[Nigel Dabster]

Is it just me or did I miss something birkett said in the test and I quote "..........the suspension was working well especially the rear after the 315r which never did have the best back suspension."
Funny how we always get these 'birkisms' last years bike was crap/ let water in/ had wrong gearing/etc but never mentioned the suspension on the mont in the last 6 years anyway as being anything other than ok. The rear unit is adjustable aswell and as far as most fair minded people say its quite good isn't it?

[windlestone]

It's about time the uk distributors got some bikes out to Trials Central regulars for an objective test of their machinary. The outlay to them to have a novice/clubman/expert ride one of their demonstrators for a month and then comment on it would imho soon be recouped in bike sales and related sales. I think far more riders at local level support their local dealers because they support local events and local riders. A local rider testing a bike in different areas up and down the country would inform riders how the bike performs in different conditions and in different hands. I know those Lakeland rocks nearly as well as Birks does and i've never been!
Lets face it apart from the pics being of different bikes you can guess what Birks is going to write.

[jenkinsm]

Well maybe you should try riding one then m8, I've riden pro's for the last two years now and the differnce is unbelievable. Yes the suspension was reliable but it lacked bounce and felt dead. As for it being an advertisement the fact is they do tests on every bike so isn't that fair!

[Shercool]

The way i read Birk's report he just said the rear suspension is a improvement over the 315, he didnt say the rear suspension is crap on a 315. If a new bike comes out it should always be an improvement over the old one or whats the point ? Some people will pick at anything.

[Nigel Dabster]

I put the quote there so you could read it, not ignore it. I can't ever remember a test in TMX, to be a test it needs to be objective and lets not forget Birks is a dealer. And as for being fair when did birkett do the Scorpa test?

[Andy]

Hypothetical situation:

I arrange for a TC member to trial, say the Mont 4RT and write a review of it. They write that, in their opinion, the bike is awful. Are Sandifords going to renew their advertising on the site? I think not. TMX are in the same situation.

[g4321]

Its the same with road bikes - all the magazines give either an excellent write up (if the bike is good) or a fair -good write up if the bike is OK. The best is when they compare last years model with this years model - last years model is always poor at some things while the new model is brilliant at everything. When you read the original test there is nothing at all bad about the old bike.

Advertising Pays in that the manufacturer always has numerous adverts for their new super dooper Yamahonduki in mags which have a good write up. The only bikes which get a not so good write up have very few adverts by the manufacturer.

Perhaps I am too synical!

To get a non biased test you have to either rely on a good rider YOU PERSONALLY KNOW & trust who can identify faults/flaws & differences from experience. Most club riders will say bike X is best because they ride bike X or because the day they tried bike Y they did not get on that well with it. I would expect even a good (read expert) rider would need to try a bike & set it up to suit himself before riding a trial then giving judgement.

I like most others who waffle on on this bulletin board whether mediocre riders(me!) or experts like some others would be quite happy to try all the manufacturers bikes over an extended period of time in competition (for no fee I hasten add in my case! - except they can repair all damage) and give un-biased judgement - then again if you dont browse through this website you would not see the results - same as a TMX test really!

This post has been edited by g4321: 12 December 2004 - 06:51 PM

[Big John]

Many, many years ago, in the 50's, AMC Ltd., manufacturers of AJS & Matchless stopped allowing journalists to ride test bikes and absolutely forbade the papers to write tests reports of their own (under threat of litigation). It is very difficult for anybody to do a real objective and critical test!

When AMC decided to lift the restriction, the then Sales manager invited the then test editor into his office, very nicely offering tea and biscuits to the editor, then get knuckled down by saying: "right then, lets get started, this is what you are going to write..."

I would say this, in agreement with Andy.. let an objective rider ride the new 4RT (for example, could be any of the new bikes available)... criticise just one component of it and then... light the blue touch paper and watch the fireworks!!!

[Nigel Dabster]

Andy, on Dec 12 2004, 06:20 PM, said:

Hypothetical situation:

I arrange for a TC member to trial, say the Mont 4RT and write a review of it. They write that, in their opinion,  the bike is awful. Are Sandifords going to renew their advertising on the site? I think not.  TMX are in the same situation.

Now this is where I beg to differ.
You can do what you like with this site and thats fine by me but TMX is not in an identical position. Whilst I thought the 4rt good it was not necessarily the bike for me, or possibly alot of other riders and this is what birks is trying to say in his final comments I'm sure. The difference with TMX is that they have no competition and whilst they would be mad (and wrong) to say the 4rt is rubbish, they could elaborate and describe a comparison. Birkett says he didn't have a 2 stroke to compare to well why didn't they have a 315 on the sidelines and compare them. They don't have to slag it off just do a more realistic assesment. Moto verde will and other continental mags so why not?
How much do Sandifords advertise in TMX anyway, and if they didn't where else would they?

[munch]

jeremy clarkson

[GIZZA5]

Quote

Now this is where I beg to differ.

That will be a first

[Tim C]

Whils't you can understand TMX's position in terms of advertising revenue, it is still frustrating to read what is generally a fairly middle of the road opinion, regardless of the bike. I always find it amusing that the shortcomings of "last years bike" are immediately declared when testing "this years" model, yet strangely anything that hasn't been improved is once again not mentioned.

The point is, we all ride trials bikes week in and week out, we know what works on them and what doesn't. We all talk to each other and share this "experience" so the report by TMX is generally simply shown to be what it is - safe reporting.

No substitute for an active community that tells it how it is - oh! thats what this is isn't it

[Woody]

On the subject of bike tests, I think no matter how honest or objective a tester tried to be, even down to listing what they believe to be the bikes strong points or faults, it is ultimately just an opinion - their opinion. Whilst it's natural to value some people's opinion higher than others, due to their ability on a bike, as a development rider, their experience or whatever, it's possible that the characteristics of the bike that they feel and report may not be apparent to most club riders due to their lower level of ability, so is there any value to be taken from a test by Joe Clubman anyway. Personally I think not much as I still believe the only way is for riders to try the bikes themselves on 'proper sections' and under proper 'event conditions' in order to get a feel for whether a bike will actually suit them.

One publication that does tend to try and 'tell it like it is' is TBM. I remember when the WR400 Yam came out and in addition to pointing out its virtues, they also criticised it heavily where they felt it was warranted - too heavy, tank too big, not easy to move around on and they really went to town on the cardiac inducing hot start routine and the lack of the leccy start. Result was a big fall-out with Yamaha UK who subsequently wouldn't provide anymore bikes for tests and I think withdrew advertising. A couple of years or so that lasted for I think before they 'made up'. But they stuck by their principles and have criticised bikes since, whatever the marque, whenever they think it is justified, including Yamaha again with the WR450 as being too heavy and too powerful. However, as informative as their tests are, it is still possible to try a bike that they have provided a very detailed write-up on and come to a different conclusion on some of the issues raised. Hence my opinion that the only way to know is to try it yourself.

We know by now that the TMX or Dirtbike tests of trials bikes are only going to give a high level overview of the bike and that the only way to be sure is try before you buy.

On the subject of importers/dealers withdrawing advertising it has happened before to TMX remember, when the grey import issue first surfaced 6 - 7 years ago. One of our local blokes was a prime instigator in this... The importers and some dealers withdrew their adverts from TMX in protest for a few weeks - I think because the 'grey' dealer was advertising in TMX also, but can't remember now. So there is a precedent for them to do it if they get upset by things they see or read that they don't like.....

[catskinner]

I have been riding trials for only a few years after more than 20 years of MX. I have always wondered why I have never seen a comparison test of different brands of trials bikes.

Many different publications here in the U.S. routinely have comparison tests of, say, all of the 125cc or 250cc MX bikes with several riders of varying abilities rating each bike in different catagories. An overall "winner" is chosen, and individual catagory winners are also listed. Sometimes the overall winner doesn't win any single catagory, the bike just does everything fairly well.

When I bought my trials bike, my decision was based on quality of craftmanship and dealer locality. I must say that to my surprise, many of the dealerships I contacted invited me to their stores for a test ride. That had never happened in all of my years in MX. I also attended a U.S. National and got to ride a couple of different brands before I bought my bike, but I was so inexperienced at trials, I didn't know what to look for except quality.

I am now getting ready to buy another bike and would find a comparison of different brands very helpful. It would be great to see which bike could possibly help me in my weaker skill areas, ( all of my skill areas are weak, some more than others ).

Do any publications in Europe do comparison tests?

[mattylad]

All modern bikes will out perform 90% of the end users. They are a very basic machine with few real differences in design as they are all designed to do exactly the same job. (250 or thereabouts single cylinder two stroke built into a frame with standard geometry wheelbase etc, and bought in forks wheels and brakes). So why on earth are they going to be very different to ride. It basically boils down to nit-picking details between factories. At least the four strokes have changed the natural order in the combustion department but the rest stays the same.
Vive la difference!