Couple of years ago there were 2 magazines that did spotlight "Indepth tests" - 1 month apart... They came out totally the opposite..How could they come to this result so far apart?
Impartial? Money rules.
But .. MIRACLE BY MIRACLE, both tests were followed by pages of advertising by the winners.. AND.... "Subscribe to win a set of XYZ LIGHTS VALUED AT $50,000"...
I reckon if you paid enough there'd be a magazine out there somewhere where a companies trailers could come out 1st in every price catagory in Camper of the year - even if they didnt have a trailer over $10k. Thats just how I see it.
agree with the short term batting off some people do...
"... these are by far the best tires I've ever had.. I've got 12klms on them now and they are still black!" kinda ****.
as I said Lost I totally understand your cynicism and agree to some degree. Yes it is possible for tests to come to 'opposite' conclusions depending on the criteria (value/performance and durability etc etc) and who is doing the testing (experience, preference, understanding of the criteria etc etc) but this 'weighting' should all be explained in the article. If it's not... be cynical!
But the Net is not always a BBQ with mates either: After being a nice obedient little Hilux forumite, I threw up some ideas and asked for feedback from punters on some plans/ambitions I had for my products before I committed another $20 or $30K...
The forum masters locked the thread. An email arrived and it said my posts would be re-instated if I agreed to a 12-month 'sponsorship'.
I didn't agree with this 'cash for comment' situation and I haven't logged-on since.
Anyhow, maybe you/we should start a thread instead of hijacking this one on pumps...