MV Agusta Forum banner

1 - 11 of 11 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
786 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Anyone noticed this on the MCN website? I usually refer to them when looking for a bike, although I take it with a pinch of salt

http://www.motorcyclenews.com/MCN/bikereviews/searchresults/Bike-Reviews/MV2/MV-Agusta-F3-675-2012-current/

basically 3/5 star.

Everything is brilliant apart from the anti-engine braking which is described as 'alarming' and the fueling which is basically slated multiple times in the same article. They somehow managed to mention the fueling under 'verdict', 'Engine' and 'Value' just incase we didn't get the point!

Seems like another project for X-bikes :naughty:

I'm still in the market for one though :yo:

So whats the real deal? is 3/5 fair? My old Brutie 910S has a 4/5 which I reckon is fair, maybe even a bit generous now that I have taken into account depreciation, spares and servicing after a couple of years ownership.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,549 Posts
Hmmmm.... I just did a quick read of this article and I picked out several glaring errors.
example;

Frame: Tubular steel trellis frame with ali side plates. Double-sided aluminium swingarm


Really? Double-sided you say, well, isn't that special!

If a publication wants to be taken seriously then they need to seriously proof their copy before print!
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
19,860 Posts
How come most of the world has given the F3 good reviews but the UK press just beats on it??? Must be something in the water :nutkick:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
786 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
Hmmmm.... I just did a quick read of this article and I picked out several glaring errors.
example;

Frame: Tubular steel trellis frame with ali side plates. Double-sided aluminium swingarm


Really? Double-sided you say, well, isn't that special!

If a publication wants to be taken seriously then they need to seriously proof their copy before print!
Absolutely, I didn't notice this. They must've got the secretary or the coffee boy to write the reviews up. I think I'll ignore the entire review if they can't be bothered to even proof read an article that's going to potentially influence the sales of this bike.

I was thinking, whats the last supersport that I can think of that was actually very good, a groundbreaker that handled well, was good value but got constantly slated on fuelling issues...

http://www.motorcyclenews.com/MCN/bikereviews/searchresults/Bike-Reviews/Triumph/Triumph-TT600-2000--2003-/

Triumph TT600. yet that one has 4/5 stars. It's British I guess so it gets an extra star.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
46 Posts
Read eric bostrom's review. Anything he likes is ok with me! Also, for what its worth, this is the only review ive seen that "trashes" the bike, maybe they just wanted to be " those guys". Personaly, it was great reading both a good and bad review. I think you need both to really get an idea of what the bike is. Same goes for any bike.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
23 Posts
same as top gear when they review aston martins up against comparable better cars, a brit mag isnt going to rate the f3 highly incase it takes away from the trumpy daytona r. thats my opinion anyway lol.
 
1 - 11 of 11 Posts
Top