Not always so, Jeff. Only when shooting the bow out of a machine does this hold true. Otherwise the tester is still doing the testing, only instead of "winging it" they are utilizing comparative graphs, charts, and formulas that will work regardless and give exacting/honest comparative results as opposed to "opinion", which can certainly be obscured as stated in my above post. Bows can be compared for speed and decible readings while shot by humans, the only tests that need to be measured by machines are shock/kick at the shot readings and even those differences can be felt by humans if honestly tested, but the machines will always read true on this.. The rest can all be formulated/graphed and compared apples to apples by humans if the time is taken to do so (or is known how to do so)---unfortunately few have the knowledge and/or take the time to do so, or even have the equipment needed for such comparative testing. Over the past several years with the increase of internet exposure everyone wants to do a report online,(why I don't know, but they do) so we see more and more of these subjective reviews popping up everywhere by virtually everyone. Yes, the line certainly "blurs" as you put it....

Does subjective testing help anyone?? Maybe to an extent but then again maybe not IMHO---- again as stated I feel that most of these subjective reports are based upon popularity and/or brand loyalty if not done of a true technical nature, and thus as stated, will be obscured, whether intentionally or not. JMHO. Pinwheel 12