Having said that, I put very little stock in magazine reviews. Of course with the exception of the ones RRW does because those guys are completely unbiased and top level racers that test and talk about stuff I care about. And with the exception of the testing that Rutter does, I like his reviews also.
But aside from that, meh. There are way too many variables.
How much time did each rider get on each bike?
How much time do they have on that track?
What is their experience/background?
Do they have more personal experience on an I4 or Twin?
Do/have they raced?
Were they allowed to make setup changes to suit the bike and/or their riding style?
Were they allowed to change spring rates?
When they swapped to a different bike, did it have new tires on it?
Were the tires used for the test the same brand of tires the riders are used to and/or race on?
If not, were they allowed to use whatever tires they wanted?
Were the track conditions exactly the same for each rider on each bike throughout the day?
Could they make gearing changes?
Were they allowed to change the ergos to suit them?
I could go on and on.
There are thousands of variables that go into play when talking about lap times, especially lap times on different bikes by different riders.
Not to mention that the lap times somebody else puts down on a bike mean absolutely .... to me. It doesn't mean my results will be the same.
In other words, 99% of those magazine shootouts are good for nothing but entertainment.
