Last updated: November 2026
We are riders first. Every guide, review and tool on Mountain Bike Insider comes out of the same process, and this page walks you through it so you can judge our work for yourself. It also says plainly what we do not do.
The promises behind this process are in our editorial policy.
How an Article Gets Made
- We start with a rider question: We look at what riders search for and ask, and pick topics where we can be clearer and more useful than what is already out there.
- We collect the facts: Manufacturer specs, geometry charts and manuals come first, then what owners tell us and say in public.
- We draft with AI help: AI tools help us organise the research and write a first draft, following a detailed brief.
- A person takes over: Our lead writer reads everything, fixes the voice, cuts what is weak or repeated, and adds what riding teaches you that a spec sheet cannot.
- We double check the facts: Every important claim goes through the checks further down this page.
- We add visuals only where they help: Each set of images is approved by a person before it goes in the article.
- We read the finished page: We check the links, the layout and the affiliate links before we call it done.
- We come back to it: Articles get updated when specs change, a new model year arrives, or a reader points something out.
Where Our Information Comes From
- Manufacturers: Product pages, geometry charts, manuals and safety labels.
- Owners: We read what owners say on forums and in reviews, and we also talk to them directly. We ask questions in Reddit communities and Facebook groups, we speak with riders we know in person, and we are starting to do the same in our Instagram community.
- Bike shops and mechanics: For repair and fit advice, we like to hear it from the people who do the work every day.
- Published research: For fitness, fit and safety topics, we rely on established studies and recognised cycling conventions.
How We Double Check
Before an important claim goes live, it has to pass the checks that apply to it:
- It matches the manufacturer specs or manual.
- It is backed by at least two independent sources, not just one.
- It has been confirmed by an owner of that bike or part, where we can reach one.
- Repair and fit advice has been sense checked with a bike shop or mechanic.
If a claim does not hold up, we change it, soften it or cut it. We would rather leave something out than guess.
Where AI Helps and Where People Decide
| AI helps with | A person decides |
|---|---|
| Organising research notes and outlines | Which topics we cover and what each article answers |
| Writing first drafts | What we recommend, and what we leave out |
| Suggesting related questions readers may have | Whether a fact, size or compatibility claim is true |
| Routine formatting tasks | The final wording, the images and when to publish |
AI is never our source. If something is in an article, it is there because a manufacturer document, an owner, an expert or solid research supports it.
How We Rank Our Sources
When two sources disagree, the higher one in this list wins.
| Source | What it can support |
|---|---|
| 1. Manufacturer specs, manuals and safety labels | Sizes, geometry, weights, compatibility and any safety claim |
| 2. Published research and standards | Fitness, fit, training and safety guidance |
| 3. Many owners saying the same thing | Real world pros and cons, reliability and how a product feels to live with |
| 4. One opinion, another blog or an AI summary | Nothing on its own. It can tell us what to check, never what to publish |
Reviews When We Have Not Tested the Product
To be upfront, we do not run a test lab, and we do not buy and test every product we write about. A review here is a careful summary of the specs and of what owners tell us after real use. Here is how we keep it honest:
- show both the strengths and the weaknesses
- say who the product suits and who should look elsewhere
- tell you when a point comes from owners rather than from us
- never describe a test as ours if it was not
- say so when we cannot confirm that a part fits, instead of guessing
How We Make Images and Diagrams
- We build them ourselves, as original diagrams, size charts, comparisons and labelled illustrations, using licensed stock graphics where they help.
- We add an image only when it helps you see what the text describes, never as decoration.
- We keep text short and large enough to read on a phone.
- We do not use manufacturer photos or photos taken from other websites.
- Every image has a short, descriptive title that also works as its alt text.
How Our Calculators Work
Our free mountain bike calculators use published formulas and typical industry ranges:
- Saddle height: the LeMond method (inseam times 0.883) and the Hamley method (inseam times 1.09, minus crank length), lowered for trail, enduro and downhill riding.
- Handlebar width: starts from shoulder width, then adjusts for riding style and shoulder comfort.
- Bike size: places your height in a size band, with a reach range for your riding style.
- Suspension sag: travel multiplied by a target sag percentage, with a starting pressure based on your weight.
- Value estimator: starts from the original price and model year, then adjusts for condition, parts, upgrades and how you sell.
They give you a starting point, not a verdict.
What This Process Cannot Do
- It cannot replace a professional bike fit, a qualified mechanic or medical advice.
- AI assisted drafting can introduce mistakes. Human review and our checks reduce them, but nothing removes them completely.
- Specs and model years change, so an older article can fall behind until we revisit it.
Spotted a Mistake?
Tell us. You can write to us through our contact page or leave a comment under any article. We correct mistakes on the page itself.