Tri-flow is my lube of choice for pretty much everything (don’t giggle). When I need a penetrant oil (stop it) I use Blast or something like it. WD-40 is a jack of all trades master of none imnsoho.
I do think they overvalue lower pricing, so usually their upgrade pick is a better choice if it’s anything other than a utility item. Like a shredder.
Does Fellowes still make shredders? I worked for them and they used to be made in the USA.
My issues are primarily with arbitrary exclusions, and (less frequently) with odd conclusions based on criteria that suggest inexperience with the product category in question – or as a reviewer in general.
As an example of the former, I’d love to know how HP’s compact home laser printers compare to Brothers’ – I’ll be in the market for one of those after an upcoming move, and both companies’ printers are super popular (I had an HP 1012 years ago that I remember fondly, but I have no idea how today’s devices compare). But since HP’s compact models tend to be single-sided, Wirecutter doesn’t bother testing them. Ditto for similar compact offerings from Samsung, Canon, Brother themselves, etc.
I haven’t printer-shopped for years, but I do recall that the last time I printed on both sides of a sheet of paper, it was because I was out of paper. Accordingly, it’s just not something I care much about. It’s not a common use case for me, so it’s low-value as a feature for me. I’d rather have something smaller and simpler.
I do care about print quality, though, and I’d like to know the trade-offs between the various brands. But due to WC’s large number of exclusions, their comparison article is worthless to me.
Valuing a feature, and weighting your scores accordingly, is one thing – readers can look at your results and assess them based on their own needs & values. But for a reviewer to assume that nobody should care about anything lacking whatever pet feature the reviewer has deemed mandatory, especially when that eliminates a huge part of the market you’re supposed to be providing insight on, is just lazy, arrogant, or both.
Usually, WC doesn’t do that. Once in awhile, though, they do, and it’s unfortunate.