My all time favorite was the '05 250F shootout by a mag whose name I will not mention, in which it was said (and it's not paraphrased far from verbatim) "Well, the blue one was more stable, and stopped better, and won all the acceleration contests, and turned the fastest lap times, and generally beat up on the red one more or less totally, but we felt faster on the red one, so we declared it the winner." Maybe they just liked the color. The point about the editorial focus is true. Dirt Bike, for example, takes a broad view of the general sport, including most of the more popular forms of off-road, MX, and recreational riding, and their tests tend to reflect that attitude. As said, MXA is very centered almost entirely on motocross. But above that, I look for a pattern of objectivity that covers a number of years, the level of expertise and experience of the testers, and also the question brought up earlier with regard to what the test staff is willing to do with the bike to get at how it will serve a real-world customer. If they are unwilling to tweak the gearing, controls, suspension, and even the jetting in a manner that any reasonably serious end user would do to find out how the bike will perform in its optimum stock condition, then you can't expect the results to reveal much more than what the bike is like in showroom condition. In the sense that that will tell you which one is better right of the floor, I suppose that's fine. But inasmuch as virtually no one leaves them like that, it's a much better comparison to see what can be done with each unit using the adjustments provided by the factory. Besides MXA and Dirt Bike, how many mags have tested a KTM with the fork offset in both of the available positions on the models with that option?