If i remember right it came out on top mind you it usually depends which manufacturer is spending more on advertising with MCN and their associated publications...i take all the tests with a dose of salt..i think this time they got it right though
I don't understand why the opinion of the motorcycle press is disregarded, unless YOUR bike wins the test, then all of a sudden the guys know what they're talking about??? These guys have ridden more bikes than the rest of us out together. They know a nail when they see one. They are SME's FFS!!! Bike advertising is minimal these days, so I seriously doubt the press's opinions are bought in that fashion. I bought an STR after searching through the road tests. Of course I rode it myself before the final decision, but if ya can't trust the opinion of someone who's ridden EVERY new bike of the last 20+ years, whose can ya trust? They were right BTW, it's a great handling, fun bike to ride. I also bought a Monster 1100s after the same research. They were right about that too. It had a great grunty engine, lacking a bit at the top end, handled well but it was an absolute dog in town with poor fuelling low down. Wonder how much Ducati paid em to say that??? I think we are very lucky with the standard of the motorcycling press. If people want to suggest they are biased and corrupt because it's a way of justifying laying out £10k on a bike that doesn't win every test, that's up to them, but I think it says more about them than it does the press. Just sayin like... Edit. This is in no way a pop at anyone, and I'm not trying to upset anyone, just contributing with my own opinion. Atb Bob
The group test i was thinking off was a few weeks ago,there is another group test in this weeks MCN..6 bikes and the speed triple came ...6th!!! mind you the competition were all much more expensive bikes apart from the yamaha mt-10 (which came 2nd) 1st Aprilia Tuono £14,636 2nd Yamaha mt-10 £9999 3rd Ducati monster 1200r £15,250 4th BMW S1000R £11,750 5TH KTM Super duke R £15,999 6TH Triumph Speed Triple R £11,500 That blows my theory out the window then (for this test anyway!)
3rd on the track!? not bad giving away 20+bhp. MCN is shite, there wasn't even a proper road test, they spoke about a previous one where the rider is about 60kg? Performance bikes loved it, the only decent bike mag going.
i don't think there is a bad bike out there nowadays,the journalist job is to make the piece entertaining whether they know anymore than you or i is debatable. It's funny though one year they will praise a bike like it's the best thing since sliced bread..then a new model comes out and suddenly the old one is no good! i have found that road tests in all the magazines don't actually tell you anything that you can't find out by reading the spec of the bike..If you are good at telling stories it must be a great job!
All the journos loved the Tracer 900 when it came out. There was no mentions of any of the problems they said were fixed by the newer version but thy must have known about them at the time. Now they say the only problem is a crap screen. Be interesting what they say about the mark 3 when it appears.
All the journos loved the Tracer 900 when it came out. There was no mentions of any of the problems they said were fixed by the newer version but thy must have known about them at the time. Now they say the only problem is a crap screen. Be interesting what they say about the mark 3 when it appears.
The Tracer is a good bike, plenty of grunt, great riding position and very good value for money. I tested one when they were first released and was really impressed, my only criticism was that the seat height was a bit tall for me.
