Consumer Reports bicycle review

[David Kerber]

Did anybody see this? They reviewed FS MTB's, hardtails,
comfort bikes and hybrids, though only a relatively few
models of each one.

They also had a relatively long sidebar about why buying
from a mass- market retailer was not a good idea except for
the most casual adult rider, or for a kid who's going to
outgrow it in a year or two. They mainly pointed out the
same things we say here, about weight, proper adjustments,
quality of build, etc. Overall, not perfect, but a pretty
good article.

--
Dave Kerber Remove the ns_ from if replying by e-mail (but
keep posts in the newsgroups if possible).

 

[Arthur Harris]

"David Kerber" wrote:
> Did anybody see this? They reviewed FS MTB's, hardtails,
> comfort bikes and hybrids, though only a relatively few
> models of each one.
>
> They also had a relatively long sidebar about why buying
> from a mass- market retailer was not a good idea except
> for the most casual adult rider, or for a kid who's going
> to outgrow it in a year or two. They mainly pointed out
> the same things we say here, about weight, proper
> adjustments, quality of build, etc. Overall, not perfect,
> but a pretty good article.

I think that's the one I saw, though IIRC it was about a
year old. Is it the one that rated Bianchi the best road
bike? A couple of their comments made me wince, like:

"Aluminum is stiff but light, steel is more comfortable
but heavy."

and

"Road bikes generally don't have shocks, so the frame is the
only thing that absorbs shock."

Art Harris

 

[David Kerber]

In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...
>
> "David Kerber" wrote:
> > Did anybody see this? They reviewed FS MTB's, hardtails,
> > comfort bikes and hybrids, though only a relatively few
> > models of each one.
> >
> > They also had a relatively long sidebar about why buying
> > from a mass- market retailer was not a good idea except
> > for the most casual adult rider, or for a kid who's
> > going to outgrow it in a year or two. They mainly
> > pointed out the same things we say here, about weight,
> > proper adjustments, quality of build, etc. Overall, not
> > perfect, but a pretty good article.
>
> I think that's the one I saw, though IIRC it was about a
> year old. Is it the one that rated Bianchi the best road
> bike? A couple of their comments made me wince, like:
>
> "Aluminum is stiff but light, steel is more comfortable
> but heavy."
>
> and
>
> "Road bikes generally don't have shocks, so the frame is
> the only thing that absorbs shock."

I believe that was their review of road bikes from last
year. This one is in the current (June 2004) issue.

--
Remove the ns_ from if replying by e-mail (but keep posts in
the newsgroups if possible).

 

[Matt O'Toole]

maxo wrote:

> On Fri, 04 Jun 2004 19:33:09 +0000, Arthur Harris wrote:
>
>> "Road bikes generally don't have shocks, so the frame is
>> the only thing that absorbs shock."
>
> They should have given tires a shot. I like mine
> real good.

Write to 'em. You might attatch an article like this one:

http://draco.acs.uci.edu/rbfaq/FAQ/8e.2.html

CR is run by engineer types in pursuit of truth -- unlike
the dumbass know-it-alls at bike magazines.

Matt O.