On this forum an individuals personal experience (unless you know them outside of cyber-land) is no more valid than that of a magazine. In all honesty I'd believe a magazine before I believed a randon internet forum user (assuming of course that I make my buying decisions in this way, which I do not) especially when the forum concerned is a fixed-gear and single speed one.
That's not my point. My point is that a magazine review is not proof that something is as good as it's made out to be, and it's no more credible than anecdotal evidence from everyday cyclists.
Companies don't pay cyclists for advertising space, so cyclists can pretty much say whatever they like about their products.
If you think you need £100 shorts to be comfortable on a long ride, then maybe you do need them, psychologically.
That's not my point. My point is that a magazine review is not proof that something is as good as it's made out to be, and it's no more credible than anecdotal evidence from everyday cyclists.
Companies don't pay cyclists for advertising space, so cyclists can pretty much say whatever they like about their products.
If you think you need £100 shorts to be comfortable on a long ride, then maybe you do need them, psychologically.