Luescher Teknik's Thoughts on new bikes

[kgt]

[TobinHatesYou]

Did you even watch the video? Luescher specifically says he hasn't noticed anything wrong with the tolerances in Canyon bottom brackets he's come across.

Here: https://youtu.be/pJnbgCEsOoI?t=190

--

Again, Hambini specifically deals with BBs that are out of spec. So when he says all his examples are shit, well that's literally useless information because it's already filtered out all the frames that are in spec. Luescher on the other hand deals mostly with impact damage or JRA damage.

[kgt]

Take it or leave it, I don't care.

[Maddie]

Again, Hambini specifically deals with BBs that are out of spec. So when he says all his examples are shit, well that's literally useless information because it's already filtered out all the frames that are in spec. Luescher on the other hand deals mostly with impact damage or JRA damage.

I raised my eyebrows too when I heard that Raoul hasn't found anything odd with Canyon BBs. It's quite the opposite of what Hambini states.
People do all kinds of funny things when they install or remove BBs (hammer anyone?). These frames often land on Hambini's famous Barbie table. No wonder some of them are out of spec.

[TobinHatesYou]

Take it or leave it, I don't care.

Not the best defense.

[kgt]

After my second ban in a couple of years without any warning or explanation and for no reason I decided not to loose time in this forum any more. I have much better things to do.

[Jrtyoung]

And here is the problem with Time’s costly manufacturing. This Canyon made by Quest Composites is quite clean on the inside with only a couple voids on non-critical layers like the additional wrap around bonded joints. Time fans can tout their RTM process all day, but in the end it bankrupted the company and the bikes simply aren’t significantly better made than bikes made with conventional techniques.

I was actually surprised the Canyon was so clean on the inside, and to learn that Canyon (and Giant apparently) achieve this using EPS foam mandrels.

Sounds like a lot of manufacturers are finding ways to produce cheaper with better quality control.

Personally though, if I’m spending $6k on a bike frame, I’d want the one with $6k of engineering behind it, not a cheaply made frame with a massive mark up.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[robertbb]

After my second ban in a couple of years without any warning or explanation and for no reason I decided not to loose time in this forum any more. I have much better things to do.

Ditto, only it was my first ban recently. Zero warning, zero explanation. Over it. Let the usual suspects write in every single thread on every single topic as though they know best and whinge when they get challenged or called out. Or feel the need to tell everyone how their own choice of frame, gruppo, wheels is the bestest evvvarrr. I'm done.

[TobinHatesYou]

Personally though, if I’m spending $6k on a bike frame, I’d want the one with $6k of engineering behind it, not a cheaply made frame with a massive mark up.

Canyons are made by Quest. Anyway, what if you can spend $4K on a similar frame with a trusted lifetime warranty?

[Jrtyoung]

Personally though, if I’m spending $6k on a bike frame, I’d want the one with $6k of engineering behind it, not a cheaply made frame with a massive mark up.

Canyons are made by Quest. Anyway, what if you can spend $4K on a similar frame with a trusted lifetime warranty?

The Canyon looked good (although the fork/handlebar faults are a bit of a worry). Makes an S-Works look like an exercise in marketing markups.

Don’t be fooled by a “lifetime warranty” - carbon fibre shouldn’t fail unless it’s got a fault from the factory so, it’s really just a “warranty” - and in a bike, if something fails that’s serious.

As Raoul points out, RTM manufacturing has pros and cons, but one of the pros is the likelihood of voids and flyaway fibres is low, so while Time bikes aren’t a super light frame, they are made in a way that achieves more consistency and ultimately a safer frame (less voids) - not my words, Raoul’s

I’d buy a Canyon next time I need a new bike for racing cause they get knocked around a bit while on tour, but for now my Time does an amazing job and I know it’s the safest bike in the peloton


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[TobinHatesYou]

Don’t be fooled by a “lifetime warranty” - carbon fibre shouldn’t fail unless it’s got a fault from the factory so, it’s really just a “warranty” - and in a bike, if something fails that’s serious.

Sometimes defects don’t result in failure for years. That’s certainly been the case with one of my wheelsets.

[ichobi]

Such a nice example of the availability bias. Just because hambini put up one video pointing out that all Canyon aeroad he has dealt with has TERriBle bb alignment and roundness issue, many people assume that all of them are out of wack, and Canyon is a terrible producer, as apparent in many post on this forum.

People believe what they want to believe, in the way they want to believe.

[nachetetm]

Such a nice example of the availability bias. Just because hambini put up one video pointing out that all Canyon aeroad he has dealt with has TERriBle bb alignment and roundness issue, many people assume that all of them are out of wack, and Canyon is a terrible producer, as apparent in many post on this forum.

People believe what they want to believe, in the way they want to believe.

The frames that Hambini get should have never leave the factory. If those frames can get passed the quality control, you can expect that they won't be outliers, but relatively common. The fact that he also get good frames, and those tend to come from certain brands, shows that not all the frames are made equally.
Someone also points that some brands found ways to manufacture more economically. Well, I would like to see that reflected in the final price...

[Butcher]

Sometimes defects don’t result in failure for years. That’s certainly been the case with one of my wheelsets.

And sometime there is never a failure. So if there is never a failure, then why is it a flaw. According to all these critics on Youtube, most of these frames have flaws and could cause failure. The fact is rarely does anything fail. It's almost like getting your car keyed and saying that you need a new car.

As far as I'm concerned, they are all like Chicken Little. The sky is not really falling. None of them have proved a void to me is a really bad thing and makes the frame unsafe to ride. I would love to see all the frame that do not pass QC. Let's really see a poorly built frame.

[bilwit]

Such a nice example of the availability bias. Just because hambini put up one video pointing out that all Canyon aeroad he has dealt with has TERriBle bb alignment and roundness issue, many people assume that all of them are out of wack, and Canyon is a terrible producer, as apparent in many post on this forum.

People believe what they want to believe, in the way they want to believe.

The frames that Hambini get should have never leave the factory. If those frames can get passed the quality control, you can expect that they won't be outliers, but relatively common. The fact that he also get good frames, and those tend to come from certain brands, shows that not all the frames are made equally.
Someone also points that some brands found ways to manufacture more economically. Well, I would like to see that reflected in the final price...

This. I don't see why this is so hard to understand. Yes, he deals with the lowest common denominator--the worst case scenario--for these brands and yes, not every single frame will be like this, but if I gave you a frame choice of two brands and told you that if you took each individually at its worst, one has the potential to be complete and utter garbage that probably shouldn't exist in the first place and the other--again, at worst--is pretty much bang on perfect, which would you say is the superior brand?