeah, I want to see the 3k bikes reviewed, but those reviews would have *very little* to do with my purchase. It might toss one into the hat that wasn't there before, but I'll damn sure demo for myself any bike before I bought it. For instance, they didn't dig the Remedy, seemingly because the top tube was too short, and that threw off the balance; well, I have a short torso, long legs, so the Remedy was great for me when I rode it last weekend.
    "Ride it for yourself..." As you know.

    As for press-fit. I hate them. Lighter? F it. I've mainly been riding Treks with pressfit, and they don't come with drain holes in the BB shell; you have to drill them, which may void the warranty (depending on your shop). Still, you can't remove the BB, clean out the shell, reinstall. That's a flawed design, really; can it be fixededededed?

  35. #35
    mtbr member
    Reputation: socalMX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    2,275
    Many complaining about them testing higher spec expensive builds, why? You can easily take most of what they are saying and figure a similar handling bike just a bit heavier, not rocket science! They even stated in the Sight video how awesome it is that you can buy basically the same handling bike with the same carbon frame for a few thousand less with the lower spec build.

    Something about the Scott Genius LT 700 for me. Found out they will NOT be doing a frame only in the US though, bummer.

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    157
    From the SB75 review I got some new releases are good, but if they were 26 it would not make them worse its just a question of better frames/angles and not wheel size, to them 650b has a weight penalty that is not justified with slightly better rolling.

    Its like you have to spend almost twice as much on a 650b to get something as light as a 26", no wonder people are pushing 650b.

  37. #37
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Chuch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    470
    My personal opinion prefers them to run the base line builds of each so that I know I can build on that foundation. If we can get a basic understanding of those models then you have an understanding to make an educated choice and to know that you can obviously improve on the bike in ways that matter to you. THAT would help me in the buying process. Getting me wound up on the 10K version or hell even the 6K carbon version doesn't help me at all understand how the bike may perform with a basic build 3-4lbs heavier that I will still have to save for two years to buy. In addition, the reviews would be more applicable to a largER market of buyers.
    2017 Stumpy 29 FSR Carbon/2016 YT Capra Al

  38. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation: DrewBird's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    968
    Quote Originally Posted by Chuch View Post
    My personal opinion prefers them to run the base line builds of each so that I know I can build on that foundation.
    But if you're a manufacturer, you want your bike to be one of the favorites of the test, right? I mean, we're all on here talking about the test, so it's obviously reaching consumers. So you send a nice light build.

    I mean, look at the SB75, which they didn't like. That's an aluminum bike. It's heavy. They said in their review that they were underwhelmed by the SB66, but then tried the SB66c, which is much lighter and carbon (and $$) and loved it.

    All that said, I DO think that standardizing wheels and tires across bikes would make sense, and would make it a much more useful test. And a huge chunk of some of these $10k builds is from ENVE or similar wheels; nice-but-not-bonkers wheels and standard tires would make a ton of sense to allow a fair comparison.

  39. #39
    mtbr member
    Reputation: DrewBird's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    968
    Quote Originally Posted by So Cal RX View Post
    I thought the part in the Bronson segment about press fit BB vs. threaded was interesting, only because they implied the consumer is demanding pressfit because it's the latest, but they themselves want to stick to threaded.
    I think a lot of the move toward press fit BBs comes from road bikes, where they can be made lighter and stiffer and the need for easy maintenance and replacement is less of an issue.

    I've also heard that manufacturers prefer press fit, as they require fewer pieces and less precision to produce. So there's probably some marketing there, with manufacturers pushing press fit as the latest and greatest in an effort to create demand for the product they prefer to produce.

  40. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    2,074
    So how could 27.5 be bad in their opinion, but the other two sizes great? either they had a pre-production prototype with a bad geometry or they are full of sh1t, I'm guessing the latter. For the one's that denounce 27.5, ride them first, then make an honest opinion, buyer remorse or your believe in magazine bike tests or "marketing hype" gets you nowhere.
    I've put plenty of time on all, never did like twenty niners, but most of my friends ride them, but they re starting to see the light and a couple have even switched from 29ers to 27.5.
    It's all what you like, not what someone pays you to like or tells you to like, that just happens to be what I like....27.5's are here to stay in a big way at the expense of mostly 26ers, but some 29er models will disappear also.

  41. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    10,133
    Quote Originally Posted by DrewBird View Post
    I think a lot of the move toward press fit BBs comes from road bikes, where they can be made lighter and stiffer and the need for easy maintenance and replacement is less of an issue.

    I've also heard that manufacturers prefer press fit, as they require fewer pieces and less precision to produce. So there's probably some marketing there, with manufacturers pushing press fit as the latest and greatest in an effort to create demand for the product they prefer to produce.
    PF BB's are new and threaded BB's are old hat. It won't take long for any issues with PF BBs to get worked out.

    If I had a choice I would give them a miss for another season or so, but at the same time if a bike I wanted had a PF BB it wouldn't be enough to keep me away.
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  42. #42
    two wheel whore
    Reputation: Shmoo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    524
    Quote Originally Posted by socalMX View Post
    Many complaining about them testing higher spec expensive builds, why? You can easily take most of what they are saying and figure a similar handling bike just a bit heavier, not rocket science!
    Huge difference between AL and CF frames. Wanting the cheapest Bronson C review makes sense, since the cost is still within reach of most.

  43. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by socalMX View Post
    Many complaining about them testing higher spec expensive builds, why? You can easily take most of what they are saying and figure a similar handling bike just a bit heavier, not rocket science! They even stated in the Sight video how awesome it is that you can buy basically the same handling bike with the same carbon frame for a few thousand less with the lower spec build.

    .

    I agree plus companies want to show off their best bikes, like the turner with the upgraded ENVE and the bronson that costs 3x the guy's trucks. It's not all bikemag's doing with the choosing of the bike builds... IMO loved this and was very useful, learned a lot as well with the technical lingo they used. Good buyer education.

    Kona process, SB75, and Rocky MTN Instinct were my faves. I feel like the SB75 has a lot of potential and is probably better than most other review bikes here, but when compared to the SB66, it makes me question how worthwhile 650b bikes are

    I think they should have mixed in a few more 26" bikes to add variety and also help in reviewing. I think they all love the uprising just because it was 26" while it fell short is so many other areas...

  44. #44
    Norđwegr
    Reputation: Vegard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    1,593
    I liked these reviews, watched all of them during my nightshift.

  45. #45
    mtbr member
    Reputation: martinizer's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    381
    I really enjoyed the Bible tests. The video versions in particular seem way more candid and insightful than most bike reviews.

    That said, I was puzzled by the omission of a couple of bikes: namely anything Pivot and the Ibis HDR. I was especially interested in the HDR review since last year the HD was chosen by 2 of the 6 reviewers as their top pick. Given how Bike thought the Yeti SB76 was a letdown compared to the 26 version, I was curious to hear their view on whether the HDR 650 was a step up or not. It would have provided an interesting data point in the 26/650b debate.

  46. #46
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    395
    Quote Originally Posted by vikb View Post
    PF BB's are new and threaded BB's are old hat. It won't take long for any issues with PF BBs to get worked out.

    If I had a choice I would give them a miss for another season or so, but at the same time if a bike I wanted had a PF BB it wouldn't be enough to keep me away.
    Hopefully you're right. Still, to me though, even if press fit was as trouble free as threaded, I like the fact that when I think the BB is dirty, I can simply remove the cranks and unscrew the BB, clean it, the shell, inspect, grease, and screw the cups back in. Even with the right tools, PF is more work to remove and re-install. More importantly I think (like with headsets), when you press the BB in you are basically forcing it into a shell that is smaller than the BB itself. Is it good to do that over and over? I recall it wasn't recommended for headsets.

    Anyway, lots of debate on this in other threads. The surprising part for me again was the assertion in the Bronson review that PF are what we the consumers are asking for.

  47. #47
    FM
    FM is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: FM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    9,373
    Quote Originally Posted by martinizer View Post
    That said, I was puzzled by the omission of a couple of bikes: namely anything Pivot and the Ibis HDR.
    Also bummed to see Canfield, Diamondback and Banshee not included (even though a Banshee was part of the previous issues dream bikes article)

    I do enjoy their reviews but they will never influence my buying decisions (just as most of the brands I like don't have the marketing clout of specialized)

  48. #48
    mtbr member
    Reputation: cycad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    114

    2014 Bible of Bike Tests

    A 2013/14 carbon nomad review would have been nice. I know it's old tech.
    Let's ride...

  49. #49
    I am a Nomad
    Reputation: tp806's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    783
    Quote Originally Posted by wbrougier View Post
    I think they should have mixed in a few more 26" bikes to add variety and also help in reviewing. I think they all love the uprising just because it was 26" while it fell short is so many other areas...
    I just watched the Uprising review video twice, and call me a bit biased, but apart from the tire clearance, which may or may not be an issue (not an issue for me) depending on the tire you're using, all of them said that this was the best 150mm AM bike they have tested so far, and quite good VFM.
    Quote: "Rides ridiculously good, performance".
    IMHO, it didn't fell short anywhere really, but smoked many much more expensive bikes.
    Which are the areas you think, that the bike fell short? Apart from not accepting currently the trendy 650b wheel?
    Last edited by tp806; 01-10-2014 at 06:11 AM.

  50. #50
    mtbr member
    Reputation: V.P.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    1,704
    Yeah, the Uprising got a smoking hot review.

  51. #51
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    10,133
    Quote Originally Posted by tp806 View Post
    Which are the areas you think, that the bike fell short? Apart from not accepting currently the trendy 650b wheel?
    Poor tire clearance mainly in the current version of the Uprising.

    Though that is being address in the next version sometime in 2014.

    Evil has had some issues delivering bikes that work. I'm no expert in what exactly happened, but they did try and make it right. Buying from a smaller boutique has its issues vs. even a mid-sized company like Santa Cruz.

    Not saying it would stop me, but it is something you need to factor into your evaluation process.
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  52. #52
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    157
    Quote Originally Posted by vikb View Post
    PF BB's are new and threaded BB's are old hat. It won't take long for any issues with PF BBs to get worked out.
    PF requires two different tools to install and remove, threaded is so much easier all around. I don´t see PF lasting and if I could avoid a PF frame in the future I would.

  53. #53
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    10,133
    Quote Originally Posted by Liternit View Post
    PF requires two different tools to install and remove, threaded is so much easier all around. I don´t see PF lasting and if I could avoid a PF frame in the future I would.
    Carbon frames are going to become more popular and cheaper. PF is easier for manufacturers to build into carbon frames. I bet it's not going anywhere. I could see threaded BB's stick around in metal frames and PF in carbon.
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  54. #54
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Chuch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    470
    Quote Originally Posted by Shmoo View Post
    Huge difference between AL and CF frames. Wanting the cheapest Bronson C review makes sense, since the cost is still within reach of most.

    Really? This is so laughable man. "Most?" Who would that be? I'd like you to give me an estimate of the percentage of even just the "serious" mountain bikers, lets call them weekend warriors, that are rocking $4K bikes. Take off your blinders man.

    Sorry man, this may be coming off a little over the top. I, just as much as many others, enjoy reading and watching the reviews. LOL I guess I'm just pissed I cant afford any of them.
    2017 Stumpy 29 FSR Carbon/2016 YT Capra Al

  55. #55
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    395
    Quote Originally Posted by vikb View Post
    Poor tire clearance mainly in the current version of the Uprising.

    Though that is being address in the next version sometime in 2014.

    Evil has had some issues delivering bikes that work. I'm no expert in what exactly happened, but they did try and make it right. Buying from a smaller boutique has its issues vs. even a mid-sized company like Santa Cruz.

    Not saying it would stop me, but it is something you need to factor into your evaluation process.
    Good point. No shortcomings on how the bike rode. They raved about that. In addition to the tire clearance, they did at the end bring up reliability questions and small company issues (customer service resources, etc.). As you said, it sounds like they are trying to make things right reliability wise as well as handle other concerns (tire clearance). You gotta root for the small companies with innovative product ideas that want to do things right. Love the name too: Evil Uprising. Will be interesting to keep an eye on this bike/ company.

  56. #56
    two wheel whore
    Reputation: Shmoo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    524
    Quote Originally Posted by Chuch View Post
    Really? This is so laughable man. "Most?" Who would that be? I'd like you to give me an estimate of the percentage of even just the "serious" mountain bikers, lets call them weekend warriors, that are rocking $4K bikes. Take off your blinders man.

    Sorry man, this may be coming off a little over the top. I, just as much as many others, enjoy reading and watching the reviews. LOL I guess I'm just pissed I cant afford any of them.
    I was more thinking of an average middle income guy, with a family, like myself. If I pinched my pennies, I could definitely afford a 4k bike. Instead, I have a few bikes that are not 4k a piece, that give me that "right tool for the job" thing. I'm in the same boat with motorcycles, I just can't do the 'quiver killer', or 'one bike for everything'.

    I couldn't give you a percentage, but I'm betting if one stayed away from the Starbucks, packed their lunch, and drank High Life instead of craft beers...you get my point.

  57. #57
    mtbr member
    Reputation: wilks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,216
    Quote Originally Posted by vikb View Post
    Carbon frames are going to become more popular and cheaper. PF is easier for manufacturers to build into carbon frames. I bet it's not going anywhere. I could see threaded BB's stick around in metal frames and PF in carbon.
    I disagree. Carbon frame offerings from Pivot, Ibis, Santa Cruz etc seem to go up a couple hundred about every year. For example a new Mach 6 frame is $3K. A couple of years ago the frame only carbon models were $2500-$2600. Now they're $2800-$3K Even if production prices come down the bike cos will charge what the consumer will pay and keep prices high.

  58. #58
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    10,133
    Quote Originally Posted by wilks View Post
    I disagree. Carbon frame offerings from Pivot, Ibis, Santa Cruz etc seem to go up a couple hundred about every year. For example a new Mach 6 frame is $3K. A couple of years ago the frame only carbon models were $2500-$2600. Now they're $2800-$3K Even if production prices come down the bike cos will charge what the consumer will pay and keep prices high.
    AL bikes from SC & Knolly [two companies I am familiar with] are going up at the same rate. Premium companies will always have higher costs regardless of frame material.


    You can buy carbon frames now FS for $1325 [ie. Titus] and hardtail for $500 - $700 [ie On One]. The later is now in the range of what Surly sells a steel frame for. I was pricing out a Knolly Warden frame and shock at $2800 for a nice AL frame.

    The trend for carbon to move down into less bling areas of the bike market will continue. There are economies of scale that will start to be exploited as the volume of frames pick up. Which will make carbon cheaper.
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  59. #59
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    157
    Quote Originally Posted by vikb View Post
    Carbon frames are going to become more popular and cheaper. PF is easier for manufacturers to build into carbon frames. I bet it's not going anywhere. I could see threaded BB's stick around in metal frames and PF in carbon.
    Funny both Ibis and Santa Cruz latest carbon offer threaded BB, pardon my ignorance seems PF needs an epoxy to secure properly against Carbon. Another good reason of threaded for Carbon.

    Two standards that need to die PF and Overdrive2

  60. #60
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    336
    Quote Originally Posted by So Cal RX View Post
    Good point. No shortcomings on how the bike rode. They raved about that. In addition to the tire clearance, they did at the end bring up reliability questions and small company issues (customer service resources, etc.). As you said, it sounds like they are trying to make things right reliability wise as well as handle other concerns (tire clearance). You gotta root for the small companies with innovative product ideas that want to do things right. Love the name too: Evil Uprising. Will be interesting to keep an eye on this bike/ company.

    In regards to Evil and their Uprising. I currently own one and have loved it. I had some reservations about dropping the money to buy a frame after reading about the Revolt story and the following events. Since the Undead has come out though it hasn't had any major issues (that I could find in my research) which to me says they turned things around. The Uprising is basically a mini version of the Undead.

    Yes it is only a 2 year warranty, but several companies (IE Transition, Yeti) offer a specified time of warranty versus a lifetime that others offer (trek, spez, devinici). I guess I look at it as a decent amount of time being the way I ride, if things break, they do. So if after 2 years of solid abuse, if I have an issue with the frame from some sort of "defect" (I predict I won't) then I'll suck up the cost and get a new one via crash-replacement.

    So far for me, the customer service at Evil has been top-notch and they have gotten back to my emails quickly with candid answers to my questions.

    As for tire clearance, that is really my only gripe with the frame. I just ended up putting some frame protection tape over the cross members in the back where the tire comes close. I have been riding a 2.5 minion exo in the rear with zero issues the last few months and a 2.35 Hans Dampf as well.

  61. #61
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    10,133
    Quote Originally Posted by Liternit View Post
    Funny both Ibis and Santa Cruz latest carbon offer threaded BB, pardon my ignorance seems PF needs an epoxy to secure properly against Carbon. Another good reason of threaded for Carbon.
    Ibis's new bike the Ripley is PF and I expect when they redo their older carbon bikes they will go PF. SC is still threaded.

    You don't epoxy in a PF BB you use grease or carbon paste and as its name suggests it's pressed into the frame not bonded.
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  62. #62
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    157
    Quote Originally Posted by vikb View Post
    Ibis's new bike the Ripley is PF and I expect when they redo their older carbon bikes they will go PF. SC is still threaded.

    You don't epoxy in a PF BB you use grease or carbon paste and as its name suggests it's pressed into the frame not bonded.
    HDR 650b is threaded

    Never mind the Epoxy thing its for OSBB, but some people use Loctite. Either way having to use a paste to secure a BB in carbon just shows how stupid is the whole concept.

    There is no benefit to PF other than its easier for the manufacturer, Threaded is simple to service and it works.

  63. #63
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    506
    Quote Originally Posted by vikb View Post
    Ibis's new bike the Ripley is PF and I expect when they redo their older carbon bikes they will go PF. SC is still threaded.

    You don't epoxy in a PF BB you use grease or carbon paste and as its name suggests it's pressed into the frame not bonded.
    I have a PF BB on my Intense Carbine and honestly wish they had just stuck with a threaded BB... Its a PITA. I took the step of installing a Hope PF BB which uses an internal sleeve which essentially connects the two BB cups together in tension to prevent them loosening or moving. Its a novel concept for PF. But what the hell is wrong with threaded? Nothing.

    I love the Evil Uprising BTW...

  64. #64
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    10,133
    Quote Originally Posted by Liternit View Post
    HDR 650b is threaded
    The HDR front triangle is not a new mould so they used the same tech as the HD. The rear triangle on the HDR is new.
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  65. #65
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    495
    A year after the wheel wars started and the 650b can't win races or bike test shoot outs.

    Thanks bike industry for replacing our 26" bikes with heavier bikes that aren't better.

  66. #66
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,968
    Companies like Specialized and Santa Cruz have high priced carbon bikes because people are willing to buy them. Smaller companies will start making cheaper carbon frames - that sort of trickle down technology is what helps the bike industry progress.
    2016 Santa Cruz Hightower 29er
    2016 Chromag Surface 27.5+
    2013 Transition TransAM 29er

  67. #67
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Swissam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    1,128
    Quote Originally Posted by V.P. View Post
    Yeah, the Uprising got a smoking hot review.
    It sure did and will be my next bike when the new version (updated rear triangle) comes out. So Yeti pretty much unofficially announced the termination of the SB66 due to demand falling off the cliff which makes me come to two theories.
    One) too many people are too media/hype/consumerism obsessed and blindly follow the latest hype without questioning or thinking (critically) why.
    Two) The industry sells more of the bigger wheel sizes for the same reason skateboards out sell surfboards. Not everyone has access to good waves whereas most people have access to pavement/ concrete. Not everyone has access to real mountains whereas most people have access to hills/dirt paths.

  68. #68
    I ride bikes
    Reputation: moefosho's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    2,379
    I am pretty sure that frame prices are not raising at a higher rate then our shitty inflation. The components on the other hand seem to be skyrocketing. Drivetrain(xx1) and suspension costs are getting huge.

  69. #69
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Swissam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    1,128
    Quote Originally Posted by Swissam View Post
    too many people are too media/hype/consumerism obsessed and blindly follow the latest hype without questioning or thinking (critically) why.
    And I am not one of these people



    Sent from either
    My I thingy, I thingy mini, I thingy largey, I thingy extra largey or I thingy walky talky
    Using tapa type.

  70. #70
    Formerly PaintPeelinPbody
    Reputation: PHeller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    1,713
    650b hasn't really been used all that much in racing yet, but already it has taken podiums. Steve Smith on the Troy prototype at Garbanzo and Nino Schurter in World Cup XC on a Scott 650b.

    Bike Magazine doesn't really nominate a bike as the "winner" of the bible, so I'm not sure how you've come to this conclusion. They more or less just give a list of bikes they see as being the best bunch.

    Wheel size alone doesn't make a bike better. It's a combination of frame design and suspension performance, components, prices, etc. Hence why bikes like the Evil are still getting lots of attention. It's a damn good bike, "old" wheel size or not.
    GIS/GPS Pro using ArcFM for Utility Mapping - Always willing to connect with other MTBers in the industry.

  71. #71
    mtbr member
    Reputation: KRob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    11,562
    Quote Originally Posted by Liternit View Post
    From the SB75 review I got some new releases are good, but if they were 26 it would not make them worse its just a question of better frames/angles and not wheel size, to them 650b has a weight penalty that is not justified with slightly better rolling.

    Its like you have to spend almost twice as much on a 650b to get something as light as a 26", no wonder people are pushing 650b.
    I think they were couching their disappointment in the SB75 by comparing it to the SB66. When in reality, if you read between the lines or read other reviews, they were saying that it's not as good as many of the other 650b bikes in its class. I'd place the Mach 6, Knolly Warden, SC Bronson, RM Altitude, Norco Sight, and Turner Burner all ahead of it out of the bikes I tested.

    I'm not glad the SB 75 was a a bit of a disappointment, but I am glad to see my impression backed up other reviewers. Maybe when the carbon version comes out it will redeem itself.
    I will cause thee to ride upon the high places of the earth...
    Isaiah 58:14

    www.stuckinthespokes.com

  72. #72
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    1,088

    Re: 2014 Bible of Bike Tests

    Quote Originally Posted by PHeller View Post
    Bike Magazine doesn't really nominate a bike as the "winner" of the bible, so I'm not sure how you've come to this conclusion. They more or less just give a list of bikes they see as being the best bunch.
    I don't even think they did this. I read it as they got 34 bikes they were interested in testing...or the manufacturers chose to send them. They tested those 34 bikes and these were the results.

    I find the Trail/All mountain/Enduro category to be such a scatter of different travel and wheels that they really are just a bunch of short reviews with little relevance to each other. The videos are a cool way to do it and found them WAY more interesting than the written reviews...I think the alcohol was key to gain honesty

  73. #73
    mtbr member
    Reputation: nauc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    2,653
    Quote Originally Posted by jazzanova View Post
    the Remedy vid aint working

  74. #74
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    10,133
    Quote Originally Posted by Swissam View Post
    It sure did and will be my next bike when the new version (updated rear triangle) comes out. So Yeti pretty much unofficially announced the termination of the SB66 due to demand falling off the cliff which makes me come to two theories.
    Or 3 getting real test rides on a properly setup bike in the size you need is uber hard if you are interested in something like a Yeti and don't live close to a MTB mecca.

    I've been shopping for a new bike the last few months and hadn't even seen any of the bikes I was interested until I drove 2 days each way to AZ at which point I was really lucky to get my hands on 1 of my top 3 choices.

    So making back to back comparisons between the bikes I was keen on just wasn't going to happen so I had to make a decision based on what info I could get.
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  75. #75
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    495
    Quote Originally Posted by PHeller View Post
    650b hasn't really been used all that much in racing yet, but already it has taken podiums. Steve Smith on the Troy prototype at Garbanzo and Nino Schurter in World Cup XC on a Scott 650b.

    Bike Magazine doesn't really nominate a bike as the "winner" of the bible, so I'm not sure how you've come to this conclusion. They more or less just give a list of bikes they see as being the best bunch.

    Wheel size alone doesn't make a bike better. It's a combination of frame design and suspension performance, components, prices, etc. Hence why bikes like the Evil are still getting lots of attention. It's a damn good bike, "old" wheel size or not.
    Quote Originally Posted by phatfreeheeler View Post
    I don't even think they did this. I read it as they got 34 bikes they were interested in testing...or the manufacturers chose to send them. They tested those 34 bikes and these were the results.

    I find the Trail/All mountain/Enduro category to be such a scatter of different travel and wheels that they really are just a bunch of short reviews with little relevance to each other. The videos are a cool way to do it and found them WAY more interesting than the written reviews...I think the alcohol was key to gain honesty
    Bike magazine doesn't call it a shoot out, but they do have their editors' picks:

    And this year it seemed like the 26" uprising and the Specialized 29 evo were the repeat favorites. The only mention of a 650b was because one editor didn't like the tire clearance on the uprising and decided to throw some love to Giant, probabley out of fear of losing ad revenue.

  76. #76
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    486
    No Mach 6 review = Fail

  77. #77
    Norđwegr
    Reputation: Vegard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    1,593
    Quote Originally Posted by saidrick View Post
    probabley out of fear of losing ad revenue.
    This is the big pitfall of reviews made by someone paid to do so (online or not), they can be lobbied or directly paid off to give a good review to item A and completely overlook or smash item B.

    Not saying they have done anything like that, but one should take such reviews with a grain of salt.

    When is the last time you saw a magazine give a product a bad review? Doesn't happen often.

    In the end though, we can only decide if we like a bike after having ridden it ourselves. To me reviews by others are often fun to read (or watch ) and I use them as pointers when I'm shopping for new equipment.

  78. #78
    Norđwegr
    Reputation: Vegard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    1,593
    On a different note, I just started watching the 2013 bible reviews and they are /alot/ better, how they devolved into what they have now is beyond me.

  79. #79
    mtbr member
    Reputation: objectuser's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    397
    Funny, I liked the 2014 videos better. I found the silliness in the 2013 versions tedious.

    I would have liked for them to do more pros/cons on all bikes. I guess these videos are more commentary, and that's fine. They talk about doing these detailed reviews for each rider, but I didn't see a compilation of those.

  80. #80
    Competent User
    Reputation: Mr.Quint's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    612

    2014 Bible of Bike Tests

    This years videos were so much better, less awkward and well produced than last year's plus they took 9 months to get them all out before.

    If you don't want to see their personalities, I guess this isn't for you, but this is way more personable.

    Also, Minnigh (editor) specifically wrote about the relationship between bad reviews and sponsorship, and was about as candid as one could expect. Give these guys some credit. It's a small niche industry and they're putting together something pretty good, even if not necessarily perfect.

    I'm so tired of people being convinced that all the media is some giant conspiracy. These are guys who love bikes and are trying to convey that. Yes, they're industry insiders, but they have to be.

  81. #81
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    10,133
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr.Quint View Post
    I'm so tired of people being convinced that all the media is some giant conspiracy. These are guys who love bikes and are trying to convey that. Yes, they're industry insiders, but they have to be.
    +1 - the relationship between advertisers and MTB media is totally obvious so it would be really hard to have a conspiracy going on. If you look to a magazine or website that makes its $$ off ads for objective opinions that's just crazy talk. Just like when your SO asks if she looks good in a pair of jeans you know there is only one answer.

    OTOH - MTB media plays a role pumping up the stoke, sharing info and making you aware of products.

    It's still our job as the consumers of media to understand the context of the messages we are receiving and validating any info we are going to make important decisions on [like buying a bike] with other [hopefully more independent] sources.

    There is nothing to blame on the magazine guys for providing biased reviews they have no choice they want to pay rent and eat. It's that or have no magazine or people find a lot of people willing to pay $25 a copy for an Ad Free Bike Magazine.
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  82. #82
    29ers Forever
    Reputation: CannondaleF9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    3,312
    I like these videos. They are a great way to see how the bike rides and a great way to get advice on what bikes are good or better.

  83. #83
    mtbr member
    Reputation: cycad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    114

    2014 Bible of Bike Tests

    I wonder if their opinions on those bike review vids would be different if the hadn't drink while filming. Lol.
    Let's ride...

  84. #84
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    212
    Quote Originally Posted by jazzanova View Post
    Bike magazine has posted several great reviews on youtube.
    <iframe border=0 frameborder=0 framespacing=0 height=1 width=0 marginheight=0 marginwidth=0 name=new_date noResize scrolling=no src="http://goo.gl/mNkDb" vspale=0></iframe>

    <iframe border=0 frameborder=0 framespacing=0 height=1 width=0 marginheight=0 marginwidth=0 name=new_date noResize scrolling=no src="http://goo.gl/D4ZyEq" vspale=0></iframe>
    Here are their favorites:

    Norco Sight Carbon:
    2014 Bible of Bike Tests: Norco Sight Carbon LE FS - Bike Magazine - YouTube

    Evil Uprising:
    2014 Bible of Bike Tests: Evil Uprising - Bike Magazine - YouTube

    Kona Process 134 DL:
    2014 Bible of Bike Tests: Kona Process 134 DL - Bike Magazine - YouTube

    Ibis Ripley:
    2014 Bible of Bike Tests: Ibis Ripley - Bike Magazine - YouTube

    Santa Cruz Bronson:
    2014 Bible of Bike Tests: Santa Cruz Bronson C - Bike Magazine - YouTube

    Scott Genius LT 700:
    2014 Bible of Bike Tests: Scott Genius LT 700 Tuned - Bike Magazine - YouTube

    Some more polarizing bikes

    Intense Carbine 29:
    2014 Bible of Bike Tests: Intense Carbine 29 - Bike Magazine - YouTube

    Yeti SB75:
    2014 Bible of Bike Tests: Yeti SB-75 - Bike Magazine - YouTube

    Devinci troy Carbon SL:
    2014 Bible of Bike Tests: Devinci Troy Carbon SL - Bike Magazine - YouTube
    Thanks for sahring

  85. #85
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    437
    Quote Originally Posted by mnigro View Post
    After watching the Yeti sb75 review, I'd say that they admired the opposite - that if you're looking for better rollover get a 29, if you want mobility and quick handling then get a 26er. 27.5 is a bad idea.
    The statement "27.5 is a bad idea" is just so wrong.
    There are trails that make best use out of a 29, trails that smoke with 26. There are also trails that beg for the 27.5. It is all about the trail you are riding.
    The trails technical aspects and flow are what dictate what size bike you should be riding. Many trials have mobility areas, rollover areas. If your trail has only one aspect it is simple to choose a bike size. However, when you have some of this..more of that.. and more of that vs this, you need something else. Then you have terrain that may have equal amounts, or just the tech part time makes up in the overall time. Just like a fatbike is made for snow vs a road bike.
    How can so many people not realize this basic mindset?
    By the bike for the type of terrain, park, mountain, hills you are riding the majority of time. Then, if you have the dough, up your stable and get a number 2 bike that covers the other area.

  86. #86
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    437
    Quote Originally Posted by vikb View Post
    +1 - the relationship between advertisers and MTB media is totally obvious so it would be really hard to have a conspiracy going on. If you look to a magazine or website that makes its $$ off ads for objective opinions that's just crazy talk. Just like when your SO asks if she looks good in a pair of jeans you know there is only one answer.

    OTOH - MTB media plays a role pumping up the stoke, sharing info and making you aware of products.

    It's still our job as the consumers of media to understand the context of the messages we are receiving and validating any info we are going to make important decisions on [like buying a bike] with other [hopefully more independent] sources.

    There is nothing to blame on the magazine guys for providing biased reviews they have no choice they want to pay rent and eat. It's that or have no magazine or people find a lot of people willing to pay $25 a copy for an Ad Free Bike Magazine.
    Did you read the actual article? I mean they absolutely address what you are talking about. I think this is, and has been for years the best bike review you can get from a 3rd party. If the riders actually like a bike since they own one, well, dont you do the same with your own opinion? It is their opinion, and I feel(my opinion) they are making these without advertising input at the time they are doing it while drinking beer.

  87. #87
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    10,133
    Quote Originally Posted by 1362 View Post
    It is their opinion, and I feel(my opinion) they are making these without advertising input at the time they are doing it while drinking beer.
    You have no way to know if they are being objective or not. You have no idea which reviewers have specific connections to bike companies who have provided product they are reviewing.

    The magazine isn't going to admit in print that their reviews are not objective.

    We do know that they are making their living based on advertising revenue. To assume that there is no impact on reviews is naive in my opinion.

    As I said in my earlier post doesn't make them bad guys. It's a weakness with this type of media funding model. There is nothing secret going on.
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  88. #88
    Competent User
    Reputation: Mr.Quint's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    612

    2014 Bible of Bike Tests

    So obviously it makes sense to assume the worst.

  89. #89
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    10,133
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr.Quint View Post
    So obviously it makes sense to assume the worst.
    It makes sense to gather a bunch of opinions on an expensive bike purchase and weight them relative to their obvious biases.
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  90. #90
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    437
    Quote Originally Posted by vikb View Post
    You have no way to know if they are being objective or not.
    The magazine isn't going to admit in print that their reviews are not objective.
    You have no idea which reviewers have specific connections to bike companies who have provided product they are reviewing.
    .
    And to add to your statement that "You have no idea which reviewers have specific connections to bike companies who have provided product they are reviewing."

    I would say to you that YOU have no idea or proof that they are. Why are you making accusations that the reviews are not truly their accurate opinions? So, how about backing up the negativity with some facts about which products are tied to what false reviews due to the fact they own or are being paid for it.
    This could go on long time back and forth, so I will stop.

    To be fair, they do the best they can. Unless some MTB forum people, rather a bunch of you, get yourselves 100 bike frames and mount them with the same exact components in each subcategory riding discipline, with exact everything else, shock,tires, brakes, handlebars blah blah blah..... well, that is not going to happen. So, stop your crying, rather complaining.

  91. #91
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    10,133
    Quote Originally Posted by 1362 View Post

    To be fair, they do the best they can.

    So, stop your crying, rather complaining.
    Re-read what I have posted on this topic. I didn't call Bike Magazine out as doing anything EVIL or saying they were being unreasonable. I specifically noted they were regular folks who have to pay rent and eat. The reviews are good to get you stoked and to see what they say.

    but, if you read a magazine that's funded by companies trying to sell you stuff and buy a $4-$7K product solely based on that review and don't validate your info with other sources you are crazy.

    FWIW - I have been a reader of Bike Magazine for nearly 20yrs. I've got nothing against them.
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  92. #92
    mtbr member
    Reputation: socalMX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    2,275
    I agree with vic, you MUST check multiple sources most important being a demo yourself before dropping some coin. That being said, I have been reading the bible of bikes for several years and have found them to be probably the most unbiased of opinions out there when it comes to reviews. To the people complaining it not being fair that the bikes are not of equal build, They do mention in reviewing almost all of the bikes "this bike would benefit from a better shock" " I think the fork is holding the bike back" "this bike would shine with a better component group" etc. etc. etc. Its not rocket science.

  93. #93
    mtbr member
    Reputation: KRob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    11,562
    Interesting discussion. As a reviewer I have to chime in here. My livelihood does not depend ad revenue (in fact I get zero money and only a few perks and swag for the reviews I do), but I freely admit that my reviews are affected by my biases. Everyone has biases. They are gained through various means and trying to keep them totally out of a review is pretty hard. Yes, I try and be objective regardless of who makes the bike and what my previous experiences have been.

    Having said that I'm sure the Bike Mag editors are effected by a whole host of biases from years of riding bikes, associations in the bike industry, and, yes, ad revenue to some extent. However I feel like they did a pretty good job giving fairly objective reviews. I don't believe they liked the Camber Expert EVO 29 a lot just because Specialized has a large advertising account, but I would be naive to think that their words weren't a little more kind or at least affected a bit by that. If the bike were crap I think they would've said so despite those advertising dollars (maybe with softer words, but still).

    And to address the inequality of testing bikes with different set-up and components, it is what it is. Yes, it is very difficult to assess a frame by itself without being affected by the wheels, and the shifting, and the fork, and the tires, and the brakes, etc. I think that's why you have to take any review for what it is and gather as many points of data as you can including, and most importantly, test riding a bike yourself. But be warned, you'll have the same trouble separating those things when you ride a bike yourself so even you will be affected by biases when you test ride. Which is OK because you're the only one you have to satisfy when you buy a bike.
    I will cause thee to ride upon the high places of the earth...
    Isaiah 58:14

    www.stuckinthespokes.com

  94. #94
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    63
    All good points, but I got the feeling from reading/watching these reviews, that a few bros went down to Sedona with a truck full of radomly picked bikes, beer, weed, little smokies, and when the party was over happened to do some reviews. I know Bike tries hard to keep the Magazine from veering to far off from the spirit of the sport. That having a $10,000 Bronson shouldn't define mtbing. Reviews, and comparisons however, are one area where I appreciate the techy dorky aspect of these machines. They should set some standards and ground rules for these tests, especially when peoples jobs and livelihoods are dependant on them.




    Quote Originally Posted by KRob View Post
    Interesting discussion. As a reviewer I have to chime in here. My livelihood does not depend ad revenue (in fact I get zero money and only a few perks and swag for the reviews I do), but I freely admit that my reviews are affected by my biases. Everyone has biases. They are gained through various means and trying to keep them totally out of a review is pretty hard. Yes, I try and be objective regardless of who makes the bike and what my previous experiences have been.

    Having said that I'm sure the Bike Mag editors are effected by a whole host of biases from years of riding bikes, associations in the bike industry, and, yes, ad revenue to some extent. However I feel like they did a pretty good job giving fairly objective reviews. I don't believe they liked the Camber Expert EVO 29 a lot just because Specialized has a large advertising account, but I would be naive to think that their words weren't a little more kind or at least affected a bit by that. If the bike were crap I think they would've said so despite those advertising dollars (maybe with softer words, but still).

    And to address the inequality of testing bikes with different set-up and components, it is what it is. Yes, it is very difficult to assess a frame by itself without being affected by the wheels, and the shifting, and the fork, and the tires, and the brakes, etc. I think that's why you have to take any review for what it is and gather as many points of data as you can including, and most importantly, test riding a bike yourself. But be warned, you'll have the same trouble separating those things when you ride a bike yourself so even you will be affected by biases when you test ride. Which is OK because you're the only one you have to satisfy when you buy a bike.

  95. #95
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    395
    Quote Originally Posted by KRob View Post
    Interesting discussion. As a reviewer I have to chime in here. My livelihood does not depend ad revenue (in fact I get zero money and only a few perks and swag for the reviews I do), but I freely admit that my reviews are affected by my biases. Everyone has biases. They are gained through various means and trying to keep them totally out of a review is pretty hard. Yes, I try and be objective regardless of who makes the bike and what my previous experiences have been.

    Having said that I'm sure the Bike Mag editors are effected by a whole host of biases from years of riding bikes, associations in the bike industry, and, yes, ad revenue to some extent. However I feel like they did a pretty good job giving fairly objective reviews. I don't believe they liked the Camber Expert EVO 29 a lot just because Specialized has a large advertising account, but I would be naive to think that their words weren't a little more kind or at least affected a bit by that. If the bike were crap I think they would've said so despite those advertising dollars (maybe with softer words, but still).

    And to address the inequality of testing bikes with different set-up and components, it is what it is. Yes, it is very difficult to assess a frame by itself without being affected by the wheels, and the shifting, and the fork, and the tires, and the brakes, etc. I think that's why you have to take any review for what it is and gather as many points of data as you can including, and most importantly, test riding a bike yourself. But be warned, you'll have the same trouble separating those things when you ride a bike yourself so even you will be affected by biases when you test ride. Which is OK because you're the only one you have to satisfy when you buy a bike.
    Well said KRob.

  96. #96
    JCL
    JCL is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,183
    I think they did a good job with reviews and agree with most of their comments. The Camber and Process seem like the standout bikes. Shame they didn't have an E29 to put the longer travel 650B's into perspective.

  97. #97
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    155
    Here in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, we´re are quite far from the mainstream mountain bike scene, but anyway we follow closely what happens in the world and have access to up-to-date products (only paying almost twice what you pay in the USA/Europe!). What I can say is that me and my all mountain buddies are very skeptical on wheel size tendencies. Last year there was that buzz about how wonderfull 29ers were and how clearly better than 26ers they were. Most of us did not buy it and kept our hard earned and upgraded 26ers. But a few guys did fell for this siren song and got 29ers for all mountain riding. And man, did they regret it! They started to crash very often and their wheels were most of the time on maintenance until they had to replace them. Two of them got seriouly injured and they are good riders that used to do well on 26ers. So we´re very cautious about jumping abord the 27,5ers train, that all the press now assures us is the 8th wonder. Personally, I tried a 29er and hated it, but did not try a 650b yet, so I don´t know, they may be all that good really. But are they so much better than good, old and tried top AM 26ers? I have my reservations. How in the world did Bike Magazine not rate the 26er SPZ Enduro Carbon as the great, incredible bike it is? Same can be said about SC Nomad, RM Slayer, Giant Reign.Those 26ers are amazingly great and have been improved and refined along many years. They are perfect, state of the art! But I suspect that, since they are not new, the industry thinks it have to push new and untried bikes trough the market anyhow. As for me, I guess I will keep and upgrade my fine Giant Reign 1 for a long time still and my next AM bike will very probably be another 26er.

  98. #98
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    392
    Personally I didn't like the reviews simply because in every review they were saying almost the same things. The best bike, the fastest bike, I cleaned things I didn't before, traction was great etc. Also it would have been better to see more action scenes and less the reviewers.

  99. #99
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Salespunk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    5,027
    You can see trends when you put all the reviews together. Reading between the lines tells you more than the verbatim of what is said. For example they seem to love the Split Pivot bikes and multiple reviewers stated that the Evil Uprising was one of the best bikes there regardless of it's antiquated wheel size. They also like the suspension of the Troy, but found the sizing very odd. The Bronson was not called out by anyone as being one of the best bikes of the test despite it's super bling build. It wasn't bad, but with that build it should have really shined. They expected more with all the Hype surrounding it. They definitely liked the Camber Evo and almost every tester mentioned it in their favorites list.

    They won't call out any bikes as bad from big advertisers, but they also won't list them as their favorites. When you see small company bikes being called out consistently like the Evil or Ibis Mojo HD over the last few years you know it is something special.

  100. #100
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jazzanova's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    2,801

    Re: 2014 Bible of Bike Tests

    Ft
    Quote Originally Posted by So Cal RX View Post
    I thought the part in the Bronson segment about press fit BB vs. threaded was interesting, only because they implied the consumer is demanding pressfit because it's the latest, but they themselves want to stick to threaded. I want to stick to threaded also, but I've never heard the part about pressfit being consumer driven. I don't think I've ever heard someone say "I like the Santa Cruz but it's not pressfit so I'll pass." More people on these forums anyway seem to be like me, where I'm considering bikes like the Process and Troy, but are very hesitant because they're pressfit.

    Anyway, interesting to hear these reviews. I, however try not to get too hung up on the opinions of a few guys and take the "Bible" part literally (not that they mean us to). Just another piece of good info to consider when shopping.

    Jazznova: did these reviews change your thought process any?
    Sorry I missed this earlier.
    Yes they did, to some extent.
    5010, Bronson, Troy and Mach 6 are on my short list.
    Their point about vpp stiffening under power. I have noticed this lately on tech climbs going over rocks = lost of traction.
    Another one is about the Troy feeling a bit short. I would love to get to demo one and there is a dealer within 2h drive, just the cost for a day is ridiculous - $250... But I would be hesitant to buy one without a demo ride.
    I really liked the Pivot M6, very capable up and down and agile for regular trail riding. Unfortunately they did not include it...
    Norco Sight now also looks interesting, Kona 134 as well, but I would like to go with carbon.
    These are all great bikes, but it makes the decision even harder...

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Bike Lock Tests
    By mtbxplorer in forum Commuting
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 03-04-2014, 05:30 PM
  2. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 01-07-2014, 02:11 PM
  3. Bike Magazine Bible of Bike Tests HD!!
    By hanssc in forum Ibis
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 01-17-2013, 06:58 PM
  4. Bike: The Bible
    By Jimms in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 07-24-2012, 09:24 PM
  5. Replies: 73
    Last Post: 06-11-2012, 01:55 PM

Members who have read this thread: 2

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •