Reply to comment

May 12, 2016, 1:40 p.m. -  Jerryek

#!markdown This is a very valid question. When I read a review, I tend to focus on the stuff that is important and unchangeable: geometry, suspension, frame design, etc. Grips, bars, saddle, etc aren't that important, since they are subjective and easy to replace. I also tend to build bikes custom, and this try to filter out info accordingly. But many people do things differently, and not everyone weighs pros/cons the same. I don't personally care about bottle mounts much, since I use a pack, but am interested if a frame has a threaded bb (yay!) or internal cable routing (meh, especially brake lines). I also tend to swap components a lot, so compatibility and changing standards is something I'm concerned about, but others might not care much. Any reader should be able to prioritize information. Accounting for rare events is more problematic. The headset example is a good one, as your experience is highly unlikely to occur for most people. King or Cane Creek bbs work great 99% of the time. But what if it's a frame or component that is new to the market? This is especially difficult since the response from the manufacturer is ALWAYS the same: "this was a preproduction version, and the ones we sell are way better!" But….sometimes companies do fix things right after release and address initial weaknesses. And even really good products can have production failures. I've had a a reverb post and set of Shimano brakes that were lemons, but know that these products are, in general, quite reliable compared to competitors. In both cases, the replacements worked great. But as a tester who spends a limited time with a product, how do you know?

Post your comment

Please log in to leave a comment.