It's really disturbing to see people disdain consumer advocacy to the lengths seen in this thread. I don't understand what benefit it is to anyone in the market for a $6000+ bike to write reviews that don't focus on its shortcomings. Why would anyone take such pride in their consumer purchases that they should feel the need to speak up and defend the honour of Dave Turner/Weagle? How are your hard earned dollars protected in this regard? If Tim thinks the bike isn't that good, it's not meant as a personal insult to anyone who disagrees and decides to spend the money on the DHR regardless.
i think you misunderstood me….i don't take any personal insult whatsoever, and i realize that nothing is infallible, and serious scrutiny results in a better product in the end…what annoyed me is that this "review" wasn't very technically based, and it was very misinforming….
Tim complained about the fork hurting his hands so he switched to his "beloved" 888, then slammed the frame that he was supposed to be reviewing because he couldn't set the shock up to work favorably….just as he didn't take the time to set the fork up(he wrote it off instead) he also probably didn't take much time trying different shock setups, and also misinformed readers about compatibility with certain shocks…
if anyone else reviewing this frame had similar findings, then maybe there would be some merit in his review, but all in all the DHR has had nothing but rave reviews, particularly regarding the rear suspensions performance….it's not about the fact that he thinks it "isn't that good" it's that he didn't do his job correctly in reviewing it and testing it, and he made some hasty conclusions….
he also said "the DHR was harsher over high speed terrain than any of the DH bikes Ive ridden recently" ….to me, that's pretty vague….he should enlighten us and go into detail if he wants to retain any credibility…
anyhow, i'm not personally bent, i just think it was a pretty lame review….