Interpreting Bike Reviews

[Peter P.]

The "We Test:" review of three racing bikes in the March issue of Bicycling led me to look closer.

The gist of the article is; some cyclist wants to get into racing with a $3.5k budget. Bicycling recommends one bike and two alternatives (can't offend the advertisers, you know). After reading the three sentence reviews, I decided to check the geometry of the three candidates , in my size (53.5 TT), to see if my interpretations of the specs would jibe with the reviews. Hey; I don't believe ANY of the copy Bicycling puts out; I just want to see how little they actually ride the bikes they portray or how little their reviewers know.

Now I know most of you would read the review, tear the page out, wipe your butt and leave the bathroom, but bear with me.

Giant TCR Advanced 2: "...manages to be aggressive yet still somewhat comfortable. The handling is balanced, with quick reflexes and superb high speed tracking."

How can aggressive (handling) conflict with comfort? And just what is "balanced" handling? I've wouldn't know what an unbalanced bike feels like. Quick reflexes?! The bike has a 72 degree head angle, albeit with no fork rake specified; maybe I should cut them some slack here. But while I think you CAN build a quality racing bike with a slack, 72 degree head angle, by itself I wouldn't call it quick.

Felt F3: "...most stable handling. (of the three bikes)"

This is the most unbelievable of the three. In my small size, it sports a 73.5 degree head angle with 45mm of rake. With those specs it results in a scant 52mm of trail. Combine the head angle with the trail figure and stable is not the word that comes to mind. This thing also has a wicked steep 76 degree seat angle, unheard of, even in small sizes, but that apparently wasn't noticed by the reviewer, and the seat angles are steeper than average across the board.

Specialized Tarmac Expert SL Double: "...crisp, responsive handling...". Well, either Specialized has done something right or as they say, "give enough monkeys typewriters and put them in a room and sooner or later they'll type the complete works of Shakespeare." Bicycling was bound to get it right sometime if they made up enough reviews.

The front end sports a 73 degree/45mm rake combination which is nothing short of generic in road racing bikes in my size. Not a bad thing, the majority of the population will hop on the bike and not notice a thing

Yeah so; I base my opinions of handling mostly on front end geometry and ignore the rest, but 5mm deviation in chainstay length is not going to be an eye opener and as long as the bike fits and I'm assuming a racing bike position, there won't be a lot of deviation. But man, Bicycling can really put some spin on their reviews. To their credit, they managed to write all three without using the trite, hackneyed phrases "all of a piece", "inspires confidence" and "corners like it's on rails". Maybe next month...

[chuckred]

are you saying that a better review of how a bike rides can be made by looking at the front end geometry than actually riding it?

That seems even more suspect unless I'm missing something.

[ThirtyEast]

I think he's saying that the points given in the reviews don't accurately correspond to how one would expect these bicycles to behave, given their specifications. They also all sound the same.

My experience with reviews from larger publications is that they tend to receive one bicycle size, which they force to fit a wide number of testers, then attempt to create some sort of generalized report on the product.

[djg]

Originally Posted by Peter P.

Giant TCR Advanced 2: "...manages to be aggressive yet still somewhat comfortable. The handling is balanced, with quick reflexes and superb high speed tracking."

This is a playful bike, insouciant yet all-business, a bike that is compliant while maintaining a firm sense of terrior. It's a bike that will rip the flesh from your back one moment and purr like a kitten the next. In the movie the Secretary, this bike would be Maggie Gyllenhaal AND James Spader, the director and the key grip. Most of all, it planes. If fact, boss, this bike doesn't just plane, it deplanes. Heck, it is de-plane.

[rcnute]

Hell, if it sells bikes and gets people riding, what do I care.

[false_Aest]

Ok,

The last issue I picked up had a couple of pages on Marsha Brady all grown up and how she rides a bike. It also featured a story about a really fat dude who pedaled himself down to skinny and showed how he's not only skinny but now has a bad "rad' " haircut.

If you need any more evidence go to their website and check out their training section. "Off-Season Fitness:From walking dogs to slicing through snow, here are six ways to stay cycling-fit without pedaling a bike."

I don't think Bicycling is read by people like us for its informative content (even you mentioned how you were kind've surprised cliché or trite phrases didn't make it in to the reviews). We read Bicycling (and the other mags like it) to pass time between squeezing nuggets out.

[BCS]

Originally Posted by false_Aest

We read Bicycling (and the other mags like it) to pass time between squeezing nuggets out.

now that's funny!!

[khjr]

Originally Posted by djg

This is a playful bike, insouciant yet all-business, a bike that is compliant while maintaining a firm sense of terrior. It's a bike that will rip the flesh from your back one moment and purr like a kitten the next. In the movie the Secretary, this bike would be Maggie Gyllenhaal AND James Spader, the director and the key grip. Most of all, it planes. If fact, boss, this bike doesn't just plane, it deplanes. Heck, it is de-plane.

Hilarious!

[rustychisel]

Originally Posted by djg

This is a playful bike, insouciant yet all-business, a bike that is compliant while maintaining a firm sense of terrior.

I get ya - it is the merlot of bicycles.


But does it climb like a scalded cat????

[dave thompson]

Originally Posted by rustychisel

I get ya - it is the merlot of bicycles.


But does it climb like a scalded cat????

You hold the cat, I'll scald it.

[roydyates]

Originally Posted by false_Aest

Ok,

The last issue I picked up had a couple of pages on Marsha Brady all grown up and how she rides a bike. It also featured a story about a really fat dude who pedaled himself down to skinny and showed how he's not only skinny but now has a bad "rad' " haircut.

If you need any more evidence go to their website and check out their training section. "Off-Season Fitness:From walking dogs to slicing through snow, here are six ways to stay cycling-fit without pedaling a bike."

I don't think Bicycling is read by people like us for its informative content (even you mentioned how you were kind've surprised cliché or trite phrases didn't make it in to the reviews). We read Bicycling (and the other mags like it) to pass time between squeezing nuggets out.

The Marsha story was the most interesting thing in that issue. IIRC the article on the fat guy was just a third person rewrite of the first person account on the web. I couldn't figure out why they wasted an hour rewriting it.

Bicycling could actually improve with a "Heard on the Serotta Forum..." column. What I've wondered is whether anyone ever has actually paid for a Bicycling subscription?

[soulspinner]

Pretty much any of the bikes they review in my size would be great for me, sure nice to know

[sg8357]

Snobbie has the best bike shootouts


http://bikesnobnyc.blogspot.com/2007...-shootout.html

DJG, submit your review to BikeSnobNYC, I think you can get a gig.

[ergott]

Originally Posted by Peter P.

Felt F3: "...most stable handling. (of the three bikes)"

This is the most unbelievable of the three. In my small size, it sports a 73.5 degree head angle with 45mm of rake. With those specs it results in a scant 52mm of trail. Combine the head angle with the trail figure and stable is not the word that comes to mind. This thing also has a wicked steep 76 degree seat angle, unheard of, even in small sizes, but that apparently wasn't noticed by the reviewer, and the seat angles are steeper than average across the board.

76 deg! I have a 53cm bike and have a 74ST with a 25mm offset post giving me 6.5mm of setback. I would look ridiculous on that bike trying to achieve that. Sounds more like a TT frame.

[McQueen]

This is pretty classic..

The revelation here is that 'Bicycling' magazine sucks. I guess everyone has to reach that conclusion sometime for one reason or another.

I haven't purchased a Bicycling magazine in 15 years -

Unfortunately there's not a lot else out there in the printed world - it almost seems like Velonews has jumped the shark a little. I liked it better when you spent $10 on a Cyclesport, and it was the import from the UK copy rather than a homogenized US version. CyclingFitness from the UK is somewhat interesting. I like Dirtrag for mountain biking stuff - I know some of those guys so I'm a little biased there..

A lot of websites are actually publishing more interesting copy than any magazines..

nyvelocity
cyclingnews
pez
etc..