Is 120/100 really in the spirit of mismatched travel bikes? I know the numbers are different but they could have taken the opportunity to feature bikes designed properly around miss-matched travel, banshee spitfire for example, instead of the usual offerings by the usual suspects. Another month of mbr left on the shelf at smiths.
Which ones did they review then?
They made some totally half-assed comments about "fitting longer forks to slacken off the head angle and change the handling" but afaik those are all bikes designed for the mismatch.
Sorry Kit, only one I remember is the Blood
They all got 6/10 appart from the Specialized which got 10/10...
Would have been good to see a blood in there, but they were all 120/100. This was April issue. I think there was an Specialized Epic, and umm some other bikes. I think the Epic won.
Looking at the cover online it's "bigger fork, better bike" so think they were trying to determine if sticking a 120 fork on a 100 bike is better or worse.
Standard MBR rubbish, I still bought it tho, Take the reviews with a pinch of salt. Also the brand that wins the test generally has a nice advert on the rear of the mag. It used to be Trek when MBR loved the fuel, now we're back to Specialized. I like the Epic but to be honest the reviews of the other bikes was poor to say the least.
Very little in the mag is actually interesting to read and is only good for viewing new products and the odd decent letter or service guide.
I find this the same for most of the magazines bar, Singletrack.
I like the way things are reviewed but not given a score as such but the persona, idea. Bikes are all different and so are those that ride them. If you don't fit the generally MBR type then your screwed, or riding a heap of crap. Hence why I now take the mag with a pinch of salt.
Singletrack mag all the way.