Each month these magazine editors must walk the fine line of being critical enough to satisfy the reader's need for information, yet positive enough to satisfy the manufacturers desire for a favorable write up. Since it's impossible to make everyone happy, the magazine editor usually ends up with every one a little bit mad at him. It comes with the job. Theoretically, the technical information and test results in all the PWC magazines should be identical. Simply put, inconsistent information among the magazines is the result of different levels of commitment to technical accuracy.
Some publications intentionally avoid tests that yield definitive performance numbers.
Conducting consistent, accurate, and definitive performance tests requires expensive equipment, not to mention expensive hours of staff traveling and water time. Sometimes, after all this effort and expense, the editors find performance figures that are not what the advertiser had hoped for. Group K believes that if magazine editors are qualified to write articles that evaluate the technical qualities of a given product, then product manufacturers are certainly qualified to evaluate the technical quality of those articles. There are as many high quality, trend setting tech articles as there are illusive ones. The technicians at Group K openly acknowledge that we know nothing about the job of producing a popular industry publication.