AnBun

@henryquinney: I wish to restate my position in manner-of-factly and polite prose without insulting you. Meaning I`ll avoid the argumentative hyperbole. This thread is days old now, but I`ll leave my closing remark here for posterity, as they say. We, humans, are not objective. We are all biased, this is inherent in the human condition. I dont really feel the need to be argumentative here, the evidence is just overwhelming. I made the reference to Kahneman because his book was a NY times best seller, and perhaps known amongst pb journalists and readers. I`ll give you another example from pop culture; moneyball. Yes, with Brad Pitt. Like every movie, it seems, its based on a book. In this case by a journalist who`s taken an interest in biases (and also written a nice biography of Kahneman and Tversky), Michael Lewis. I encourage you read his stuff, its both engagingly fun, as well as educational. All of the bikes in the first round of the field test are, talking ballpark here, similar. Its 29ers with droppers and some front and rear suspension. It`s not like we`re comparing hardtails to endurobikes. It is my contention that they are more or less similar in performance, but they will feel different when riding them. My stand on this is that the lux was undeservedly bashed. What got my gall flowing was the summary video where one of the Mike`s tried to be diplomatic and offer the lux as a good bike for someone not riding in your backyard in Pemberton, but you and Mike#2 shut him down hastily. You said: This bike does nothing well, it doesnt climb, its not efficient, it doesnt descend. Now, having bought this bike and taking real joy from riding it, that struck a chord. I became emotionally invested, and that engendered the angry post. I cant say I didnt mean it though. It is a profound thing in human psychology to form an identity, and most of us have several, e.g. father, husband, employee, bike rider. Consumerism sells identity, quite successfully too, and I think reviews like this propagate consumerism. This is a powerful machine and its so easy be a little cog in the machinery without even noticing it. Really, it just happens by itself. Our psychology and the development of factory production of consumables is whats makes capitalism such an enormous engine for economic growth - its what make your line of work even possible. I`m not saying that`s inherently a bad thing. I`ll stop here without going further into the philosophical implications of this, not to mention the sustainability problem and environmentalist perspective. I for one I`m starting to really not like what I see around me. Incidentally, one escape from this is riding bikes. And yes, I have an expensive bike (two, actually - but combined they`re still less $$$ than the most expensive DC-bike in the test). Yeah, mea culpa. I did say I was a hypocrite and I pay for that with self loathing from time to time. I try to keep it balanced though. My classic roadie is ten years old and I pedal that thing around 3000 km every year. I`ll keep doing that till the frame snaps. Heres to a better world. Cheers.

@JWP: I share your sentiment. I tried to express something similar in another commentary section, but I think it got lost in a tantrum. I'd upvote your comment twice if I could. As op-eds go this wasn't bad. Consumerism is the prevailing ideology of our generation. Nice to see someone on the business side of things acknowledging that.

@sonuvagun: I think you're onto something there. From the looks of it you seem like a good bloke to have a beer with. Cheers

@sonuvagun: Yes, there are some rotten apples, ey? There are reputable NGOs though that can document where and how the money are spent. If you have a moral-philosophical interest in this I suggest you read Peter Singers "a life you can save" (or listen, the book is a free audiobook podcast). I think Singer makes a strong case for his brand of utilitarianism. Singers problem though is ignoring peoples psychology (or biases if you`d like - ref. my previous rant). Although his arguments are strong, it doesnt always play that way in the real world.

Look here, it doesnt matter. We`re all worshipping the same god here - capitalism. If we had any human decency we wouldnt spend 6k+ USD on bikes - we`d give that money to NGOs that feed starving people. The world is messed up as it is, how about we leave the hate behind. Im sorry pb didnt like the lux. I hope that some of my commentary might inspire a change of agenda, but I`m not one for optimism, really. Cheer up. GO ride.

@Cirest: Thank you for picking up the gauntlet. Allow me to retort. I: No, in my opinion that is a tough thing to do. My issue is that pb performs pseudoscience with efficiency testing, timed descents etc., when in reality what you are getting here is the subjective opinion of the reviewer. That opinion is shaped by external pressures, and the industry is a strong force as such. What`s on sale here is identity as a MTBer, and pb is telling you what you need in your garage to be a cool kid. The reviewer in question have legitimacy as a good judge of bike characteristics, and used that legitimacy to take a flame thrower to a perfectly fine bike. I think he`s wrong, other reviewers have different opinions as well. If you want to pick your bike by what pb says you`ll end up with bikes costing around 10k usd, and of course the stylish clothing on display. Then of course, you`ll need N+1 for those extra gnarly trails, or a dedicated race machine for the xc races and BCBR. That kind of subjective opinion doesnt do much for me. II We are all cognitive biased. Seeing how you know your way around a dictionary I would assume you are of the same opinion. It is really hard not to be biased, nigh on impossible. In medical research this happens all the time, and the stakes there are somewhat higher than what kind of bike you buy. III. Absolutely. I would say you are spot on, and I`m not apologetic about it either. However, this was merely the trigger. My resentments about consumerism and how the bike industry makes you buy new gizmos every year goes way deeper. Again, I dont like that reputable bike journos like pb are pushing this agenda. IV. No doubt.

@dldewar: I appreciated your post, always pleasant to see a fellow thinking man. I will enjoy my bike, thank you, it just made me annoyed how one-sided and negative this review came across.

@Cameltoby: Yeah, you can think of me like that guy, I do read a book from time to time. I also ride 6000-8000k each year, while being a dad and working fulltime with on-call 24h once a week and 72h every 4th or 5th weekend.

I guess I should say thanks for writing up a reply and not dismissing me out of hand. You stomped on that bike pretty hard. That statement about the pencils is the sentiment you leave the readers with, at least me. There are other reviewers who also have spent some time with a bike between their legs that found plenty to like about this bike (check out nsmb and flow). This is not a judgement of your character as such, but all of you working in pb should come to terms with the fact that you are pushing a consumer culture. The articles generating traffic on this site seem always to be about tech-reviews. You have to buy this or that to be a REAL mountainbiker. I guess most of the readers in this here joint wont share my views on this - seems if you spend your time here and dollars on 10k+ bikes you`re already drinking the kool aid. Im part of the same hypocrisy, for sure. But at least my eyes are open. On this review of the lux I think you missed the mark. And I think you did so because of biases towards a something that in your mind is what a real bike should be.

I'm quite disappointed by this whole thing. The premise of the field test seem to be comparative, objective testing, but most of what I've read are highly subjective experiences of how a particular bike feels to the reviewer. Anyone remotely interested in comparative research should be acquainted with cognitive biases and how it effects appraisal of whatever is the subject at hand. Kahneman and Tverskys work popularized in the book thinking fast and slow illustrates the point I'm making and also makes for way more useful infotainement than this series of articles. Punditry really is an uncertain endeavor, and from where I'm sitting this brand of journalism really doesn't extend beyond that. Add to that the obvious conflict of interest that the bike industry generates the revenue that keeps this triumvirate employed. I'm not saying there's cash delivered in envelopes, but it doesn't really work that way either. Maybe the rep from SC or Rocky is a really nice guy that throws a great party once in a while. That kind of influence matters. The industry knows that stuff like this field test is the holy grail of marketing. It's naive to not think there will be made attempts to influence the results. I'm a continent removed from all of this, but let's say i maintain a healthy skepticism. I can't help but feel that this whole thing is nothing more than consumerism. We express ourselves no longer by our behaviour, but how we spend our money. The message that comes across is that it's clearly more about the bike, than the rider. Once upon a time MTBs was perhaps a rebellious counterculture to traditional biking, but judging from the commentaries here i would say conformity is rampant. 1 degree angle off whatever trend these days and the bike is absolute rubbish. I especially found the hatchet job on the lux distateful. It obviously doesn't jive with whatever the reviewer regards a bike at all. The carbon that went into the frame would be better spent making pencil points. Really? Yes, I have the lux and I like it. The sentiment I'm expressing here goes beyond simply being indignant or having my feelings hurt. I've felt this way about the bike industry for some time. Your biased review of the lux simply made me wish to articulate it. You can look at this whole rant as an expression of sunk cost fallacy if you wish, or you might introspect somewhat and perhaps realize I'm right about a thing or two. It really doesn't matter, the world keeps turning. At least it felt good to speak my mind. So it goes. Cheers.