[dropmachine]

Theres a huge difference between saying something sucks, and something isn't your preference. One is a statement, one is an opinion. And yeah, unless you can pony the F up and do better, state opinions, not baseless and incorrect dribbling crap.

Your tire analogy doesn't work either. If a product fails to do its job, then stating that its crap is completely logical, because its FAILED to do what its promised. Decline doesn't do that. You just don't like it. They do exactly what they say, in that they bring news and articles, reviews and photos to people that want to see them.

The fact that you think DIRT or anybody else does a better job (which I will agree with actually in DIRT's regard) is opinion, not fact. If these things were facts, mountain bike action wouldn't exist.


Good line on the carbon hardtails though, and it works with 29er Steel bikes too.

 

[spocomptonrider]

Also as far as not "supporting the mag that tries to bring you the sport you love" 30 issues and counting.

 

[pedalmunky]

After reading this thread and the Clay Porter thread I've gotta say: Damn lotta hate for people with a lotta love for bikes around here.

 

[troubbledone]

it is a good mag. i had a subscription but had to cancel due to that is a tad expensive

 

[jonKranked]

Your tire analogy doesn't work either. If a product fails to do its job, then stating that its crap is completely logical, because its FAILED to do what its promised. Decline doesn't do that. You just don't like it. They do exactly what they say, in that they bring news and articles, reviews and photos to people that want to see them.

Bingo. If a tire fails is objective, it didn't work for x, y, and z reason; there are physical attributes through which you can define its failure.

If a magazine fails (in terms other than financial or printing quality/specs), its subjective. You didn't like it for a, b, or c reason. But other people may like it for those same reasons. The content doesn't really have physical attributes that you can define the same way a performance based product, such as a tire, does.

 

[Sghost]

Some tires are better for slow people.

 

[worship_mud]

and some mags are better for fast people.

 

[iRider]

All mags have good and bad parts. I really like articles in Decline written by Mark Jordan. His Ashland 12 mile Super D race report was really good. The comparison of the WC bikes from Leov and the Athertons was well written and more informative to me than the test of Gee's bike in Dirt by Steve Jones.
For bike tests I don't find either mag appealing. Reviews on here have more information in them than their tests. Dirt doesn't seem to get that different riders want different bikes and geometries and compare everything to the Orange and only bikes that come close to it are rated high. And please give me at least one decent pic from the side so I can see the full bike. Decline has the pictures dialed in that respect but the tests are not talking about weaknesses of the bikes which I would like to learn about.

For all those that are complaining about the bro-cal thing in Decline, Dirt has the same thing going with their british buddies. And it is quite funny that people complain about the pics in Decline as e.g. one of the photographers, Sven Martin, contributes to both publications as do many others.

Both mags get people stoked to ride and if they don't do this for you, don't buy them!

That said, I sooooo would love to see a real scientific shootout of DH bikes. Same track (1:04?), same day, a couple of test riders (amateur, intermediate rider, pro, top WC pro), same tires, maybe SRM cranks and like 10 different top level bikes. Give every rider a chance to set up the bike, warm up and then do 3 fast runs. Repeat with the next bike. And in the end see who is fastest on which bike. That would be a great test IMO.

 

[Vlad]

The lack of real insight here is astounding.

On one hand, you have a bunch of guys accusing dirt of lacklustre content, and concentrating on thier "So-cal" bros.

The on the other hand you have guys raving about Dirt and thier "unbiased" coverage of events.
THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE in the way that Dirt hypes the **** out of UK riders compared to Decline hyping US riders. DECLINE IS A US DH MAGAZINE. What the F do you expect them to report on? Its like complaining that a Ford mag has **** coverage of BMWs.

The real fact is, the US DH scene hasn't been anywhere near its glory days for a while, yet Decline takes pride in the US scene (albeit mostly west coast stuff rather then as a whole) and promotes it and shows it off in a way they are trying to keep exciting, and you CHUMPS that do nothing but bitch on message boards sit here and take shots at it. What exactly have you done that you are in a position to rip on them? Whats the last magazine you've produced?

The fact is, I am sure that if you were proactive and just emailed Decline and inquired about content that wasn't so US-centric, they'd appreciate the feedback, and you'd get what you want. Then if you supported the mag that tries to bring you the sport that you love, they'd actually have enough in the budget to fly people to different areas. Print is suffering, or at least shrinking hugely compared to what it used to be, so I seriously doubt that the boys at DECLINE are taking all those billions of dollars that come from subscriptions, and embezzling it into the lucrative housing market.

As for complaining that the mag is full of rider articles, seriously? This annoys you? I could sit and read stories from Vories for days, because he lives a life I am confident saying NONE OF YOU DO. Same with Lopes. Even Weir (whom I didn't like reading at first, but instead of bitching on the web I TURNED THE ****ING PAGE. Imagine that.)

Lousy content is lousy content, bro. You, of all people, should understand that. I'm a journalism student and don't care to contribute to them.... Decline is on the newstand for everyone to see. Their **** stinks.

 

[Huck Banzai]

read them in Barnes and Noble, go home, spend your money on something delicious.