beachedbeluga wrote:
This is somewhat what I'm getting at. My issue is this- I have x dollars to spend on a bike. There are four or five that I am considering in that price range. Yes, I know that they are all good- but which ones had flaws, how do they compare to each other. All of these reviewers have access to all the bikes, and may or may not have preferences amongst them. Can you rank them? Say that they are similar? Or give any insight to how they stack up?One problem is that one rider's "responsive" is another rider's "twitchy", while another's "stable" is another's "unresponsive". So unless your personal preferences line up exactly with the reviewer's, you may have an entirely different experience with the same bike.
Also, there is the expectations of the reviewer. Several years ago, Road Bike Action reviewed a bike that I helped design. Overall the review was pretty positive, except the reviewer kept bringing up the geometry, specifically how it fit. There were several comments about the "tall 165mm head tube, which is on average 10 to 15mm longer than similarly sized models from other brands" and how this made the bike less suitable for racing. This bike was designed to compete against the Specialized Roubaix and Cannondale Synapse, both of which at that time also had 165mm head tubes on their 54cm models. If you were looking for something like a Tarmac or SuperSix, they had a point, but not if you were looking for an alternative to a Synapse or Roubaix...
"I'm thinking of a number between 1 and 10, and I don't know why!"