Author |
Message |
River
| Posted on Wednesday, June 27, 2007 - 01:36 am: |
|
Since getting back into bikes a few months back I've been devouring every bike magazine I find. Damn there's a lot out there - but a lot of average amongst them. Best two I've read so far from the many are Bike and Performance Bike, both from the UK. What's the best bike mag in the States? (good writing and entertaining stories being the main ask because it's a mag I want, not a tech manual.) |
Samiam
| Posted on Wednesday, June 27, 2007 - 01:54 am: |
|
I personally like Cycle World. YMMV as always though. Sam |
07xb12scg
| Posted on Wednesday, June 27, 2007 - 08:12 am: |
|
I personally like Cycle World. +1. I subscribe to Cycle Word and Motorcyclist and Motorcyclist has changed for the worse since the new editor has taken over. It's trying to be like Cycle World IMO, but it just can't cut it. To its credit, though Aaron Frank did choose the Ulysses as his long term bike. Cycle World has all types of street bikes and dirt bikes and many interesting articles with good writing. Plus, they don't live by the top speed is everything mantra. |
Kuuud
| Posted on Wednesday, June 27, 2007 - 08:18 am: |
|
CW is great for all-around info. Also try Motorcycle Consumer News. They're the best for product testing. |
Reepicheep
| Posted on Wednesday, June 27, 2007 - 08:31 am: |
|
I prefer Cycle World as well... www.motorcycle.com has some great reading as well... especially if you can dig up some John Burns stuff. |
12r
| Posted on Wednesday, June 27, 2007 - 08:32 am: |
|
I can relate to Cycle World and Motorcyclist more than our UK-based magazines. The sportsbike group tests involve putting the bikes in a van and heading for a racetrack in the south of France. At least your journos ride on the road |
Jaimec
| Posted on Wednesday, June 27, 2007 - 07:36 pm: |
|
I'm a big fan of Rider magazine, myself. They were the first to review the XB12Ss Lightning Long (and it was a good write up, too). |
Teeps
| Posted on Wednesday, June 27, 2007 - 08:04 pm: |
|
Cycle World, only because of Kevin Cameron. The other rags are good for the pictures. |
Kowpow225
| Posted on Wednesday, June 27, 2007 - 09:45 pm: |
|
Cameron's a genius...and a really good writer as well. I prefer Sportrider for the technical stuff and interesting data. Some (much) of it contradicts itself though. |
Jaimec
| Posted on Thursday, June 28, 2007 - 08:32 am: |
|
I miss "Battle2Win" |
Trojan
| Posted on Thursday, June 28, 2007 - 08:48 am: |
|
Performance Bikes, without a doubt. Although this months issue has a test of the XB12R that is not too complimentary. 'The brakes are weak and prone to fade. So much for Buell's revolutionary rim mounted technology. Give me a pair of four pot calipers and some 320mm discs. Or at least let me have two of those rim mounted jobbies'. 'Despite achieving the slowest top speeds of all the bikes tested, the braking point still remains the most conservative'. 'The best of the power is located a hairs breath from the rev limiter, which is savage enough to give you concussion from a helmet/screen interface if you hit it!' 'The swingarm gets incredibly hot. Why not just fit a nice alloy sump in the subframe rather than add to the unsprung weight?' It did have a few good things to say though. 'It leans and leans and leans. High corner speed is totally effortless. I take back everything I said, it is only when approaching or leaving the corners that the Buell runs into trouble'. |
Jaimec
| Posted on Thursday, June 28, 2007 - 09:52 am: |
|
So the swingarm gets hot... who cares? One of the strangest criticisms I've ever heard. As for the brakes being weak... they're already strong enough to loop the bike if you're not careful... how much stronger do they have to be? I'll agree in regards to brake fade ON THE RACE TRACK but I've yet to experience brake fade on the street (where I spend 99.9% of my time). Sometimes I think writers criticize things just because they're different... |
Xb12randy
| Posted on Thursday, June 28, 2007 - 11:03 am: |
|
How much stronger do they need to be? Have you ridden a new Jap bike or Ducati with the relatively new Radial Mounted calipers. Those things stop like crazy. |
Jaimec
| Posted on Thursday, June 28, 2007 - 11:28 am: |
|
Again... the brake is strong enough to loop the bike over. You don't want it to be any stronger. Shortening brake distances has less to do with front brake strength and more to do with longer wheelbases. Cruisers actually stop FASTER than sportbikes because both tires remain on the ground. You CAN'T make the ZTL any more powerful without making it DANGEROUS. |
Sloppy
| Posted on Thursday, June 28, 2007 - 12:23 pm: |
|
You folks are NUTS. C'mon - it's PENTHOUSE!!! They've got chicks on bikes... Tired of flipping through a magazine where half the pages are ADS!!! Or articles that are clearly biased to sell more ad space!!! The best bike mag out there is Motorcycle Consumer News, no question about it. Try it for a year -- if you want a quality mag, you will have to pay for it. |
07xb12scg
| Posted on Thursday, June 28, 2007 - 12:57 pm: |
|
'The best of the power is located a hairs breath from the rev limiter, which is savage enough to give you concussion from a helmet/screen interface if you hit it! I disagree with that! The best of the power is located much lower. And isn't there a soft rev limiter to warn you of the hard rev limiter? |
Court
| Posted on Thursday, June 28, 2007 - 01:30 pm: |
|
Actually. . . I must say that the Penthouse photo shoot I worked for Harley-Davidson media group is one of the funnest assignments I've ever drawn. . . . |
Trojan
| Posted on Thursday, June 28, 2007 - 02:20 pm: |
|
for the brakes being weak... they're already strong enough to loop the bike if you're not careful... how much stronger do they have to be? I know plenty of pure road riders who have run out of brakes and suffered from major fade problems. It isn't just my opinion (although I agree with the article) ;) I disagree with that! The best of the power is located much lower. don't confuse maximum torque with maximum power. Max torque is indeed much lower down but max power is right up there near the rev limit. And isn't there a soft rev limiter to warn you of the hard rev limiter? No I don't think so, and certainly not that I've ever noticed. You just hit the rev limiter and that's it, all over. |
Kowpow225
| Posted on Thursday, June 28, 2007 - 02:35 pm: |
|
Theres a soft limit and the true 'not going any further' limit. In my experience the soft cuts power slightly (almost like it's firing on one cylinder) and the hard limit is like you flipped the kill switch momentarily. |
07xb12scg
| Posted on Thursday, June 28, 2007 - 08:41 pm: |
|
don't confuse maximum torque with maximum power. Max torque is indeed much lower down but max power is right up there near the rev limit. You're right. It's just that power and torque seems to be used so interchangeably in magazines that I assumed they were talking torque since, after all, this is a Buell engine they were talking about! |
Bobolt
| Posted on Thursday, June 28, 2007 - 08:59 pm: |
|
at less than a buck an issue with a subscription, Cycle World is a steal. who cares what anybody else says about your bike, as long as you're satisfied with it? |
Cityxslicker
| Posted on Friday, June 29, 2007 - 02:17 pm: |
|
Sorry, but The Horse gets a nod of the hat , always nice to see what the backyard engineers that work for a living are doing to the bikes |