For this episode, it was a question from a reader that sparked the conversation: they wanted to know ‘why don’t we test bikes to see which is the fastest?’. Hannah, Mark and Chipps navigate their way through this question, plus a whole pile of tangental bits of science, conjecture and anecdote. Could we figure out which bike is fastest? Is fastest bestest? What is the point of a bike test, or any product review, and is it all just marketing anyway?
Give this episode a listen, and if you’ve got things you’d like us to discuss, drop them in the comments. We can’t promise definitive answers, but we’ll likely have some interesting perspectives to debate!
Help us make our podcasts even better
Singletrack Merch
Spinelines Blackboard Shirt
Spinelines. Those out of context statements on the spine of every mag.ย A selection of sometimes dumb, sometimes inappropriate, but always hilarious comments made in Singletrack Towers.ย Nowadays we keep them in a Google Doc, but the original whiteboard still takes pride of place in the office and we wanted…
Singletrack Sponsored Features
Scottish Stag-Do – A YT Izzo UK Adventure
Amanda sets out to bag some Scottish Munros, returning instead with epic memories, incredible experiences and more than a few bruises. In association with… YT INDUSTRIES Words Amanda Photography Pete Scullion As we park up, Pete signals to us to listen to whatโs going on outside the vehicles. Expecting to…




I found that podcast satisfactory. ๐
Touche ๐
I donโt normally listen to podcasts but I found this an interesting and honest discussion.
I agree that if the reviewer loves 100mm bikes and is testing a DH bike then they have to put themselves in the shoes of a downhiller, and comment from that personโs perspective. I do think though that it is possible to comment on quality. Is the carbon frame from X better finished on the inside than the one from Y? And are the suspension bearings much better protected? That said, I sold bike X and bought bike Y and itโs a lot more fun to ride!
One final thought; another site includes โrecommended upgradesโ in their tests. That seems to tell me a lot about the bikeโs major weakness, and something about likely cost of ownership.
Anyway, Happy Birthday!
I suppose if you want “Clarkson” style bike tests there’s always GCN/GMBN…
I think any (journalistic/consumer) test/comparison, should really come with a clear introduction where the use case the tester(s) had in mind is laid out.
e.g. were you comparing ~130mm travel “Trail bikes” with aspiring #Enduroists or typical weekend warriors in mind?
But yep I’m interested in people’s qualitative opinion and I would like that opinion from someone with some experience of other bikes, but not necessarily a racer.
I wonder if it’s worth getting testers to fill out a pre-test questionnaire having only had sight of the marketing blurb: Who/what they think it’s aimed at, do they think any claims made are a bit dubious?
Try and get them to acknowledge (and get past) any bias they might have. you may already do that, does it result in a more objective test?
The recommended upgrades idea I like a lot. I shall make sure we discuss that.