Consumer Reports rates some bikes

Discussion in 'Road Cycling' started by Tom Parker, May 9, 2003.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Tom Parker

    Tom Parker Guest

    The latest issue of Consumer Reports (June) just arrived, and they have a small article rating
    bikes, for 3 categories of riders: comfort, fitness, and road. The top-rated bikes were by Giant,
    Giant, and Bianchi, respectively. They didn't care much for the two comfort bikes with automatic
    shift. FYI.

    -- Tom
     
    Tags:


  2. Rich Clark

    Rich Clark Guest

    "Tom Parker" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > The latest issue of Consumer Reports (June) just arrived, and they have a small article rating
    > bikes, for 3 categories of riders: comfort, fitness, and road. The top-rated bikes were by Giant,
    > Giant, and Bianchi, respectively. They didn't care much for the two comfort bikes with automatic
    > shift. FYI.

    I was mostly impressed with the quality of the general advice they gave about bike-buying. It isn't
    comprehensive or complete, but it's mostly at least not wrong. They make the case that buying at a
    local bike shop is the best strategy. And they didn't include any mountain bikes, for once.

    But the test reports are ludicrous. For one thing, they make no mention of the basic reality that
    what they tested is about 1% of what's actually available. Entire major brands are omitted
    entirely. Nothing is said about the brandmates of the bikes they did test. And while the issue of
    fit is mentioned in the text, the connection is not made to the "ratings." The uninitiated buyer
    who wants the "top rated" bike may have trouble understanding why it's not suitable for their
    particular physique.

    RichC
     
  3. Grl

    Grl Guest

    I think you are right. The piece was not useless, but damned close. The heart rate monitors thing
    was kind of nice, but again quite superficial/limited.

    My guess is that a couple of bike guys on their staff were given a very small budget and a few pages
    to do their report and this is the best they could do with limited resources. I personally would
    have liked to see them add a few a of the often-reviled "department store" models to their
    comparison just to see what 1/3 less than the lowest priced models in their ranges would get them.

    - GRL

    "It's good to want things."

    Steve Barr (philosopher, poet, humorist, chemist, Visual Basic programmer)
    "Rich Clark" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    >
    > "Tom Parker" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]...
    > > The latest issue of Consumer Reports (June) just arrived, and they have a small article rating
    > > bikes, for 3 categories of riders: comfort, fitness, and road. The top-rated bikes were by
    > > Giant, Giant, and Bianchi, respectively. They didn't care much for the two comfort bikes with
    > > automatic shift. FYI.
    >
    > I was mostly impressed with the quality of the general advice they gave about bike-buying. It
    > isn't comprehensive or complete, but it's mostly at least not wrong. They make the case that
    > buying at a local bike shop is
    the
    > best strategy. And they didn't include any mountain bikes, for once.
    >
    > But the test reports are ludicrous. For one thing, they make no mention of the basic reality that
    > what they tested is about 1% of what's actually available. Entire major brands are omitted
    > entirely. Nothing is said about the brandmates of the bikes they did test. And while the issue of
    > fit is mentioned in the text, the connection is not made to the "ratings." The uninitiated buyer
    > who wants the "top rated" bike may have trouble understanding why it's not suitable for their
    > particular physique.
    >
    > RichC
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...