MCN ?

[captinktm]

Off topic a bit , but I read a test the other day in the MCN and they were comparing 4 or 5 bikes against each other, the cheapest of which was 10k the most expensive was 16k , surely that's ridiculous. Then they say well the best bike was .............at 16k but if it was my money then I would go for the ...........at 10k . Surely if they both belong to the same group and do the same job then the 16k bike is just ridiculously over priced?

[SteveW]

I've read loads of tests featuring bikes in the same "category" with huge differences in price.
Often the outcome of the test will be......The bike at 16K is the best, but the 10K bike will definitely do the job, but it has a less prestigious badge, less standard equipment, less power, etc.....
That's what I want from a group test, then I can decide if I really want to spend money on things like.......a BMW/KTM/Ducati badge, all the bells and whistles and 160BHP.
It may well be "Humble" Suzuki or Kawasaki is better value.
So it's important to compare bikes of differing price.

[Jak*]

I only ever bought MCN in the late eighties when I was a courier and that was for the classified ads. There was a newsagent in the city where you could pick it up on Tuesday evening and there was usually a steady stream of couriers hoping for a bargain. I always thought their reviews were poorly written and largely irrelevant for the sort of riding I did. Unfortunately I think the same of all the British motorcycle press nowadays. Even Motorcycle Sport which used to be highly regarded for the quality of its writing is a shadow of its former self. To be fair the majority of modern bikes are of no interest to me either.
Forums like this can be really useful particularly for less common bikes like the GP450 or the WK400. The advantage of reading owners reviews is they tend to do a lot more mileage than journalists. Even Motorcycle Sports long term fleet does not seem to do the mileage they used to. The same goes for gear reviews until you have done some decent mileage in all weathers you can't really comment. I have read reviews on waterproof clothing in which the writer has commented that it did not rain during the test. What was the point then it was just a waste of ink.
With the price of magazines these days I find it hard to justify the cost, I occasionally manage to pick up mags from the 50s or 60s at autojumbles which are often far more entertaining.
Cheers Jak

[Richard Simpson Mark II]

Hummmm...I was a motorcycle journalist for a while, back in the 1980s.

Ironically, the most profitable (and for a while the best-selling) monthly mag back then was the one I worked on: Classic Bike!

There was a good reason for this: the Japanese bikes of the time were truly horrible, unreliable junk. Who in their right mind would have purchased a first-generation Honda V4 or any of the other rubbish that was being churned out? New to scrap in a year or less.

Much better to buy something old and British (and appreciating in value).

Bikes obviously improved fast: they had to. And the magazines were able to bask in their success for a while as the sportsbike boom went on.

But most magazine publishers (and not just motorcycle magazines) reacted really badly to the internet: which offered a wide range of content of dubious quality at a very low cost.

You'd think the way to counter that would be to launch very high-quality premium magazines, with content far better than anything you could access on-line. Accept there would be a loss in ad revenue, and make up for it by bumping up the cover price with editorial quality and production values to match.

Instead, most publishers panicked, reduced editorial quality to try to maintain profits, then wondered where the readers had all gone.

After all, why pay for rubbish, when you can get it for free?

I still earn a living from print journalism (not motorbikes)...but I wouldn't recommended it as a long-term career. TBH emptying septic tanks looks like a better bet.

[Richard Simpson Mark II]

I've read loads of tests featuring bikes in the same "category" with huge differences in price.
Often the outcome of the test will be......The bike at 16K is the best, but the 10K bike will definitely do the job, but it has a less prestigious badge, less standard equipment, less power, etc.....
That's what I want from a group test, then I can decide if I really want to spend money on things like.......a BMW/KTM/Ducati badge, all the bells and whistles and 160BHP.
It may well be "Humble" Suzuki or Kawasaki is better value.
So it's important to compare bikes of differing price.

There's also the 'fun' factor....this month's Bike has a good test featuring a huge range of 'retro-roadsters': a Mash, an Enfield, a Guzzi, a Harley, a Triumph and a BM. There's a huge range of price and performance, but the bike with the highest price and performance isn't necessarily the one that everyone would want or aspire to.

[Mad Hatter]

I remember when the Super Tenere came out 7 years ago and they tested it against the BMW GSA (which I owned at the time).
They rode it in conditions that it clearly was not prepeared for, insofar as they had no sump protection and ripped the sump out on a rock. (The GSA comes with one already installed)
The S10 was slagged off mercilessly and surprise, surprise there were, IIRC, 3 and a half whole pages of adverts dedicated to BMW.
As Captinktm states, they have sold their soles to the devil and are more interested in advertising revenue than real, unbiased tests.
PS I have had an S10 for 7 years now. ... and no longer buy the MCN.

Magazines are a business, if they make more money from advertising than they do from copy sales then that is what you will get. Alas.

How right you are mate, I've literally just left (today actually) a job doing maintenance for a local paper and the revenue from actual sales of papers was negligible compared to the adds, it was effectively the only thing keeping it going.

And garyboy your right, the print quality is awful, I sat down last year and annoyed the crap out of my Mrs slagging the print off. If the paper I worked for put papers like that out for sale someone would definitely be in line for getting an arse kicking.

[simonw]

Seriously though... I would much rather buy a new bike based on the opinion of experienced journalists who spend their working lives riding all the bikes available than the confirmation bias opinion of new owners on forums...

Blimey, I wouldn't. I'd take the journos' views and those of the owners (agree with your confirmation bias comment) and form an opinion after talking to (a) dealer(s) and a test ride. As a former V-Strom 650 and now V-Strom 1000 owner, I don't recognise some of the things journos have written about those bikes. And I find the whole "it's slow/boring/sluggish/dull/doesn't turn" etc about anything that isn't a Hayabusa or Fireblade misleading and unhelpful.

In their defence, I guess it's probably risky to write anything too negative about a bike in case the manufacturer doesn't invite them to subsequent model launches.

[captinktm]

I've read loads of tests featuring bikes in the same "category" with huge differences in price.
Often the outcome of the test will be......The bike at 16K is the best, but the 10K bike will definitely do the job, but it has a less prestigious badge, less standard equipment, less power, etc.....
That's what I want from a group test, then I can decide if I really want to spend money on things like.......a BMW/KTM/Ducati badge, all the bells and whistles and 160BHP.
It may well be "Humble" Suzuki or Kawasaki is better value.
So it's important to compare bikes of differing price.

Ah if it were only that simple. If they are going to do a true comparison then it should be the base model from each manufacturer, not the top of one and the bottom of the other. Also they should have the same type of tyres. They should then be ridden to the max (like the old journo's did) in all the environments they will be expected to perform in. But the biggest judgement factor should be which bike perform best standard straight from the show room.
I like the "prestigious badge" that's proper bike snobbery that.

[captinktm]

I only ever bought MCN in the late eighties when I was a courier and that was for the classified ads. There was a newsagent in the city where you could pick it up on Tuesday evening and there was usually a steady stream of couriers hoping for a bargain. I always thought their reviews were poorly written and largely irrelevant for the sort of riding I did. Unfortunately I think the same of all the British motorcycle press nowadays. Even Motorcycle Sport which used to be highly regarded for the quality of its writing is a shadow of its former self. To be fair the majority of modern bikes are of no interest to me either.
Forums like this can be really useful particularly for less common bikes like the GP450 or the WK400. The advantage of reading owners reviews is they tend to do a lot more mileage than journalists. Even Motorcycle Sports long term fleet does not seem to do the mileage they used to. The same goes for gear reviews until you have done some decent mileage in all weathers you can't really comment. I have read reviews on waterproof clothing in which the writer has commented that it did not rain during the test. What was the point then it was just a waste of ink.
With the price of magazines these days I find it hard to justify the cost, I occasionally manage to pick up mags from the 50s or 60s at autojumbles which are often far more entertaining.
Cheers Jak

Spot on boss. the other thing of course is if you have paid hard earned cash for a jacket or suit then your expectations will be greater than those who get it free and will only where a few times.

[DaveCon]

Ah if it were only that simple. If they are going to do a true comparison then it should be the base model from each manufacturer, not the top of one and the bottom of the other. Also they should have the same type of tyres. They should then be ridden to the max (like the old journo's did) in all the environments they will be expected to perform in. But the biggest judgement factor should be which bike perform best standard straight from the show room.
I like the "prestigious badge" that's proper bike snobbery that.

And ridden by riders of the same ability and riding experience as the reader, who happens to be of the same physical size and weight and etc

In other words go get a test ride. I'm lucky enough to have been able to afford two new bikes in the last 3 years and I never read anything about them in the press but I did test ride all the bikes that interested me. I never had any trouble getting a test ride on any of the bikes - aside from a bit of patience while one became available.

The problem comes when you're looking at a bike that is a bit older and maybe out of production and/or buying privately. The comparison tests of older bikes I think are a bit more interesting and the journalists aren't under so much commercial pressure from advertisers.