[weedkilla]

I figure there is 2 sides to the mtb media, product and experience. For product info I'm probably in the same boat as most here, Dirt and RM for the most part, but I'm a total magazine whore. I buy most of the Australian mags, dirt and used to buy MBA. I really like any article that actually includes a byline, if you read any media long enough you get to know the bias of the regular authors and you can make informed judgements.
Actually trust any of them? Hmmm not sure, there is too much variation in individual samples to know that the review you are reading has any reference to what you'll actually buy. I've seen bikes 2degrees off in all there measurements, spd shoes where one size was xc race stiff, next size up was the flexiest thing I've ever held in my hand. Suspension - total joke, QA seems to be all over the place irrespective of manufacturer.

End of the day, media can fire up your desire to consume, but nothing can provide qualitative opinion that matters except your own experience.

As for the experience of riding and translating that into a media suitable form..... Dirt has great photos, as do many websites. Freecaster brings races into my loungeroom so I no longer really care for any other form of coverage of WC racing. And just about anyone can produce both good and bad editorials about the rest of the experiences that relate to cycling, so I just read lots.

 

[Dogboy]

Jonesy is wicked biased on lots of his reviews, but if you have read his articles for long enough, I think it's fairly easy to look between the lines.

Spot on. Once you have read enough of his reviews to put his comments into context, some seemingly abstract statements begin to make perfect sense. Dirt is the only mag that I subscribe to, though I flip through most of the others. For online content, Vital, Dirt , and Sicklines are all awesome.

 

[IH8Rice]

according to Dirt, nothing is as amazing as a Orange 22x

 

[Kntr]

I read them all, but I come to RM for first hand experience.

 

[NoUseForAName]

I trust forum people i know face to face - and that usually means NSMB.com.

The rest of it, i read the comics for the pictures, not whether they think Ardents are the best mud tires ever. This week.

Trust media? You must be joking.

 

[Pslide]

according to Dirt, nothing is as amazing as a Orange 22x

Have your read Dirt lately? Because this old stereotype doesn't really apply anymore. They've given quite a few bikes very high acclaim, including the Session and the Summum.

Since there has been quite a bit of ripping on Dirt here, I'll just shed a little light in what I saw when I did a bike test with them.

They do ride a bike for more than a day. They had my bike for 2 weeks for their review.

They do consider components and try to factor them out of the equation. This is probably why some of the articles seem vague in some aspects. The rear shock type and tune has such a large effect on the performance, it would be unfair to judge a frame on the shock (in many cases).

Steve Jones does have a bias. We all do. You are reading opinion, not fact. That's all a review can be. He likes his bikes to perform a certain way. But he's not close minded or biased towards any particular brand. He'll call a spade a spade - as he sees it.

And finally, and this is probably true for a lot of magazines, they've got friends in the industry. This is a small sport and you form relationships quickly. They are not going to say a bunch of crap about their friends, would you? It certainly had nothing to do with advertising dollars at Dirt. If they get sent a bike or component and they don't like it, the review will probably never see print. They'll send their feedback back to the company for improvement and the world becomes a better place without the negativity. Magazines are not obligated to print 100% honest reviews, it's their discretion, and I can't blame them. Most people have realized this and a magazine review is just one fraction of what goes into a purchase decision.