how can i trust reviews of things? if it's a magazine or popular website, there are advertisers paying money to keep that magazine or website running. people are often stoooopid with four Os but they aren't going to say "This topcap is the shittiest topcap we've ever seen and breaks all the time and has to be warrantied constantly" when that topcap company is buying adds. Hence why there were no bad reviews of the Crank Bros Kronolog. Emphasis on the LOG.
so i can read reviews by regular joes on forums or their blogs. but does that guy know what he's talking about? is he a guy who rides a bike two or three times a week for six months out of the year? does he know how to ride a bike and what to look for and how something should feel? is he reviewing a 160mm bike that he only rides on fire roads and his local trail which is slightly less gnarly than a road in afghanistan (which can be pretty fucking gnarly)? a guy says he's never had a problem with his dropper post, how many hours and under what conditions has he ridden it?
then there is confirmation bias. how objective can someone be after they've spent a whole bunch of money on something and know they are stuck with it?
so many factors are involved in the reviewer. is he motivated by money, or loyalty, or friendship? let's say he is completely unbiased....then there is the knowledge and ability of the rider, the type of rider he is,
most stuff today is pretty darn good, there aren't that many crappy products out there. i can find so many bad reviews of stuff i love and use daily. i can find great reviews on products that i think are complete shit, or i know fail with consistency. other than my own experience, and the guys i work with who i trust and know, whose reviews can i trust?
