Dear Uncle Dave – Tinder Reviews

Dear Uncle Dave:

Ever since I started consuming bike tests (both online and in print), I noticed something awkward about them: Every time a bike is reviewed in a “first contact” manner it gets all the bells and whistles, while when the companies hand a unit for a long term test all the flaws come floating in no time.

I understand this is similar to the way one comes to note our beloved ones defects after the initial phase where we fall in love, but what really grinds my gears is the fact that whenever a reviewer acknowledges the time and effort it took him to find the right suspension settings, dial the cockpit position, etc. he’s are blatantly reckoning all the bells and whistles he threw up when he was handed the bike for less than an hour were pure horse manure.

How can you assess the true potential of a given bike when it’s not adjusted to your weight/riding style/body geometry? Are the short-time testers superior to us, mere mortals, in feeling the true abilities of any bike model? Are short-termed reviews superior to long-termed ones in the same way one tends to idealize one night stands?

Sincerely,

Not sure If One-Time Memories Make The Best Ones.

---

Dear NSIOTMMTBO:

Here at Uncle Dave, we respect your questions. We strive to answer them in an informative and entertaining manner. But that doesn’t mean we always fully understand them. I feel like you might be speaking some kind of advanced form of across-the-pond English that is going over my head…or that maybe you’ve run this through some kind of auto translator. Either way, I think I’ve got it…

But I’ll start with a question of my own for myself:
Q – What’s the hardest part about testing bikes?

A – When you’re back on your own equipment, remembering not to beat the shit out of it.
Testing bikes is a strange gig. It’s often hard to find something interesting to say, and you always seem to be running the risk of offending someone, somewhere. Everybody second guesses your conclusions. People make insane leaps on even your softest of criticisms, yet get all riled up if you don’t go in for the kill over the slightest shortcoming. In short, it’s a really, really time consuming and kind of shitty way to keep yourself on up to date on product. Sponsorship is probably a better way to go.

Myself, I don’t have much experience with short term tests or “product launches”, and NSMB doesn’t make a habit of running these one day rides as “reviews”, more as a precursor to a longer test. But that doesn’t mean there isn’t a lot that can be learned in a short period of time with a bike. Usually with a few hours of riding time, and maybe another hour or two of fiddling, a good tester can make a decent judgement on a bike. Well. That’s how long it takes me. So a ‘good tester’ can probably sort it out much quicker than that.

The other thing to consider is that these all expense paid trips to exotic locations where these testers are forming their off-the-cuff opinions generally come with a host of groupies and hangers on. You’ll have the sales guys, and the marketing guys, mechanics, pro riders and maybe even an engineer or two. You’ll have people that can explain every nuance and design quirk. You’ll have people tuning the bikes to perfection. And you’ll have people ensuring that the time is taken to set the bike up correctly for weight and riding style. This, of course, is a double edged sword. I mean, that description sounds pretty far from what most would consider “real world conditions”. But all those resources allow you to cut away hours of tinkering and fiddling, and you end up starting with the proper set-up rather than wasting a few rides figuring it out.

But then you have to consider the whole ‘unfamiliar trails’ thing. I mean, how many of us have flown to Montreal and gained 10 pounds gorging on poutine? And then you fly home wondering why it’s taken you so long to discover that magical food and you spend the next couple of weeks driving around Vancouver on a sad poutine hunt. And then you realize that it’s nothing more than soggy fries, glutinous gravy and some squeaky cheese and what you really loved was the magic of Montreal in the springtime. I mean, who’s not going to love a bike after they’ve been flown across the world to be schmoozed and pampered and shuttled and flattered?

So, there are some things to be learned on a short term test. You can learn if the bike does/doesn’t suck. You can learn what went into the design and pick the brains of the probably smart people that created it. And you can learn which journalists are the lazy hacks and simply regurgitate the package handed to them upon their arrival. But any ‘review’ completed with just a few hours in the saddle should be treated for what it is – desperate clickbait.

But then again, what is ‘clickbait’ anyhow? Shoddy content designed to appeal to your basest instinct, forcing you into following the link due to a fancy title? A nasty phrase dreamed up by people who can’t get the traffic in order to insult the people who do? Maybe 3 hour bike tests are exactly what the mountain bike world is demanding and we need to step up to the plate/play ball/get with the program/put on our big boy pants?

Sincerely,

Uncle Dave

---

NSIOTMMTBO – yours is the Ask Uncle Dave letter of the week. Congrats! You have scored a pair of  Spank Spike pedals.

Have a question for Uncle Dave? Send it here…

---

I’m sure nobody wants to vent about bike reviews…