Specialized Recall

Discuss light weight issues concerning road bikes & parts.
TobinHatesYou
Posts: 4181
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2017 12:02 pm

by TobinHatesYou

Again that’s really just the collar to keep preload on the headset components. It does nothing else. It’s like a second stem/steerer clamp interface because the real stem clamps onto the FutureShock.

by Weenie


sethjs
Posts: 179
Joined: Fri Feb 04, 2011 4:02 pm
Location: San Francisco, CA

by sethjs

Mr Gib - how to innovate then? Should everything stay as it is? I have a Diverge. It's amazing. Really nice to have a bit of extra cushion on both more technical climbs and most descents (gravel or near mtb terrain).

Innovation sometimes Cobra with simplicity. Sometimes added complexity. All for a benefit.

Is a Tesla simpler or more complex than a gas car? Isn't that mtb shock a more complex design with more potential points of failure?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

arthurf
Posts: 135
Joined: Thu May 22, 2014 9:13 pm

by arthurf

kgt wrote:
Sat Jan 12, 2019 9:11 am
+1
When a company needs to come up with a technological 'innovation' every year or so in order to be competitive those are the results.
Calnago has done a really interesting and detailed build report on the issues he encountered whilst building a Time Scylon, almost all of those problems are cause by Time’s “innovation” (like the absurd headset) yet you defended every single one of those as being technically better than everything else on the market. Now you crap all over Specialized for needlessly innovating. Double standards.

arthurf
Posts: 135
Joined: Thu May 22, 2014 9:13 pm

by arthurf

sethjs wrote:
Sat Jan 12, 2019 10:51 am
Mr Gib - how to innovate then? Should everything stay as it is? I have a Diverge. It's amazing. Really nice to have a bit of extra cushion on both more technical climbs and most descents (gravel or near mtb terrain).

Innovation sometimes Cobra with simplicity. Sometimes added complexity. All for a benefit.
+1. I have an S Works Roubaix and it’s brilliant for less than perfect, broken up British roads, the future shock takes the edge off of all the bad surface without compromising handling or feedback

User avatar
kgt
Posts: 7822
Joined: Sun Jun 18, 2006 10:29 am
Location: Athens, Greece

by kgt

arthurf wrote:
Sat Jan 12, 2019 10:57 am
kgt wrote:
Sat Jan 12, 2019 9:11 am
+1
When a company needs to come up with a technological 'innovation' every year or so in order to be competitive those are the results.
Calnago has done a really interesting and detailed build report on the issues he encountered whilst building a Time Scylon, almost all of those problems are cause by Time’s “innovation” (like the absurd headset) yet you defended every single one of those as being technically better than everything else on the market. Now you crap all over Specialized for needlessly innovating. Double standards.
I guess you just waited for the moment to post this. lol
TIME headsets exist for many, many years. They don't redesign them every season. Furthermore TIME's headset were not recalled. Do you know why? Because they just work perfectly and are 100% safe. Experienced composite engineers like Raoul Luescher loves TIME's specific innovation. Calnago does not like it but that just his opinion.
On the contrary, Specialized's 'innovation' can fail catastrophicaly, that's why the recall it.

Please, do a simple google search. Search for carbon frames or fork recalls in the last ten years. Then tell us what the results were.

Mr.Gib
Posts: 3602
Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2005 4:12 pm
Location: eh?

by Mr.Gib

sethjs wrote:
Sat Jan 12, 2019 10:51 am
Mr Gib - how to innovate then? Should everything stay as it is? I have a Diverge. It's amazing. Really nice to have a bit of extra cushion on both more technical climbs and most descents (gravel or near mtb terrain).
Innovation is the key to survival for many businesses and must be pursued - I applaud the effort. I just view certain innovations that have safety implications with a jaundiced eye. Even if Specialized is able to get the design and manufacuring to be failure proof, what are the odds that some junior LBS employee is going to set it up wrong? 100%? Will is still be safe on a bike that is poorly maintained. What does 10 years of sweat do to it? The irony is that I am the sort of owner that would ensure proper care and adjustment of such a item.
arthurf wrote:
Sat Jan 12, 2019 11:00 am
+1. I have an S Works Roubaix and it’s brilliant for less than perfect, broken up British roads, the future shock takes the edge off of all the bad surface without compromising handling or feedback
All report are that the future shock is excellent as far as providing comfort without comprimising handling. I am a comfort seeker due to my high mileage.
wheelsONfire wrote: When we ride disc brakes the whole deal of braking is just like a leaving a fart. It happens and then it's over. Nothing planned and nothing to get nervous for.

arthurf
Posts: 135
Joined: Thu May 22, 2014 9:13 pm

by arthurf

kgt wrote:
Sat Jan 12, 2019 3:15 pm
arthurf wrote:
Sat Jan 12, 2019 10:57 am
kgt wrote:
Sat Jan 12, 2019 9:11 am
+1
When a company needs to come up with a technological 'innovation' every year or so in order to be competitive those are the results.
Calnago has done a really interesting and detailed build report on the issues he encountered whilst building a Time Scylon, almost all of those problems are cause by Time’s “innovation” (like the absurd headset) yet you defended every single one of those as being technically better than everything else on the market. Now you crap all over Specialized for needlessly innovating. Double standards.
I guess you just waited for the moment to post this. lol
TIME headsets exist for many, many years. They don't redesign them every season. Furthermore TIME's headset were not recalled. Do you know why? Because they just work perfectly and are 100% safe. Experienced composite engineers like Raoul Luescher loves TIME's specific innovation. Calnago does not like it but that just his opinion.
On the contrary, Specialized's 'innovation' can fail catastrophicaly, that's why the recall it.

Please, do a simple google search. Search for carbon frames or fork recalls in the last ten years. Then tell us what the results were.
You’ve misinterpreted what I wrote. 99% of all Bikes use the traditional headset system, so why have Time innovated and developed an alternative? Because they believe there is a better system that is more effective than everyone else is using, same as Specialized have done with the future shock.

To the best of my knowledge, there hasn’t actually been a failure of any future shock system (Terpstra excepted) and this recall is purely a precaution (based on one potential incident).

I also respect Specialized and Trek etc for acknowledging and implementing a product recall. Do you know how many repeat failures there are with car manufacturers such as BMW, Audi, Toyota etc that are never acknowledged as warranty recalls? A lot. Suggest you google BMW N47 to start with .........

User avatar
kgt
Posts: 7822
Joined: Sun Jun 18, 2006 10:29 am
Location: Athens, Greece

by kgt

I don't see how I misinterpreted you.
My critique was not about innovation in general. My critique was about those companies who need to seem innovative in order to be competitive (competitive means sales) so they come up with a new techological gadget every year or so. This is directed by marketing IMHO and not by real needs. In contrast TIME's headset (sorry but you are the one who brought this up) is well tested innovation that just works and has obvious advantages. No recalls, no nothing.
I don't care about Tepstra and his accident. The thread is about the future shock's recall. Precaution or not the company is afraid that an accident can happen. They are not so sure about the 'future' of the 'future schock' riders. BTW don't you thing 'future shock' is a name suggested by the marketing deprartment? Cause I am sure it is.

Karvalo
Posts: 737
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2018 6:40 pm

by Karvalo

arthurf wrote:
Sat Jan 12, 2019 6:18 pm
You’ve misinterpreted what I wrote. 99% of all Bikes use the traditional headset system, so why have Time innovated and developed an alternative?
But a 'traditional' headset system is a threaded headset for a quill stem, right?

In that sense isn't the Time Quickset actually closer in both principle and execution to a traditional headset than the (once) innovative threadless drop in system which is secured using the clamping force of the stem bolts?

arthurf
Posts: 135
Joined: Thu May 22, 2014 9:13 pm

by arthurf

kgt wrote:
Sat Jan 12, 2019 6:53 pm
I don't see how I misinterpreted you.
My critique was not about innovation in general. My critique was about those companies who need to seem innovative in order to be competitive (competitive means sales) so they come up with a new techological gadget every year or so. This is directed by marketing IMHO and not by real needs. In contrast TIME's headset (sorry but you are the one who brought this up) is well tested innovation that just works and has obvious advantages. No recalls, no nothing.
I don't care about Tepstra and his accident. The thread is about the future shock's recall. Precaution or not the company is afraid that an accident can happen. They are not so sure about the 'future' of the 'future schock' riders. BTW don't you thing 'future shock' is a name suggested by the marketing deprartment? Cause I am sure it is.
Specialized have innovated to develop a solution to a problem/improve comfort on their product, how is this driven by marketing? The marketing is developed on the back of this. Do the marketing department lay cobbles or break up roads just to increase sales of their product? No.

Time’s headset is needlessly complicated and doesn’t address any actual problem or have any perceptible advantages. Do you think that Quickset adjustment system or Aktiv fork aren’t names developed by the Time marketing department?

Anywa yI’m not wasting any more time arguing with you, all you do is needlessly put down and belittle everything that you don’t own. You’re just like the EU, democracy so long as everyone agrees with you.

User avatar
kgt
Posts: 7822
Joined: Sun Jun 18, 2006 10:29 am
Location: Athens, Greece

by kgt

Time’s headset is not needlessly complicated. If you are interested to understand the advantages just do a search.
And if I am what you say, please, do not waste your time responding to my posts. I have enough boring followers already, thanks.
Last edited by kgt on Tue Jan 15, 2019 2:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Ritxis
Posts: 381
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2012 3:00 pm
Location: San Sebastian

by Ritxis

kgt wrote:
Sun Jan 13, 2019 11:26 am
Time’s headset is not needlessly complicated. If you are interested to understand the advantages just do a search.
And if I am what you say, please, do not waste your time responding to my posts. I have enough boring followers, thanks.
I will give my opinion, you give reasoned opinions.......but "criticizes" Specialized in this matter.......if in instead of "Spe" it happens to another brand with less "glamor" ....... I would criticize her much more and she would not defend herself so much

Regards

User avatar
wheelsONfire
Posts: 2953
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2014 8:15 am
Location: NorthEU

by wheelsONfire

Please guys, why do you feel a need to defend yourselves?
No need to get worked up, take a cup of coffee and think how great it is, that all of you can actually decide yourselves which brand and model of bike you'd like to buy,.... and hopefully ride :-D
Bikes:

Ax Lightness Vial EVO Race (2018.12.21)
viewtopic.php?f=10&t=156137
Paduano Racing Fidia (kind of shelved)
Open *UP* (2016.04.14)


Ex bike; Vial EVO D

Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post