On 07/20/2017 09:01 PM, Mad Roger wrote:
Likewise, they measured mpg, where, again, most bikers don't really care
all that much about fuel efficiency (although tank size and miles to empty
has some bearing on the tourers).

Fuel efficiency on a bike is highly variable. That's what happens when
you have a drag coefficient like a barn door. The only thing that saves
them is a low frontal area. Since I live in a state where there isn't a
gas station on every corner I tend to be interested in those matters. I
replaced the OEM tank on one bike because a potential 120-150 mile range
wasn't going to make it.


But, still. You have to assume the engineers tested their opinions "more
better" than Joe Usenet did. You just have to assume that this is the case.

I don't assume when it comes to engineers. I are one. Some are very
adept at getting data that matches their opinions.

So, what CR says goes on the list, along with Car and Driver and other
hopefully reputable rags.

C&D is an entertaining publication geared to delivering advertising to
the consumer. I have one magazine I trust -- Motorcycle Consumer News.
There is NO advertising. If they test the Vincent Super Snark and it
sucks that's what the review says. Usually there are several reviewers
riding the bike since much is subjective.