How do I rate/review cycling products?

February 13, 2008 10:52 AM

I was recently asked to review/rate some new cycling products (frames, pedals, saddles, etc...) for my friend's blog and I'm trying to figure out a good set of overall criteria to base the reviews on. Something like this: Criteria 01 Criteria 02 Criteria 03 Criteria 04 Overall Score Any suggestions as to what I can base my reviews on? I was thinking build quality might be one good criteria, but I'm struggling for more.
posted by ISeemToBeAVerb to sports, hobbies, & recreation (13 comments total)

Weight, fit (subjective, but could be useful for others of your height and build), durability, and overall panache (or styling).
posted by cog_nate at 10:55 AM on February 13

Value for money, weight (depending on the market you're aiming at) are probably the only attributes that can be applied to all of those parts. Professional rating might be another (0 for just starting, 5 for tour de france-- although the cost and weight would reflect that anyway).

The problem is, the parts are entirely different, a helmet and a rear-derailleur don't have anything in common, except they happen to be in the same vicinity when a cyclist is near. Perhaps your best course of action is to work out different critera for the different categories of biking accessories. Mechanical elements would be rated in X,Y,Z while safety parts would be P,Q,R.
posted by Static Vagabond at 11:03 AM on February 13

Cost, weight, geometry (for the frames, perhaps also a variation for saddles), quality, application (are some items geared toward road/track bikes and others toward mountain bikes, etc.). And yes, some version of panache, as cog_nate suggests.
posted by cocoagirl at 11:06 AM on February 13

Weight may be very important depending upon the product or the audience. Indeed, there is one set of consumers out there that care about nothing else than weight. For us mortals other things are important. It really depends on your audience... you DO know who your audience is, right?

Build quality is reasonably important to most consumers, but more so depending upon the intended use.

Value is probably the biggest criteria you can zero in on and one of the easiest to write about. But keep in mind that different consumers have different ides about what is valuable. I recognize that a $120 Chris King headset is a good value in the long run, but I get about as much utility out of a $34 Cane Creek S-8. Recognizing value is very important.

Mainly I look for comparative reviews with an eye for historical comparisons as in, "I haven't seen a frame this nice since TREK was rolling out silver brazed beauties from Waterloo." Okay, that's a little over the top, but in an industry that is trying to sell you a new $200 crank every year a little op-ed about how good something is compared to previous models would be welcome.
posted by wfrgms at 11:07 AM on February 13

Oh and one other thought. I find simple lead-ins like, "Pros:" and "Cons:" useful as well as suggestions like "Buy this if..." and "Don't buy it if..."
posted by wfrgms at 11:10 AM on February 13

I'd also be interested in how it compares to others for you. A really valuable review for me would be, "I used to be driven crazy by part A's tendency to do annoying thing X and new part B is better | worse | the same."

Of course, I'm not a weight weenie, jut a guy that tends to appreciate a well engineered component.
posted by advicepig at 11:17 AM on February 13

Frames: geometry, stiffness, comfort (like on a chip and seal road), material (steel, aluminum, titanium, carbon, etc), attention to detail (paint, welds/lugs)

Pedals: weight (include the cleats!), platform size, clearance, maintenance (are they fully serviceable?), degrees of float, adjustable float (yes/no), Q factor

Saddles: this is hard. they're so subjective. weight, fore/aft adjustability, rails material, perceived comfort, dimensions
posted by spikeleemajortomdickandharryconnickjrmints at 11:19 AM on February 13

Something like "who this is recommended for" - someone new to cycling, someone who rides recreationally, someone who regularly commutes via bike, a hardcore cyclist. Perhaps that is just a subset of "value," but I think that would be valuable especially for those less familiar with the cycling world.
posted by that possible maker of pork sausages at 11:31 AM on February 13

price compared to other similar items in the market
ease of use
durability/quality
weight
looks (that does matter to some people)


i agree that different types of items should have different criteria for evaluation as static vagabond suggests.
posted by misanthropicsarah at 11:34 AM on February 13

The most important factor for roadies, more than even weight:
Bling factor.

You could have fun with:
How will it play at the local coffee stop? (1 to 10)
Buzz word compliance: Bonus for Aero, Ti, Carbon or "vertically compliant, laterally stiff"

Post the url. I won't moan about a self link. I want to see the site.
posted by cccorlew at 11:44 AM on February 13

Design smartness. Which is kind of like usability.
posted by smackfu at 12:41 PM on February 13

Thanks for all the replies so far, I'm getting some good feedback. I'm definitely going to have separate criteria for each type of product, and I've gotten some good ideas for a few so far.

cccorlew, I don't want to post the link right now because the site is still in the works. I can send you the URL when he has the site is up and running if you'd like.
posted by ISeemToBeAVerb at 1:12 PM on February 13

cccorlew, was "vertically compliant, laterally stiff" a bikesnobnyc reference? Big points if it was.

Verb, you could do worse than to write your reviews like this guy.
posted by computech_apolloniajames at 2:36 PM on February 15