#!markdown
I re-read the article and the comments I made relate to points raised by the
article - whether that's what the intention was or not. It's certainly not
clear that the only point/question you are trying to make is whether to re-
build before a review or not.
To that question I'd say it should be ridden as delivered unless there are
safety concerns. If it comes as a pile of parts build it up how you would a
frame up build [just mention that in the review] and if it just needs the bars
turned, front wheel attached and some air in the tires/suspension ride it that
way.
If a company sends you a review bike that's in poor shape or was assembled
correctly that's something I'd want to see in a review. A company that can't
connect the dots is worth taking about even if they theoretically make a great
product which once properly assembled is a reliable ride.
May 12, 2016, 11:41 a.m. - Vik Banerjee
#!markdown I re-read the article and the comments I made relate to points raised by the article - whether that's what the intention was or not. It's certainly not clear that the only point/question you are trying to make is whether to re- build before a review or not. To that question I'd say it should be ridden as delivered unless there are safety concerns. If it comes as a pile of parts build it up how you would a frame up build [just mention that in the review] and if it just needs the bars turned, front wheel attached and some air in the tires/suspension ride it that way. If a company sends you a review bike that's in poor shape or was assembled correctly that's something I'd want to see in a review. A company that can't connect the dots is worth taking about even if they theoretically make a great product which once properly assembled is a reliable ride.