In order to compete with the ever-increasing SEO and AI influences on the internet, our Bike and Gear Reviews will now come with a score out of ten.
Fear not, for our new scoring system will see a minor layout change to the same information you’re used to, just housed in a new graphic below the text.
‘What Do We Think’ summaries, plus the ‘We love:’ and ‘Could do better:’ segments remain, with the addition of a score out of ten, with half point scores added into the mix. This feature aims to explain how we get to the score. Note that we will likely expand this system into sub-scores for things like value for money, sustainability, reliability etc.
0-4 scores are unlikely as poor reviews help no one but there needs to be scope for it. 5 is the acceptable baseline, where the product simply fulfills its intended use. 10 is potentially era-defining.
Wideopenmag Test Scores.
Testing bikes and gear is the cornerstone of what we do at Wideopenmag. That’s backed up by the fact that they remain some of our highest trafficked sites to date. Until this changes, we will always put an emphasis on reviews. We have, historically, not offered scores. This was because we felt that readers and brands would focus too much on the number rather than on the reasoning behind it.
Why a score though?
In an age where search engine optimisation and artificial intelligence rule the roost, Wideopenmag has to stay one step ahead or at least keep up. AI reviews are pretty awful for getting our reviews seen and part of the scoring system is to help get our rider-written and rider-focused reviews back to the top of your search. This means what we do works harder for you, and our content that you clearly enjoy is easier to find.
Testing out of ten allows plenty of scope for half point variations that scores out of five do not. We could have done a percentage but then that’s perhaps too far in the other direction. For now, we’re keeping it simple. Once we have time under our belts calculating scores for test product, we will expand this to include sub categories that will directly make up the score out of ten.
Once the sub scores are up and running, you will be able to see where a product excels and where it falls short. An incredibly good product might be incredibly expensive, so loses points in that particular area. Something very well priced might achieve a higher score by being better value for money.
So what are we looking for?
It may seem blindingly obvious from the graphic above but there are plenty of things that feed into a final score. Everything from aesthetics, sustainability, price, value, reliability, durability, cool factor, performance and features feed into this, blended with the nuance of being tested by a 60kg balding troglodyte.
On top of this, the trails they are likely tested on (Pete’s home trails in Aberfoyle) are steep and slick. Neither of these things is new but, a very stiff bar or a wooden-feeling tyre will be more apparent in their context of who they’re used by and where they’re used.
To give an example, I would have to try very hard indeed not to give the Hope HB.916 a 10/10 score. The cool factor comes from it being Hope-made, hand-layered in Barnoldswick. Add to this that most of the kit attached to it is made under the same roof. It’s wicked fast too and would convince me to do silly things where I’d normally be hauling on the brakes. For what you get, the price, whilst high, isn’t ludicrous. I would imagine it holds its value well and aftersales care from Hope is legendary. The HB.916 is on the very short list of bikes that I would pay my own money for.
