Opinions verus documented facts

[1moreroad]

Until he proves he rides a REAL motorcycle, then his opinions about rider apparel & equipment don't really mean shit.

That's just it, they're not his opinions.  He is citing some of the most comprehensive testing done by any motorcycle magazine in the world as well as standards of force transfer I believe determined through a mix of lab testing and a Hurt-style accident survey.

A little attitude on an internet forum bugs you?

I wouldn't know about his PO attitudes -- I don't go there.  This is a MOTORCYCLE forum.

So how is a magazine's product comparisons considered "valid" testing?  I like Ride Magazine very much, but I consider their opinion as just another datapoint when purchasing protective gear.

Because they have a standardized tests and consistently apply the same one to every piece of gear they test.

http://www.ridetriangles.com/nav?page=ridetriangles.contentspage&view_resource=2712064

I have it on good authority that plethoras died out in the Yurassic period.

 

[jschmidt]

The people slamming him here don't like him. They'd rather you ignore his information because they don't like him. This is a more compelling purpose -- for them -- than helping you learn what you'd like to know.

It's sad really...

[Rogue]

The people slamming him here don't like him. They'd rather you ignore his information because they don't like him.

I don't care if you ignore his info or not.

I'm calling him for what he is:  A person who believes experience doesn't count.  That's because he doesn't have ANY experience in riding at all.  

[Rogue]

That's just it, they're not his opinions.  

He just gave you an opinion:  There's a lot of folks that would like to think they ar experts, based on simple indibvidual experiences that don't add-up to much of anything.

Ah well....what do I know.

[Nesbocaj]

Truth be that.  +1

L2I, keep on, keeping on. (70's style statement of support)


The point is that you have no sense of humor.

[JonS]

Testing gear over a short period gives some indication what you can expect from the item, but I would put far more faith in someone like Dantes Dame's opinion on boots or gloves for example. She rides many thousands of miles a year. There are many members here who do the same.
 On the other hand, I would not pay any attention to someone who gives his opinion with absolutely no experience on a motorcycle. A person like that wouldn't even know what to look for in a product test.
 I actually put riders opinions on the same level as magazine opinions. All are taken into account and I draw a conclusion. Unless its something like an Aerostitch suit that has been praises over and over, its always something of a crap shoot with the info putting the odds in a more favorible light.

[Headmanbrewing]

MOST people's experiences don't mean very much.  Not because they don't know anything, but because they don't do side by side testing of different products under the same conditions.  My favorite example would be tires.  When I see a review of XX tire model, most of the reviews seem to say, "My old YY tires sucked. As soon as I put these XX tires on, Wow what a difference!"  The problem I see, is that the new tire owner doesn't remember very well what their YY tires were like when they were brand new.

The best way, IMO, is blind testing.  Get two identical bikes, set them up with two different tires, and ride them both under the same conditions.  Unfortunately, most of us don't have those kind of resources.  The best we can do is read the tests that are done by the bike mags, that can afford to do these kind of tests.  

Our other option is to be more like Dante, etc., that ride tons of miles a year.  That sounds good to me!!  

[Global Rider]

So how is a magazine's product comparisons considered "valid" testing?

In the majority of cases, its not. Magazines don't have the expertise or labs to do the necessary testing. Simple tests can be done, but reputable magazines like Motorrad have thorough testing done by labs for them. Of course, testing costs money and thats why quality magazines cost money.

A product comparison of all weather riding suits that use various proprietary products (Gore-Tex, Sympatex, Polo-Tex/Premium Polo-Tex, Drygate, etc) is of limited use unless the test includes moisture transfer rates under various conditions. A 100% waterproof suit can mean many things...from a totally unbreathable suit which is uncomfortable to wear (feels like you're in a sauna) to a high end suit that is comfortable to wear.

[license2ill]

In the majority of cases, its not. Magazines don't have the expertise or labs to do the necessary testing. Simple tests can be done, but reputable magazines like Motorrad have thorough testing done by labs for them. Of course, testing costs money and thats why quality magazines cost money.

A product comparison of all weather riding suits that use various proprietary products (Gore-Tex, Sympatex, Polo-Tex/Premium Polo-Tex, Drygate, etc) is of limited use unless the test includes moisture transfer rates under various conditions. A 100% waterproof suit can mean many things...from a totally unbreathable suit which is uncomfortable to wear (feels like you're in a sauna) to a high end suit that is comfortable to wear.

Ride Magazines tests are sourced out to the Cambridge Facility labs and tests are conducted by the origninator of the majority of information that goes into the CE testing standards and protocols for motoryclist protective equipment, Dr. Rod Woods. It's as legit as it gets.

[jschmidt]

...My favorite example would be tires.  When I see a review of XX tire model, most of the reviews seem to say, "My old YY tires sucked. As soon as I put these XX tires on, Wow what a difference!"  The problem I see, is that the new tire owner doesn't remember very well what their YY tires were like when they were brand new...

I've always found this hilarious too. While that's the most obvious example of buyer-bias, we shouldn't forget things like: "My bike is much faster after an oil change with X oil," "My new slip-on added at least 10 horsepower," and "These levers make me much faster!"

Enthusiasm for a product is often found in direct proportion to its price. The "butt dyno" is about as useful a tool as a ripped condom.

Anecdotal evidence is, however, a useful data point, but just that. The Fieldsheer example is a good one. I don't think anyone tested the zippers, but I have heard dozens of owners complain about them. Over time, the pattern becomes clear. Another example might be the FZ TPS.

[license2ill]

I've always found this hilarious too. While that's the most obvious example of buyer-bias, we shouldn't forget things like: "My bike is much faster after an oil change with X oil," "My new slip-on added at least 10 horsepower," and "These levers make me much faster!"

Enthusiasm for a product is often found in direct proportion to its price. The "butt dyno" is about as useful a tool as a ripped condom.

Anecdotal evidence is, however, a useful data point, but just that. The Fieldsheer example is a good one. I don't think anyone tested the zippers, but I have heard dozens of owners complain about them. Over time, the pattern becomes clear. Another example might be the FZ TPS.

Ride mag has tested zippers in their comparisons, though I can't recall any Fieldsheer products in any of those articles, it's a point to be looked at with any manufacturer, but of ocurse there is little outside info about zippers, except the glaring anecdotes of the Fieldsheer Highlander suit. The Frank THomas leather suits that were recalled for bad zippers failed lab tests in the Ride mag tests, which wasn;t a cause for concern with durability or convenience, but one of protective value. I'm amazed how questions of melting points comes up every so often, yet no one ever discuses zippers in terms of portective value at all, ever. And chunky, thick, heavy zippers are not the easy answer either. Within the Euro standards, nylon coil zips are preferred, and it's apparently the number of teeth and their design that give the tensile strength to a zipper, not size of the teeth, and of course that's not hing to say about how it' sewn into the garment. Just repeats the need to buy using an encompassing label like EN13595 for any type of supposed protective garment.

[Global Rider]

I've always found this hilarious too. While that's the most obvious example of buyer-bias, we shouldn't forget things like: "My bike is much faster after an oil change with X oil," "My new slip-on added at least 10 horsepower," and "These levers make me much faster!"

I already mentioned those and yes, its totally hilarious.  

Actually, if some riders lost 30 pounds of fat, they'd get better performance results over the slip-on that really didn't add any horsepower. Not only do you not spend money, you save some, get more performance and feel better. A win x 4 scenario.

But farkle acquisition in most cases is nothing more than filling some need due to boredom. They farkle the bike out, get bored, sell it and then start all over again with another bike.  

[jschmidt]

I already mentioned those and yes, its totally hilarious.  

Actually, if some riders lost 30 pounds of fat, they'd get better performance results over the slip-on that really didn't add any horsepower. Not only do you not spend money, you save some, get more performance and feel better. A win x 4 scenario.

But farkle acquisition in most cases is nothing more than filling some need due to boredom. They farkle the bike out, get bored, sell it and then start all over again with another bike.  

It's OK to have a hobby. Making it more important than a leisure activity is what leads to fuzzy thinking.

[1moreroad]

But farkle acquisition in most cases is nothing more than filling some need due to boredom. They farkle the bike out, get bored, sell it and then start all over again with another bike.

The opposite is true, too.  Someone purchases some bike item and then needs to rationalize that purchase as being noticeably better after spending all their $$ on it.

It's OK to have a hobby. Making it more important than a leisure activity is what leads to fuzzy thinking.

 

[Global Rider]

It's OK to have a hobby. Making it more important than a leisure activity is what leads to fuzzy thinking.

If you call farkling, a hobby. I'd sooner spend my money wisely to get the most out of the limited amount. But on the subject of hobbies...

Motorcycling...to some its a phase, to some its a hobby and to some, a passion.

[Global Rider]

The opposite is true, too.  Someone purchases some bike item and then needs to rationalize that purchase as being noticeably better after spending all their $$ on it.

Of course! Few can admit to being a fool by being sucked in by ads resulting in buying a product that doesn't deliver, and even worse, as you've mentioned, if they've spent $$ on it. Its fun to hear them defend their purchase to the death on some of the threads.

[RickC1957]

  All I know....is everyone and his little brother told me HELD gloves were the cats meow...and  $155 later I have come to the conclusion they SUCK....I'll remember that lesson....and buy for MY comfort and on MY budget Funny I always did great buying high quality gear on a budget.