To be fair, who's going to compile that sort of data just to pick out a hub? Hearsay is what it's all about, especially 'round here. From what I've read, mihlbach got a lemon from PW, but they made it right with him. That at least points to good customer service, and that's what you want because, regardless of sample size, if you win the lottery and get the lemon, you want the maker to make it right.

mihlbach adds, however, that he doesn't think that the performance warrants the added expense.

And here's the trick about forums on the Giant Tubular System of Truth-ernet: you've got to get to know the evaluator before you trust his evaluation. Are his purposes and yours sufficiently compatible that you can trust his judgment? (From what I've read, I trust mihlbach's judgment, because I think his purposes are close to mine.) If not, read someone else's post. It's really quite simple.

(I'm sure I ruffle feathers when I disparage on-the-stand spin-tests of wheels (which some mistakenly think is a test of a hub). Sure, it's lovely to watch a wheel spin for a long time with no other forces acting upon it. But I'm more interested in what the wheel is doing at mile 100 of a grueling ride. You can't evaluate that on a stand. And any readers should keep this sort of thing in mind when they read my occasionally snarky, often cynical remarks.)

{steps off soapbox}