The whole purpose of a long-term test is to see if the "original" components are up to spec for the price of the bike. Not many can afford a £2500 bike and then upgrade almost immediately, unless they already own the bits from a previous bike.

Personnally (OK I'm a grumpy old git) I'd like to see the stock bike tested, not with upgrades.

Interested in know what others feel.

What exactly is the point in doing a long term test on a bike thats pretty much unavailable indefinately. Iron Horse has gone bankrupt, so why would anyone want to buy one, unless they were being given away exceptionally cheap or second hand. Its like doing a review on a Rover...

This is not the first time Bike Radar have reported on Bikes that are unavailable either. Could you perhaps put some effort into securing bikes that people actually want and that shops can actually sell to people. It would be far more useful.

I can't watch the video at work, but, I think both the posts above appear to raise very valid points.

A long-term test should highlight stock parts that *need* switching, as they are rubbish / don't work etc. The sort of things a prospective buyer will need to account for. For example, the stock tyres can't cope with UK weather etc. But upgrades for the sake of it are a no, no. Whats the point of testing parts that don't come on the bike?

And if the frame is no longer available, why waste anyones time and magazine space at all.

As Ovidius states, please put some effort, or even some thought into things...

ps don't waste time reviewing specialized, treks etc long term either - no real point when everyone has a mate with one anyhow.

i couldnt agree more with alll off you

personaly i feel that mbuk should start to focus on cheaer bikes that perform as good as the top, yes they do exist! unfortunatly there arnt many :(

MBUK should do a credit crunch magazine special

"The whole purpose of a long-term test is to see if the "original" components are up to spec for the price of the bike. Not many can afford a £2500 bike and then upgrade almost immediately, unless they already own the bits from a previous bike."

100% right and the reason I don't buy MBUK any more

Ok then, let's address some of these issues...

1) Regular readers of the mag will know that our Long Term machines are run as stock and upgraded as stuff breaks/we are asked to test new kit. To give us the ability to test products thoroughly we need to run them for extended periods of time, the best way to do this is by strapping them to our long term bikes and doing our best to push them to the limits. Modifying your bike to suit your own style of riding is by no means a new idea either.

2) Iron Horse are still trading, their bikes are still available in the UK and numerous World Cup teams are running Sunday's. Because they are experiencing financial problems doesn't mean that every Iron Horse is sucked from the face of the planet. The bike is not new on test, I've been running it for 6 months.

3) Issue 237 featured a group test on £399-500 hardtails. Issue 236 featured a group test on the best full sus bikes for under a grand. We've also got a bargain dirt jump bike group test coming up in a couple of issues. All these tests and reviews are then available on Bikeradar.

What exactly does "Iron Horse are still trading" actually mean? Worldwide has gone bankrupt. Iron Horse are not still trading. They might still be looking for a buyer for the brand and remaining stock, that does not mean they are still trading (this buyer has almost definately been dismissed). Distributers might by attempting to continue to sell Iron Horse stock. Iron Horse cannot make any bikes and due to their financial position are definately not still trading.

They owe $17mil, during a recession and financial crisis, in mostly unsecured debt. There are major allegations and a lawsuit against some of Iron Horse senior managment, due to the state of the company. They have lost major credability within their most significant market. The company really does not look to come out of the Ashes here. After their Bankruptcy Hearing, I doubt there will be much left.

Chris Aston from Iron Horse's UK importers Jim Walker & Co had this to say:

"Whilst we do understand that the holding company of the Iron Horse brand is undergoing financial difficulties, it is hoped that the Iron Horse brand itself will soon find a new owner.

"[Rather than comparing Iron Horse to Rover]... the analogy is probably more appropriate if compared with an Aston Martin - recently voted the world’s most desirable brand, but which has gone through various financial problems throughout its history, changing through various ownerships including Ford and the current Kuwaiti/David Richards investors.

"What is certain is that it was always planned that this 2009 season would see the last dw-link version of the Sunday. And as this iconic bike has been one of the best and most successful downhill bikes ever produced - and with the 09 models available in UK stores and supposedly being the latest and best, based on Sam Hill’s race model for last season - it is most certainly relevant and worthy of a thorough test and review, just as the last Aston Vanquish S models were tested by the motor press rather than being ignored."

Well, here we are in October, and as we all know Ironhorse is down, is showing very little sign of coming back as anything more than budget asda style bikes.

Thats all that was meant by "it is hoped that the Iron Horse brand itself will soon find a new owner."

The sunday is gone, it was one of the best bikes ever made but why buy something from a company that doesnt exist. No warranty other than with the retailer, no spare parts, no tech support, no company contact or support, and lets not forget, no new ones being made.

Its a real shame, I wish someone would buy the sunday design and keep making it, but it's not going to happen.

Also, I agree, the point of a long term review is to see how the stock parts hold up. And the difference between a dual sus for under a grand, and buying a 2.5K bike and upgrading it is substantial.