MCN ?

[captinktm]

I am as I am sure a lot of others on here are MCN readers of many years. I could probably have bought another bike with the money I have spent on the paper. I now down load it to my Kindle and while it's not quite the same it is convenient. I think the standard of the content as gone down and the paper is no longer news but a retail paper for the motorcycle industry. It's not really even worth reading the test and comparisons on new bikes as you could probably cut and paste any test they have done over the past ten years. They used to be a bit more subtle with there freebies but now it obvious, and lets face it they are n't going to bite the hand that feeds them. So these days unless you can blag a test ride then we are buying completely blind as that flashy new model as not even seen a British road. For me an example of this at it's worst was the Suzuki TLS 1000 which was raved about by journo's on the test in some sunny local on a lovely race track only to slag it off when I was found to be a bit Lively on Brit roads. Had the bike been tested properly on our roads then this could have been avoided.
So is there any mag out there now that tells it how it is, say things like, most injected bikes have poor low down carbration to the point of being difficult to ride anywhere apart from a track.
The other thing that bugs me about MCN and other publication is the repetition in the writing, it was n't so noticeable reading the paper but in a kindle where you are presented the magnified pages to read it's terrible, the paper would of course be have the size if they wrote it once, not so much room for the ads!! I guess some of the problem is information over load, but surely there's a demand for good honest opinions after all unless these experienced journo's don't give an honest account and are found to be sugar coating their reports then the next time we read their reports they are worthless. So at what point does it become a worthless comic rather than somewhere we used to get good info. What e think.

[DaveCon]

That's why forums like this are so valuable

I stopped getting MCN when I realized I was only getting it for the racing pages and I got bored with that. I get all my bike info off forums, YouTube and Internet in general.

[captinktm]

That's why forums like this are so valuable

I stopped getting MCN when I realized I was only getting it for the racing pages and I got bored with that. I get all my bike info off forums, YouTube and Internet in general.

Yes I agree, but and it's a BIG but, using forums for information is also fraut with danger unless you know or have a good idea what the answer is. So in the case of the TLS 1000 I was one of the first to get one in the UK so there was no feed back on the web. This I am guessing is the case with a lot of new bikes.

[Old Git Ray]

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.

[Brenhden]

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.

[daveuprite]

, they have sold their soles to the devil

What size does the devil take these days?

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, all desperate to justify the large investment they just made. Of course the advertising revenue / bribe allegation will always remain and could be valid in some cases - which certainly muddies the waters. You can often spot it though, as some of those commenting on here have. Thinking back to the good old early days of Performance Bike magazine, you got a mag written and edited by a bunch of fast road riders and/or club racers, with occasional input from BSB level riders too, and the bikes were begged and borrowed from dealers and recent owners. The articles were refreshingly candid and if a bike was crap they said so in no uncertain terms. Although there was clearly a deep love for the 916 amongst the PB journos, for example, you got the impression that that was not because Ducati paid them to say so but just because they thought the bike was great. Towards the end of its production run the mag criticized the bike in comparison with better stuff that had come along from Japan and Italy since.

Re. the TL1000S, I've got a 97/98 bike in the garage and although it has its faults I do love it for its hairy lack of sophistication. Those who knock it for twitchiness need to take off the horrendous Suzuki factory 'Please don't sue us' steering damper and ride it like a proper scrote. It's only unsafe if you don't know how to handle a lively sharp-steering superbike and if that's not what you like you really shouldn't consider one. Changing the rotary rear shock system is wise too. The steering damper was put on in direct response to criticism from journos unused to such handling in a road bike - the racers at PB loved it because it felt exciting and alive.

At the end of the day, you don't have much choice when weighing up what new bike to buy. If it's a sports bike you are unlikely to get to test ride one at a track, where you can really explore its potential, and if it's a dirt/dual-sport bike you are unlikely to be allowed to test it off road. And you are very unlikely ever to be able to test your candidate bikes from different manufacturers back to back over a few hours. Professional bike journalists get to do all these things on a regular basis so their's is the best analysis of what's available that you are going to get, even if it is sometimes affected by the influence of manufacturers.

[garyboy]

when mcn changed management way back in ??? the feel and content changed overnight, and of course there was the loss of kevin. The tech reports became poor, and the use of hype and use of meaningless comparatives (bigger stronger faster.. ) became all too obvious. They seemed to be catering for the young burnout hooligan, not serious motorcyclists.

but the main reason for me stopping buying it was ..
the very very poor quality of the print .. all smudged and often illegible .. pics could not quite see, and dirty ink hands.

I still use the mcn bike reviews though, occasionally, even tho they are sometimes bland or biased as if written by speed freaks .. and the mpg estimates were way out (must have been written by a speed freak then?)

I have often, over the previous years bought bikes from their ads, though .. and see them still as a reasonably fair knowledge base to consult.

[DaveCon]

Yes I agree, but and it's a BIG but, using forums for information is also fraut with danger unless you know or have a good idea what the answer is. So in the case of the TLS 1000 I was one of the first to get one in the UK so there was no feed back on the web. This I am guessing is the case with a lot of new bikes.

That goes for pretty much everything you read on the web; double check everything

I remember the reviews of the Super Ten and was put right off them completely. Imagine my surprise a few years later when I find owners absolutely love them

[bowber]

MCN was know as the road race news years ago (mid 80s) and my occasional looks since have been no different. I've never really found a good all rounder so the only mag we get regularly is ABR and that's only because my wife fancied it.

Steve

[captinktm]

, they have sold their soles to the devil

What size does the devil take these days?

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, all desperate to justify the large investment they just made. Of course the advertising revenue / bribe allegation will always remain and could be valid in some cases - which certainly muddies the waters. You can often spot it though, as some of those commenting on here have. Thinking back to the good old early days of Performance Bike magazine, you got a mag written and edited by a bunch of fast road riders and/or club racers, with occasional input from BSB level riders too, and the bikes were begged and borrowed from dealers and recent owners. The articles were refreshingly candid and if a bike was crap they said so in no uncertain terms. Although there was clearly a deep love for the 916 amongst the PB journos, for example, you got the impression that that was not because Ducati paid them to say so but just because they thought the bike was great. Towards the end of its production run the mag criticized the bike in comparison with better stuff that had come along from Japan and Italy since.

Re. the TL1000S, I've got a 97/98 bike in the garage and although it has its faults I do love it for its hairy lack of sophistication. Those who knock it for twitchiness need to take off the horrendous Suzuki factory 'Please don't sue us' steering damper and ride it like a proper scrote. It's only unsafe if you don't know how to handle a lively sharp-steering superbike and if that's not what you like you really shouldn't consider one. Changing the rotary rear shock system is wise too. The steering damper was put on in direct response to criticism from journos unused to such handling in a road bike - the racers at PB loved it because it felt exciting and alive.

At the end of the day, you don't have much choice when weighing up what new bike to buy. If it's a sports bike you are unlikely to get to test ride one at a track, where you can really explore its potential, and if it's a dirt/dual-sport bike you are unlikely to be allowed to test it off road. And you are very unlikely ever to be able to test your candidate bikes from different manufacturers back to back over a few hours. Professional bike journalists get to do all these things on a regular basis so their's is the best analysis of what's available that you are going to get, even if it is sometimes affected by the influence of manufacturers.

Your absolutely spot on, I also agree with the TLS being a cracking bike, as I said I had one of the first to enter the uk and loved it, I did n't find it had a problem at all and fitted the damper only to remove it half way through a ride it was that bad. No, my problem was that there comments killed the resale value stone dead. I to would pay attention if these experienced journo's were testing the bikes on the road in the uk.