Yes, of course. It would be cool to write more detailed reviews about these parts. Many of these parts has no or very low quality reviews on Farnell/Newark stores but buyer sometime want to know more details, experiences or just see more detailed photos of the oblect and so on. I did not remember any usefull review in the store and this is opportunity to change it. Maybe consider linking these Roadtest reviews to the store. This apply also to standard (even already existing) RoadTests.

In case of for example connectors or other tiny components, it would be better to provide them as kit with multiple pieces avalaible and for exmaple include several pin ocunts available.

I recommend reducing deadline on these reviews. I think that waiting for breadborad review for two months is inadequately long. In case of most mentioned parts I think 14 days (after UPS deliver it) is sufficient deadline. I also gues there will be higher demand on these RoadTests because for example I skipped most of roadtest just because I had no time to properly do them and this can bring a good opportunity to one-weekend roadtests which would be very attractive to me.

My approach is to examine the product and pitch a project that provides a deliverable. Assuming the deliverable has merit my application may get selected. Given the vast knowledge level and experience of the community there should be a sufficient niche of users to cover the product in reviews.

I'm sure members would be happy to road test a wider variety of products. It sounds like more work to administer, and if they are niche products, there may be fewer applicants, but it might get a larger number of members involved in road tests and there are lots of other popular products that would be interesting to road test. Road Tests for simple products don't need to be longwinded affairs to be successful at highlighting what the product is good for and its performance.

I'm going with "Yes" because I think more community members will feel that it's within their skill set to test this type of equipment.  They also may not have some of it so it interests them greatly.

I agree that there isn't as much one can do with some of it HOWEVER, as misaz points out, there isn't a lot of feedback on the products.  Roadtests could be a start - especially with how functional the search engine is these days.

I also like the "techniques" approach.  Workholders are what they are - but maybe the Roadtest could be on the most creative way to use them.  Does the product do what it says?  Is there a creative way to test that claim?  How does that connector handle a Canadian winter or an Australian summer?  Or an English spring?     Just some thoughts.

This could lead to some very interesting RoadTests.

Maybe also doing comparisons of low-medium-high priced versions of the same thing. For example, compare a USB charger to a dollar-store version. Or compare house-brand to expensive-brand.

Yes of course.  E14 does offer instrumentation and tooling road tests, certainly it would be fun to do more.

Adhesives, for sure. I'd like to suggest including productivity software tools, products that help bring surface mount to the hobbyist & maker, adapters & converters,

Dougw hit the bullseye, how about mini-roadtests on low cost components, like an i2c sensor, oled graphic displays, etc.  Keep same road test rules , but lower expectations on formal report details, expect mostly a demonstration video, wiring, and code. 

Good point supporting a mini-road test concept that can be done over a weekend. 

I would vote for Yes. I still remember doing my very first ever roadtest back in 2018 on the universal stripping tool. Basically, it was a normal stripping tool, but what was interesting in doing this type of roadtest is that we need to see how creative we can share with the audience the functionality of the product. So i do feel that it would be interesting to have a wider variety of products for the roadtest.

The latter part of the list is more interesting to me. They are all items I would appreciate seeing another person's perspective and how they use them.

I also think it would give more opportunities for new Road Testers to participate in the program.

I think this is a hard question to get a blanket answer for - I think members may be happy to RoadTest almost anything, but at the same time, the requirements to do a meaningful RoadTest can be quite tricky with seemingly simple components and it may require experience or equipment not widely available. The low value of some of the items versus the time investment may make them unattractive and the niche applications of some items may make them unappealing. Perhaps bundling different products together is a good way around this, but will the RoadTester use all of them, or only some? Will the companies involved be happy to test only with their own series of products, or against competitors as well?

For example - testing a connector may involve several tests such as checking dimensions, mating force, mating durability, contact resistance, retention force, impedance/VSWR, waterproofness, interchangeability (with other connectors). To adequately use such a connector could require crimping tools, or designing a PCB to mount them to. If the RoadTester doesn't have the right gear (not even I can test all of these key parameters), then is an "application-based" RoadTest that says "I built this, it works" valuable when a connector of a different make may have served just as well? The amount of time it may take to get the supporting infrastructure (e.g. PCBs made) may not be insignificant - and its cost (if borne by the RoadTester) can make it very unattractive. Adapters may be useful, but again, to properly test them requires some very specific set-ups. Another thing to consider is that some of these tests may also involve test to destruction (or at the least, could put the connection itself at danger), so perhaps having multiple components of the same type is a requirement to make a successful RoadTest.

As for breadboards - I think one could easily subjectively evaluate them based on building a circuit. There are some shockingly poor breadboards out there now - I've encountered a few. But could that really be a full 2-month RoadTest? Not too sure. Hand tools and supplies are probably in a similar category, although they may have some more elements that can be tested.

One risk is that these varied RoadTests may come at the cost of more serious RoadTests - if a "big ticket" RoadTest review is swimming in a pool of "small fish" RoadTests ... I'm not sure that's necessarily a good thing and could affect the image of the program. After all, the audience has limited time to absorb the content ... so I think the priority should still remain on meatier RoadTests that truly justify the name.

- Gough