I just saw a snippet of their article on ebikes, but apparently they tested a "bevy" (I don't know the appropriate terminology) and a HeyBike received a rating or an unheard of high 92%. I'm looking for the complete article if it's been published. I know the individual(s) itching to respond with negativity.

My daughter just got an $800 incentive for an e-bike purchase, so I am interested too. Has it been published? If so, I will pay the access fee.

Consumer Reports as far as I know has never been a cycling related magazine, they test a ton of consumer products and rate them but are they actually testing these bikes scientifically and long term and knowing what to look for and what not to look for? I know you are excited 2old because they are rating the cheap stuff highly but I would like you to explain how they got to those conclusions and how long they have had the bike. We all could say a brand new bike that is properly built is going to feel great any e-bike will be fun and all of the buzzwords that we love using as a society but long term is that thing going to be reliable. If they had it for 3 years would they still give it such a high rating and how scientific was that testing throughout those 3 years. Were these people who have ridden bikes are or these people who could rate anything that moves highly.

Reviews are fun but short term reviews are just telling you it is a bike and unless they are going through the building process and know what they are doing the review is going to have a very narrow range and short shelf life.

I know you want to assume I am just hating to hate but there is a reason I am likely to find these reviews flawed for the reasons above. How did they actually come to those conclusions and how do those conclusions hold up long term and how independent are they still.

Live in the real world and it will always help.

I don't subscribe, but my MIL does. However, I couldn't locate the article in her "stash". It's online if you join CR's program, but I haven't yet. It should be interesting because AFAIK they test comprehensively, buy everything themselves and don't have advertising. Maybe it'll shut up some of the elites (in their minds) here.

The elites? Well if actually wanting to know how they are testing a bicycle (which should not be like testing a blender) is being an elite in your mind, than so be it. If having knowledge and asking questions is some how some elitist belief in your mind, I do not really care. I am not just going to dumb myself down because a non-professional bicycle reviewer said this bike is the best.

I know you cannot answer the questions and don't want to because if you did give the answer we know it would then ruin the cheap bikes are the best argument I think you want to put forth. A brief short term test like I said and like you should know will tell you just about nothing other than it is fun because bikes, e-bikes and e-mopeds are going to be fun in that first ride but how is that vehicle going to perform long term? That is where I think you will find the cracks in the testing. How is the company support? How were the bikes assembled and tuned, could it just be that one bike beat out others simply because it was better set up at the factory?

I full understand you 2old you have experience with a few bikes you own and maybe a couple you have worked on so your width and breath is a bit less. It is not a bad thing, not everyone can do everything nor should they but it makes it hard to really be a useful commentator when you have less experience. Reading a review is great owning a bike is great but working on a lot of different bikes over the years and dealing with warranties and trying to get parts is a whole different story.

We will have to see what figures of merit they have come up with but you can bet it will be practical things like range, power, weight, comfort, garage footprint. They will probably rely on survey for durability, that's how they do cars. They are not going to report on ineffable marketing things like suppleness. I don't imagine any cracks in their testing will be any worse than the conditioned blind spots in the enthusiast press.

Consumer Reports is a unique organization. They indeed do nearly all their own testing, and it's thorough. The important thing for tests like this, is that they are not at all under the thumb of the manufacturers ad departments like the enthusiast press. They are buying at retail, running benchmark tests, surveying owners, and reporting out. The most important thing is, when something obviously sucks, or especially if it's dangerous, they can say so without fear of retaliation from ad buyers. The closest thing you will get from a regular magazine is, "The old model had these minor problems, but this new one solves them all!" There are a few other somewhat similar outfits but not quite the same retail focus, like IIHS and UL Labs.

The magazine/ad industry does have some bald-faced lying copies intended to mislead you, like the late Consumers Digest, which had no subscribers and did no testing, merely sold their awards to the highest bidder. JD Power is a real company but it does market research, not testing. It takes a fee from manufacturers so they can mention it in their ads, which is such an obvious conflict

I subscribed to CR for a month just to read it.

It's pretty topical and they don't mention any of the eBikes they tried that didn't make the cut. (which is too bad)

They don't know anything about reputations of the brands or conventions; nor which groupsets are "good" or "bad". They just review based on what they see.

I found it a refreshing take, as they went into without bias. On the other hand, they're unaware of potential issues that dudes like veganbikes would be. It's good to look at it from all angles.

I would say though that even more important than how nice the bike is as new is how you are taken care of after the sale. The CR article doesn't consider this angle at ALL.

They shouldn't have to. There is so much baloney sliced so thin

I'm going to subscribe to CR for a month as above to get access to the report. CR may not be perfect, but at least they'll test without any preconceived notions and buy the bikes so they don't receive
"one-offs".

I do that for any major appliance or car purchase. I haven't done it for bikes, but I am curious to know if I should be.

Cheap shot which is why I don’t take you seriously - just nothing more than a forum hound

Don't engage, man. It goes nowhere good.

I will say CR has done right by me - they may not be the best experts in the fields, but they do provide some valuable and scientific results… when I was looking for a bike I didn’t consult them, honestly - I did a lot of researching on YT and I appreciated those reviewers who seemed honest and who didn’t have a vested interest

forums are also a great way to get unbiased opinions on bikes

to this day I have no idea what CR thinks of my bike

One of the best aspects of CR testing (IMO) which I alluded to above is they purchase what they test from the same vendors we would use. It's so easy to "juice" an ebike who knows what they're providing to testing individuals. Also, one popular "shill" said he "tested" 100 bikes last year, so it's pretty obvious what the level of testing is.

Consumer Reports has a place and a good reputation, I guess.
Since I was not an 'early adopter' of e-bikes (purchased mine in 2022), I had already seen many new e-bike companies go by the wayside. Since there are so many common components by major brands (Mahle hub motors, Bosch and others BB, Shimano components, etc), I wanted something almost non-proprietary from an established bicycle company. I bought Orbea - from Spain.