Hand Made?

[emcgough]

This topic has been brought to my attention quite a few times, so I decided to see what you all thought. It may seem like a stupid question, but what's the difference in the way the top end frames are manufactured, but more specifically, how are (for example) Orange frames manufactured to a higher quality? I hear the claim too often about Orange (again, just an example) being "hand made in the UK", as evidence that they are superior to other brands.

Are these types of claims accurate, or just an attempt to glorify their favourite brand?

Are you under the impression the frames are pressed together in some big machine or something? Last time I checked pretty much all bike frames were hand made by welders.
That's what I thought!

Anyway, anybody able to shed some light?

ps: I searched, so sorry if this has been covered already.

[Wattsy]

I had an angry go bout this some time back, ah, found it


FFS, can we get one thing straight, production line DOES NOT mean machine made, 80% of the work on the frames is still done by hand, its just done in larger quantities. most of the machine work is for bending, cutting, forming of the tubes used in the frame manifacture. yes, the welding maybe done by a machine because ifs programed to, but all inital spot welding is done by hand to insure no slipups in frame faults.
so, production frames does not mean its all made by a machine, infact, hardly anything is done by machines.


As you can tell, even the big major manifactures like giant, still like every other company, make there frames, and complete bikes mainly hand made. The machines are used in assisting the builder's and/or doing jobs that human can't (aka tube bending or forming, CNC, etc)
hope that helps, and there be more.

[udi]

Hand made would refer to the welding process.

Many boutique frames are hand welded, but my experience with this is that it is no better than a machine welded frame, and in some cases even inferior. The welds are always messier when hand welded, and the only technical advantage I can think of is that any mistakes made can be fixed while welding.

I know specialized frames are robot-welded, and the welds are a lot neater, and I can't think of many that have failed, probably one of the manufacturers that you hardly ever see a broken frame from.

I'm sure for both cases there are good and bad examples, breakages would have a lot to do with design, and heat-treating - perhaps those two moreso than the welding.

[No Skid Marks]

They're all hand made to some extent, it's just the boutique brands like orange are done on a smaller scale and therfore less employees and your left to dream of the anglo saxon welder putting pride into his work, whereas in Taiwan they may have lots of people in a prodution line doing less pationate work. Some of the ugliest welds I've seen have been on Orange bikes and the like and I think although the Taiwaneese worker may not be as into his work due to no pride and little pay you'll find that he is just like a machine doing a very simple job over and over and is actually more efficient and doing a better job to a higher standard. This is a genralisation but I feel from whet I've seen is fairly accurate.

[and1]

Its more marketing hype than anything else. Personally I think a welder in china doing it all day every day to keep himself alive would have more experience at it than someone over in the UK/Canada or wherever.

I think its more the design of the frame and how well it operates that determines frame quality, not who welded it and where.

[Wattsy]

I know specialized frames are robot-welded, and the welds are a lot neater, and I can't think of many that have failed, probably one of the manufacturers that you hardly ever see a broken frame from.

I'm sure for both cases there are good and bad examples, breakages would have a lot to do with design, and heat-treating - perhaps those two moreso than the welding.

Which one's? Cause i found out after a bit of research, that giant does specialized frame's aswell. BUT this could just be frames like the Hardrock, i couldn't find that out. I'd be guessing specialized would like to do there boutique frames.

Hey udi, did we argue bout this before? I can't remember if it was you or not.

[TheBofh]

Generally it is just the QA that is better with handmade & smaller production runs.

[No Skid Marks]

There's only about six big factories in Taiwan pumping out all the different brands bikes. I think Giant were the biggest and were known as the giant factory and went fuck it lets make our own brand.

[toml]

Well, handmade = more $$$$$
Also what everyone else has been saying, I honestly could not care less, your frames are coverd by warentys and if the companies wernt confedent with there workmanship they would not use that method. They wouldent do somthing if it were to damage there reputation. I dont woriey about it.
(I cant spell don't rub it in)
Tom

[and1]

Well, handmade = more $$$$$
Also what everyone else has been saying, I honestly could not care less, your frames are coverd by warentys and if the companies wernt confedent with there workmanship they would not use that method. They wouldent do somthing if it were to damage there reputation. I dont woriey about it.
(I cant spell don't rub it in)
Tom

If they weren't confident then they would just have a warranty like rocky mountain - take our bike off road and you void warranty!

[kevpun]

The number of quality review steps in the production process play a major part in ultimate quality.

Design is obviously major too, you can mass produce a great design, but a small handmade run of a crap design is just "expensive rubbish".

The big obvious weld, large box section, industrial looking bikes appeal to some people ... its a personal taste thing!

Back on welds - the actual frame material becomes a big factor. Some materials are better welded in a clean room by a robot without the potential for contamination.

[emcgough]

Back on welds - the actual frame material becomes a big factor. Some materials are better welded in a clean room by a robot without the potential for contamination.
I agree with that. Surely a machine could weld more successfully (and like you said, in quarantine) than some guy shoving his grubby mits all over the place!

[udi]

Which one's? Cause i found out after a bit of research, that giant does specialized frame's aswell. BUT this could just be frames like the Hardrock, i couldn't find that out. I'd be guessing specialized would like to do there boutique frames.

Hey udi, did we argue bout this before? I can't remember if it was you or not.

We did, and we concluded that you were WRONG. :p

Giant does not make Specialized frames, Specialized have their own welding/manufacturing facilities.

[notb4dinner]

Generally it is just the QA that is better with handmade & smaller production runs.Hmmm... this is *pure speculation* but I would imagine it would be easier to do decent QA (automated, repeatable tests) in a factory with high throughput where you can treat a certain number of frames as disposable.

[Bodin]

There's only about six big factories in Taiwan pumping out all the different brands bikes. I think Giant were the biggest and were known as the giant factory and went fuck it lets make our own brand.

...and then there's the Merida factory that pumps out well over a million bikes a year for various companies...

[No Skid Marks]

However after saying the big Taiwaneese factories are possibly better quality I would not rule out corprate greed and the balance between name(reliability) and turnover. I believe some deliberate built in fusses are put into some big name bikes. This will open a can of worms but every big company has tipped the scales too much and made a very short lived frame. This may not be a conspiracy as much as a weight saving cost saving exersize but the smaller brands don't seem to take as much risk. Yes Orange are light but thats due to their design.

[t]

I think Giant were the biggest and were known as the giant factory and went fuck it lets make our own brand.

not exactly... giant got stuck with something like 50,000 frames when Shwinn went bankrupt the first time so they invented the Giant brand name and flogged 'em off, the bean counters obviously decided this was a plausable bussines model and so it continued.

If they weren't confident then they would just have a warranty like rocky mountain - take our bike off road and you void warranty!

you've either been seriously ill informed or went the wrong way about your waranty claim, Rocky will send you a brand new frame from Canada to anywhere in the world.


Obviously a crap weld makes a crap frame, but there are far more factors involved, tiwaneese manufacturers have more relaxed tollerances during preperation of tubes and in the "accaptable" allignment of the final product, they weigh up the cost of how often to sharpening drill bits, miters and reems against the cost of the increase in failures it will cause.

The easiest example of this you can quickly check is how gently a quick release seatpost clamp can be shut and totaly clamp the post, My woodman for example I have no quams in labeling tiwanese CRAP, no QR clamp could keep the seatpost firm i have to use a bolt up. My girlfreinds rocky by contrast can be closed with your little finger and i couldnt twist it no matter how hard i tried. obviously the relatitivly small test population of my garage is by no means thoroug but flick a few QR levers next time your at your LBS and see which companies are using sharp tools.

[bighitter]

RM will send you a new frame anywhere in the world ? Seems you live in a world of make believe 'T'


What Is Not Covered

D.You take great personal risk and shall forfeit the warranty, as outlined in the Warranty Table, when you ride in extreme ter rain as depicted in mountain bike videos. I.e. ride "trials" style courses, ride ramps, do stunts, ride on BMX tracks, ride in the city down stairs and embankments, or ride in other similar terrain. It is important to note that bent components, frames, forks, handlebars, seat posts, pedals, cranks and wheel rims are signs of accidents and/or abuse.

What Will Void Your Warranty
A.Competition racing and any commercial activity


So you can pick up their top DH bike, but you cant race it like it was made for, or you could get one of there Freeride rigs, but dont do any other riding other than flat ground.
Oh and what about there street bikes, whats the point of making them if you cant ride how they were made to be ? as outlined in the 'What is not covered section'

[floody]

Which one's? Cause i found out after a bit of research, that giant does specialized frame's aswell. BUT this could just be frames like the Hardrock, i couldn't find that out. I'd be guessing specialized would like to do there boutique frames.

Hey udi, did we argue bout this before? I can't remember if it was you or not.


We did, and we concluded that you were WRONG. :p

Giant does not make Specialized frames, Specialized have their own welding/manufacturing facilities.

Specialized frames are built in the Merida factory, but AFAIK the facilities, materials, processes and designs are all Specialized dedicated.

Giant build for a number of companies, one you will be surprised by - the majority of Treks are built by Giant, there may be a couple of Carbon ones done elsewhere (or not, not sure on CF stuff). It was always a known thing, but sealed when pics of Treks coming down the production line, being built by people in Giant uniforms, were shown in a recent industry publication.

It was funny recently when someone was talking about Trek and how "you get what you pay for, not like a Giant or one of those cheap brands"...lol

I believe Dave Weagle has been quoted saying that the best steel frames were out of China, the best aluminium out of Taiwan, and that USA made frames couldn't hope to match the quality of either.

[Derek Yates]

RM will send you a new frame anywhere in the world ? Seems you live in a world of make believe 'T'

So you can pick up their top DH bike, but you cant race it like it was made for, or you could get one of there Freeride rigs, but dont do any other riding other than flat ground.
Oh and what about there street bikes, whats the point of making them if you cant ride how they were made to be ? as outlined in the 'What is not covered section'

Ok, here's the deal. The important thing you miss here is "You take great personal risk and shall forfeit the warranty". If you huck your bike and break it how is that the manufacturers fault? If you land 50/50 on jumps, case landings and generally do the things that people do on bike that cause them to break WHY is the company responsible for the damage? You can argue that they are expensive and 'made to do' something but at the end of the day you can't hold the factory responsible for what YOU do to the bike. If they welded it wrong, fitted parts wrong, used a frame component that was damaged or faulty in construction then no worries, expect a warranty. If you go out and BREAK something being a 'hardcore mountainbiker' then that is YOUR risk and YOUR responsability. I think it's actually really honest to be up front about that (as much as people bitch and moan). Nearly all factories have the same warranty standards it's just the marketing spin the companies put on the 'warranty policy' might allow for a certain number of 'good will' or 'crash replacement' deals that are not really a strict warranty.

YOU can do ANYTHING you want on YOUR bike. Just don't expect a third party to pony up for a new one when or if things go wrong. Be grown up about this. Motorbike, 4WD and Car companies wont hand out new suspension if you go and jump them or rally them and manage to trash them, even if they are for 'offroad' use. Roll a WRX off the lot and go thrash it in the bush for a weekend and see how far the 'warranty' will look after your bent and broken machine.

You can build any product as tough as you like but some 'people' will always be able to break it. I have known riders to deliberatley go out to break things to prove how hardcore they are. I have ridden with people who have smashed frames against hard objects, consistantly cased landings and fitted totally inapropriate parts to frames and still come back for a warranty.

Anyway that's my rant.

Derek

[S.]

I believe Dave Weagle has been quoted saying that the best steel frames were out of China, the best aluminium out of Taiwan, and that USA made frames couldn't hope to match the quality of either.

I'd like to see that quote, because I have plenty of reasons to believe it's wrong. Here's a few:
1. I know he has said "The nicest factory I have ever been to was in mainland China. Strange but true." or something very close to that. I am quite sure material type was not mentioned. The only reason I can think of that you might be linking steel to china is because of the DOC frame which is in higher production than Evil's others (which is made from 853 Reynolds tubing AFAIK), and may be manufactured in China for all I know, I don't think it's made in the US anyway although I could be wrong about that.
2. The Evil Imperial (aluminium frame) is manufactured by Devinci Bikes in Canada. Given the price discrepancy between anywhere in North America and Taiwan, I find it hard to believe that he'd get them manufactured at lower quality for a higher price.
3. The Sunday factory frame (which DW designed) is manufactured in the US. Why in flaming hell would they get it made in the US if it could not live up to the standards of Taiwan or China?
4. I have seen him say "Don't think for a minute that the US is the only place that can do it right". If that's the quote you've seen/are thinking of, I believe you are extrapolating well beyond its intended meaning.

[S.]

Ok, here's the deal. The important thing you miss here is "You take great personal risk and shall forfeit the warranty". If you huck your bike and break it how is that the manufacturers fault? If you land 50/50 on jumps, case landings and generally do the things that people do on bike that cause them to break WHY is the company responsible for the damage? You can argue that they are expensive and 'made to do' something but at the end of the day you can't hold the factory responsible for what YOU do to the bike. If they welded it wrong, fitted parts wrong, used a frame component that was damaged or faulty in construction then no worries, expect a warranty. If you go out and BREAK something being a 'hardcore mountainbiker' then that is YOUR risk and YOUR responsability. I think it's actually really honest to be up front about that (as much as people bitch and moan). Nearly all factories have the same warranty standards it's just the marketing spin the companies put on the 'warranty policy' might allow for a certain number of 'good will' or 'crash replacement' deals that are not really a strict warranty.

YOU can do ANYTHING you want on YOUR bike. Just don't expect a third party to pony up for a new one when or if things go wrong. Be grown up about this. Motorbike, 4WD and Car companies wont hand out new suspension if you go and jump them or rally them and manage to trash them, even if they are for 'offroad' use. Roll a WRX off the lot and go thrash it in the bush for a weekend and see how far the 'warranty' will look after your bent and broken machine.

You can build any product as tough as you like but some 'people' will always be able to break it. I have known riders to deliberatley go out to break things to prove how hardcore they are. I have ridden with people who have smashed frames against hard objects, consistantly cased landings and fitted totally inapropriate parts to frames and still come back for a warranty.

Anyway that's my rant.

Derek

Taken from the Norco site:
"There's something particularly dreaded about your first run at a new set of jumps. Perhaps it's our universal fear of the unknown, or the struggle to find that perfect combination of timing and coordination. Or, maybe it's simply because first runs hold the most potential to case, bail, and generally brutalize ourselves and our bikes.

Unfortunately, no bike in the world can make those painful first runs go away (plus, wouldn't that sorta wreck the fun and triumph of it anyhow?) But, for the past 5 years Norco has designed and refined Super X bikes that will not only survive the disastrous first runs, but stay with you through all the silky smooth ones as well. "

"These are the bikes that are tough enough to take the big drops, handle those sketchy lines and come back looking for more."

"The 2005 line of Norco VPS bikes are designed to take real world trail abuse."


If you're not going to back up the above claims with warranty, why do you make them? Why don't you say "well we tried to make something pretty strong, hopefully it won't break. Just don't ride it hard, just to be safe."?

Here is the real world of riding: casing jumps happens, sketchy landings happen, and so do crashes. A person can only stay on a bike for so bad a landing; there is a point where a sketchy line becomes a crash. If someone crashes their bike into a tree, I would agree, that's not a warranty issue at all. However, if say a dirtjump bike snaps from dirtjumping (and yes we all know it happens, no not restricted to Norco or Giant or any other brand), then WTF is going on? Bikes should be built to take cases, 50/50s, nosedives etc into account because they are a damn frequent occurence. You could dirtjump an XC bike safely IF that stuff never happened, because done right, dirtjumping isn't abusive - it's the 10% of the time when something goes wrong that you break stuff, and 10% is a pretty high percentage to be ignoring with your design/warranty.

You know why motorbike/car manufacturers don't warranty stuff that's been damaged from riding/driving? Because they can and do use appropriate safety factors that bike manufacturers can't/won't (mainly for weight reasons I believe). Car/moto stuff doesn't break under its intended use, and believe me they don't joke around when it comes to defining intended use. You hit a pothole, they don't go "well you shouldn't have hit the pothole you stupidhead", they go "yeah that thing happens to everyone now and then, and needs to be taken into account to make sure our chassis doesn't just twist or snap" (if it matters, I'm studying automotive engineering at the moment, and they go into safety factors and whatnot in a hell of a lot of detail). If you're going to build a DH/FR/jump bike then you do have to take into account the fact that jumps do get cased/overshot/landed sideways, people do miss lines now and then and plow into stuff they would usually avoid, etc etc. Obviously everyone acknowledges this to some extent because we're not using road frames for dirtjumping and expecting them to last (even though that would be a somewhat reasonable expectation IF nothing ever went wrong).

You know why motorbike companies won't give you a new fork if you wreck the one on the front of your YZ250? Because they take into account the kind of riding that needs to be catered to, and build a fork strong enough to suit (which is easier to do with a motorbike because when they give you a 27lb fork [Marz quoted weight for their Shiver MX fork] you don't whinge about the weight, and a 100kg moto in general is rideable whereas a 40kg pushbike is not). A lot of bike design seems to be the other way around, more like "Hey let's build a 9.5lb DH frame!" rather than "Hey let's make a frame that will take a beating then see how light we can get it whilst keeping the strength high enough!". If you're going to do that, fine, but be honest about it. Maybe mention that you've done some calculations for fatigue life (you guys do actually do that stuff right?) and that bikes simply won't last forever, that they're designed to be light enough to be rideable for their intended purpose and tough enough to last a couple of years of hard riding. A lot of riders, as you know, simply aren't aware of that, and telling them that your bikes will handle anything is
a) a lie
b) going to cause them, reasonably or not, to scream warranty at you when they break stuff that they bought under the impression that it was going to hold up (yes you know who I'm thinking of Derek ;))

This sort of thing should be made obvious to consumers. A LOT of people are still under the impression that they CAN buy a bike that WILL NOT break no matter what they do to it. Taken from Hcor.net:

sorry for the tangent here, but dont let the marketing BS out there kid you
Everyone repeat after me:
VIRTUALLY EVERY FRAME, STEEL, ALUMINUM, ETC HAS A FATIGUE LIFE. IT WILL BREAK OVER TIME.
Just because a material CAN have an infinite fatigue life, does not mean that if you use it to build something, it WILL have an infinite fatigue life. The trick to building bikes with an infinite fatigue life is using enough of the material in question. You can buid a bike out of steel, but if you dont use enough of it, guess what, you will have a fininte fatigue life. In many cases, prepoerly designed aluminum frames have LONGER fatigue lives than some of their steel counterparts.
I know it sounds crazy, but anyone who has studied structural engineering will tell you its 100% the truth.
In order to build an infinite fatigue life hardtail frame for aggressive use, I calculated a few years back that it would require roughly 9.5-10.5 lbs of steel. Whos going to ride a beast like that!
dw

How many bike manufacturers mention that next to "OUR FRAME IS TEH TUFFEST!!!!1"?

(Better question: how many bike manufacturers actually know that?)

[S.]

Obviously a crap weld makes a crap frame, but there are far more factors involved, tiwaneese manufacturers have more relaxed tollerances during preperation of tubes and in the "accaptable" allignment of the final product, they weigh up the cost of how often to sharpening drill bits, miters and reems against the cost of the increase in failures it will cause.

The easiest example of this you can quickly check is how gently a quick release seatpost clamp can be shut and totaly clamp the post, My woodman for example I have no quams in labeling tiwanese CRAP, no QR clamp could keep the seatpost firm i have to use a bolt up. My girlfreinds rocky by contrast can be closed with your little finger and i couldnt twist it no matter how hard i tried. obviously the relatitivly small test population of my garage is by no means thoroug but flick a few QR levers next time your at your LBS and see which companies are using sharp tools.

Er, sharp tools would cut more and thus be a looser fit, in theory. No offence but I think you're making a mountain out of a molehill there. Until I see any kind of substantive evidence that Taiwanese factories cheap out on their tools and tolerances (do you have any figures whatsoever to back that up?), I'm not inclined to believe it at all.

[gumbyhead]

As usual Steve unleashes the fury, and all the kiddies run away with their tails between their legs....

[Bodin]

Love your work, S.

Like you, I too believe that any frame directed at the DJ market must take in to account the fact the DJ involves casing occasionally. How are you supposed to learn if you're never allowed to case? You just wouldn't be able to start in the first place...

I'm sympathetic to manufacturers/suppliers who get dickheads trying to claim replacements on things that they've deliberately broken, but to have advertising of the sort that you've posted above, there has to be the support behind it.

[S.]

Love your work, S.

Like you, I too believe that any frame directed at the DJ market must take in to account the fact the DJ involves casing occasionally. How are you supposed to learn if you're never allowed to case? You just wouldn't be able to start in the first place...

I'm sympathetic to manufacturers/suppliers who get dickheads trying to claim replacements on things that they've deliberately broken, but to have advertising of the sort that you've posted above, there has to be the support behind it.

Ditto about the deliberate shit, Planet X got badly burned by that stuff back when they had a 2-year no-questions-asked warranty/replacement guarantee. If manufacturers just said "Look, it should be able to take pretty much anything you can throw at it and survive yourself, for a year or two, so we'll provide a 1-year warranty" I'd be more than happy with it, but the way they carry on, misleading the uneducated public who simply CAN'T know any better, about their bikes being tough enough to cop a hammering then turning around and saying "Hey, you abused it! No warranty!" really gets to me.

Not that Norco is particularly bad, but I like to pick on Derek mainly because he's here :D

[manny24]

Er, sharp tools would cut more and thus be a looser fit, in theory. No offence but I think you're making a mountain out of a molehill there. Until I see any kind of substantive evidence that Taiwanese factories cheap out on their tools and tolerances (do you have any figures whatsoever to back that up?), I'm not inclined to believe it at all.

ease up tiger!! im more with t. here- the evidence is in every bike shop.
take a look at a high end frame from a 'hand made' frame, so to speak, and compare it to a cheaper one. ive got a machineing background too, like a few of us here. the first example to come to my mind are the craftworks- look at the cnc'ed parts of the frame. great frame design etc etc, but to keep it to a good price the overall quality if reduced too.

[S.]

ease up tiger!! im more with t. here- the evidence is in every bike shop.
take a look at a high end frame from a 'hand made' frame, so to speak, and compare it to a cheaper one. ive got a machineing background too, like a few of us here. the first example to come to my mind are the craftworks- look at the cnc'ed parts of the frame. great frame design etc etc, but to keep it to a good price the overall quality if reduced too.

Could you be more specific please? I would agree that frames made in Taiwan are often of a lower class of construction, but by that I mean the designer specs cheaper-to-make parts rather than expensive forgings/machinings that are often found on boutique bikes. I am yet to see any evidence that the quality of machining, welds or tube extrusion is lower in Taiwan (based purely on it being from Taiwan anyway, compare apples to apples here). The machined bits on my SGS are very nicely done IMO, clean and smooth. The welds are as good as I see on other people's M1s and whatnot. The tube extrusion and mitring are harder (impossible?) to compare (at least without cutting the frame up, unless anyone else knows how it could be done?), but I don't have any reason to believe that it's any worse than what anyone elsewhere does.

[udi]

can't we all just be friends and pay out rocky mountain's warranty?

[S.]

What warranty would that be?






:p

[toodles]

ease up tiger!! im more with t. here- the evidence is in every bike shop.
take a look at a high end frame from a 'hand made' frame, so to speak, and compare it to a cheaper one. ive got a machineing background too, like a few of us here. the first example to come to my mind are the craftworks- look at the cnc'ed parts of the frame. great frame design etc etc, but to keep it to a good price the overall quality if reduced too.

Hmmm... I've seen Intense frames that weren't aligned straight out of the box. Beautiful machining, nice paintwork, great welds but not aligned. US-made vs. Taiwanese made, production line vs. small batch specialist manufacturer - whatever - companies make mistakes. Some make more than others, some make so few that they're never heard of. What matters IMO is how companies react to that in terms of remedying the fault in future production batches and looking after customers with faulty or inferior run items.

There's companies I'll never buy from again after some disgusting reactions to their faulty products. Others are on my shopping list after examples of superb customer service and reaction to "unintentional, client reported, field-based R&D".

Buy from the guys who look after you after they've got your money, not the one who employs the more fashionable welder.

[toodles]

can't we all just be friends and pay out rocky mountain's warranty?

What warranty would that be?

*boom, boom, tish*

Good call. I was going to say something about the Easter Bunny, Santa Claus and the RM warranty guy walking into a bar but S. got in first.

[John U]

lets talk real world for a minute

i used to be of the school who cares were the frame is made. how much of a difference can there be?

my first 2 bikes were x-country hardtails from taiwan, one mid range, and one high end. they got general xc use. i didn't give them a caining. both frames cracked and both frames were replaced.

i bought a rocky mountain last year. my girlfriend knocked it off the roofrack (both wheels on if that makes a difference) at low speed. i expected the bike to be totalled or at least bent. there was no problem with the frame. it was straight and i am still riding it today.

my story. i won't be going back to made in taiwan for a while. i will see how the high end taiwanwese replacement goes berfore i go back there but i am not expecting great things.

[cam-o]

. my girlfriend knocked it off the roofrack (both wheels on if that makes a difference) at low speed. i expected the bike to be totalled or at least bent. there was no problem with the frame. it was straight and i am still riding it today.

Understand where you are trying to go John however I don't think the example is relevant.
The Taiwanese frames cracked after a period of riding, i.e there were subjected to repeated stresses over a period of time which causes fatigue. The RM example is a single hit. The roof racks would have acted as the fuse and the frame was probably not subjected to a large amount of stress. I have seen road bikes survive the same thing and there is no way they would survive an extended period of XC riding.

[ona rampage]

John U; I think that you will find a number of farkiners have had failed RMs however....
(not to say that all manufacturers don't fail, but some seem to more then others).

[toodles]

John U; I think that you will find a number of farkiners have had failed RMs however....
(not to say that all manufacturers don't fail, but some seem to more then others).

I think that's not the point here. Indeed, most RM hardtails I've seen were very nicely built. What's being said is that RM gives a 6 month warranty on their frames, and that warranty is voided by riding the bike off-road. Yep, even their mountain bikes.

Sure they might not actually refuse warranty on that basis very often but just having it in their warranty policy is enough to put me off buying one of their bikes.

[crabapple hitz]

I don't agree with the whole "things made in asia are crap" mentality we have in Australia. I would much rather trust a weld done by a guy in a factory in Taiwan than a guy in an American factory. Think about it, if you were a Taiwanese factory worker and you got busted slacking off and doing dodgy welds you would be fired on the spot and replaced by one of the other several thousand people banging down the factory door for a job.
In the states you are protected by unions so if your feeling slack you can be, or if you hate your job you can not care.
Asian people take a lot of pride in there work and the factories employ the best of the best because you have to be good with that much competition.
It would probably cost the bike companies a lot more to replace a broken frame than doing it right in the first place anyway.

[cam-o]

I think this topic tends to oversimplify why people buy the expensive designer bikes. Sure longevitiy is a factor but at the end on the day any bike will break. Name a brand and I reckon I can give you the name of someone who has busted one. There's more to it than that. As Toodles said support is a big thing too.

Another is design. A bike is a very complex thing, and generally the pricey version will have those subtle differences that make them such a great ride whereas the cheaper version will be close, but not quite there.
Example: I own a Da Bomb Cherry Bomb and it's a great thing. About a month ago I rode it head to head with a Turner 5 Spot around Sparrow Hill.
To the untrained eye they are pretty similar. Even on paper they don't seem hugely different, a few mm of top tube, a degree of seat/head tube. The Ride? Chalk and cheese. While the DaBomb is a good thing, the Turner is a f@cking brilliant thing. Climbed better, turned better, descended better, did everything better. That to me is why you buy the designer jobs. They spend the time and have the experience to make those tiny little changes that make a huge difference.

[Bodin]

I don't agree with the whole "things made in asia are crap" mentality we have in Australia. I would much rather trust a weld done by a guy in a factory in Taiwan than a guy in an American factory. Think about it, if you were a Taiwanese factory worker and you got busted slacking off and doing dodgy welds you would be fired on the spot and replaced by one of the other several thousand people banging down the factory door for a job.
In the states you are protected by unions so if your feeling slack you can be, or if you hate your job you can not care.
Asian people take a lot of pride in there work and the factories employ the best of the best because you have to be good with that much competition.
It would probably cost the bike companies a lot more to replace a broken frame than doing it right in the first place anyway.

I see what you're getting at and I kinda agree with you in theory, but everything you've written above is based around your assumptions on the conditions in the various factories around the world.

Others in this thread have been very specific about what they do and don't know and have raised examples to support what they're saying. How much do you actually know about what it takes for a Taiwanese or American factory worker to get sacked? What experience are your opinions based on?

I'm only asking because I've learnt a lot from this thread and I'm really not sure that what you've posted has actually contributed anything...

[Derek Yates]

Taken from the Norco site:
"There's something particularly dreaded about your first run at a new set of jumps. Perhaps it's our universal fear of the unknown, or the struggle to find that perfect combination of timing and coordination. Or, maybe it's simply because first runs hold the most potential to case, bail, and generally brutalize ourselves and our bikes.

Unfortunately, no bike in the world can make those painful first runs go away (plus, wouldn't that sorta wreck the fun and triumph of it anyhow?) But, for the past 5 years Norco has designed and refined Super X bikes that will not only survive the disastrous first runs, but stay with you through all the silky smooth ones as well. "

"These are the bikes that are tough enough to take the big drops, handle those sketchy lines and come back looking for more."

"The 2005 line of Norco VPS bikes are designed to take real world trail abuse."

<CHOP>

How many bike manufacturers mention that next to "OUR FRAME IS TEH TUFFEST!!!!1"?

(Better question: how many bike manufacturers actually know that?)

Ok........ damn..... some days I wish I kept my mouth shut BUT there are a lot of good points in what you said.

Like you have said (or quoted) the main problem is peoples expectations VS reality. Marketing helps to sell bikes and no one is going to market saying yeah, we think it's tough but maybe it'll break someday.... EVERYONE is telling the public that the bikes they make this year are tougher, lighter,faster and more fantabulous. That's the nature of marketing in the western world. Look at the reality and the 20/20 hindsight of the previous seasons product and you can see all the areas that product A didn't live up to marketing hype B. I'd LOVE the market to accept limitations of companies products and warranties BUT then this thread is the perfect example. People SLAM the guy who's honest and rush off to the guy who offers the 'Lifetime' warranty option because it's 'better' (ever read the fine print?). Spend enough money on marketing and advertising and you get the sales. I won't go into the right and wrongs of this because I'm not going to change the world today.

Ok here's my defense of Marketing. From the guy who wrote it's point of view it's true. He'll never look after the warranty. He'll never talk to the guy with the busted bike and the pained look on his face when he's told he's got to buy a new one. The other thing is that we DO test bikes and yes in the real word. The Norco guys spend a lot of time testing bikes on the North Shore, Whistler and all over Canada. That is testing that gives them the confidence to step up and make claims about the bikes. THEY did what they write about and didn't break them. That's not to say that NO ONE ever will break them. I don't think ANYONE would claim that bike X can handle anything the rider can dish out forever. How many people break bikes on the FIRST 50/50? How many people break bikes on the second big flat landing. Not many. It's that grey area where a bike has seen a season of DH, jumping, gaps, harsh landings, assorted big and small crashes, shuttle runs, cartwheeling down the hill, falling over and a million other stresses that can't be tested for in a scentific way. Everyone wants the bike lighter and better next year. So each year the feedback from riders, shops, distubutors and staff all contribute to make a bike better for the next year. That still doesn't make the bike indestuctible. It doesn't make the bike no good for riding either. It's just a product with limitations that you need to respect. That doesn't mean you shouldn't ride it. It doesn't mean you shouldn't ride it hard. It DOES mean that you have to understand there IS a point where it will fail and that's not the fault of the manufacturer. That's the choice you have to make when you choose to buy something. Bikes can't be rated on a scale for consumers to make educated guesses about. People in the know can advise on a purchase but there is no fixed point where product A will fail. I can personally vouch for the companies products from years of riding the bikes and pushing the limits. I have never had a Norco fail. That being said I wouldn't claim they NEVER break.

I got a call from a kid a week or so ago wanting to know 'How much can an A-line take for extreme riding'. How do you answer that? It indicates a level of understanding about the product that screams that they need to learn A LOT more about what they are buying before they part with any cash. Of course the bike shop is going to see it differently when someone starts showing real interest in a bike and flashing some $$ around.

Margin for error is another tough one. Like you pointed out a moto or car has a massive margin for error built in. Bikes have a MUCH tighter margin. People want LIGHT bikes. That means less material. You can take 2 products and beef one up and make one lighter. On a machine the light option might be 1/2 as strong as the heavy. In real life a light smooth rider could make the light product last 2 years. The rough, harsh rider could break the heavy option in 3 weeks. You can't test for that. Mountainbiking is too varied. No one can work out how to scientificly define something as simple as XC or DH to even start to work out where Dirt Jump becomes Street or Freeride becomes Hucking. If performed 100% sucessfully most of those riding styles are not abuse. As soon you have a bail, crash, hash landing they whole thing changes. How can you possibly design around that when your consumer will likely push whatever you make well beyond what you had in mind when you drew it up? If an XC course has a small drop off in it does that mean the guys with the light forks have to get off and walk? If a DH course has a big gap jump in it does that mean every fork should take the landing EVERY time regardless of the rider? If it breaks who's fault is it? In 3 months/ 6 months/ 24 months? What is the reasonable life expectancy? No one can answer these questions except with an 'it depends....' answer. How much margin for error have you got to play with? Some companies err on the 'stong' side others on the 'light' side others just rely on marketing and high prices to sell expectations. At the end of the day I think 90% of riders buy bikes on the strength of marketing (websites, magazines, catalogues, team riders, colours, style) than on almost any other factor. 99% of riders will tell you the opposite but that's marketing working it's magic.

Fatigue life. Every frame has one. Maybe it's 100,000 or 1 million cycles on a testing machine. What's the bet a big, harsh, rough begginer will manage to break it before then in the real world? On the flip side the little, smooth, Elite rider might NEVER break it. Where do you draw the line? Is a life expectancy of 1 season of racing what you want, 2 years, 5 years, Life? What's real? Everyone has different expectations.

Anyway something to think about.

-Derek

[John U]

the high end taiwanese frame had less than 1000k's on it when it cracked. the fatigue issues should not come into play until well after that. it's not like i am a heavy bloke. maybe the point is that the rocky that i bought was made from high quality material (easton aluminium) and that is probably why it stayed straight. i geuss it is a combinmation of a heap of things, not just where the bike was made (which has probably been said above). i would have shyed away from the rocky if it had a 6 month warranty but if the frame lasts longer in the end i will be happy

[floody]

I'd like to see that quote, because I have plenty of reasons to believe it's wrong.

To be honest, I'm not 100% certain where I saw it. NOTE that I said "I BELIEVE" for this very reason.
IIRC, it was along the lines of "nicest aluminium welding in Taiwan, nicest steel in mainland china". But, if I'm wrong, I'm wrong.

I'm not sure I agree anyway, IMO the best steel, materials and build quality, has always been Japan- Tange and a few manufacturing houses.
Probably an inherent mistrust of pommy steel, from owning a Ford Escort, but anyway...

[Oddjob]

The whole debate about frames made in country x being better than those made in country y sounds like nationalistic rubbish to me, so I'm not getting involved in that debate.

This topic has been brought to my attention quite a few times, so I decided to see what you all thought. It may seem like a stupid question, but what's the difference in the way the top end frames are manufactured, but more specifically, how are (for example) Orange frames manufactured to a higher quality? I hear the claim too often about Orange (again, just an example) being "hand made in the UK", as evidence that they are superior to other brands.

Are these types of claims accurate, or just an attempt to glorify their favourite brand?


Referencing the initial question though. Boutique or top end frames are often manufactured in a way that makes less compromises for costs. So for example the manufacturer will use expensive materials that are not necessarily mass production friendly or are just expensive. Common examples are carbon fibre or scandium alloy. Further, the design of the bike might require not only more materials but require the material to be handled in a special manner, and requiring more expertise or machinery. An example is the mocoque design of Oranges, or hydroformed aluminium, solid billet gussets etc. Finally there is the amount of time and care that is put into putting together the frame, a manufacturer that is geared toward mass production will presumably spend a lot less time on a frame than a manufacturer with a quality focus.

So to sum it up, you get what you pay for. The warranty also has some reflection on the confidence of the manufacturer in their product, but at the end of the day the world's best warranty is not going to make up for a crap frame.

[crabapple hitz]

I see what you're getting at and I kinda agree with you in theory, but everything you've written above is based around your assumptions on the conditions in the various factories around the world.

Others in this thread have been very specific about what they do and don't know and have raised examples to support what they're saying. How much do you actually know about what it takes for a Taiwanese or American factory worker to get sacked? What experience are your opinions based on?

I'm only asking because I've learnt a lot from this thread and I'm really not sure that what you've posted has actually contributed anything...


50% of my post was my opinion take it or leave it it's up to you.

I am an industrial designer by trade and worked for a refrigeration company a few years ago. Most of our parts were manufactured out of asia and we frequented the factories a lot. The conditions in some were attrocious and others were really good but the workers get paid nothing and have absolutely no rights. They are completely disposable to the factories.
I have no idea if this is the case with bike factorys but the reason stuff out of asia is cheap is because the labour is cheap. Saying this the reason the Labour is cheap is because of the amount of people willing to do a certain job is huge. So once you are in a job you do your best to keep it or someone else will gladly take your place. These people work haaaard.
In the last ten years asian manufacturers have really upped there game in the quality department and are easily on par or better than any western country. China even made it a national initiative to make better quality products with "Proudly made in China" instead of "made in China".

[bradh]

Boutique or top end frames are often manufactured in a way that makes less compromises for costs. So for example the manufacturer will use expensive materials that are not necessarily mass production friendly or are just expensive. Common examples are carbon fibre or scandium alloy. Further, the design of the bike might require not only more materials but require the material to be handled in a special manner, and requiring more expertise or machinery.
I think your argument regarding materials holds true for top-end frames from large manufacturers, but not in regard to boutique makers. The extensive (and expensive) tooling, machinery, etc., that is required to deal with complex materials is more likely to be the reserve of the larger companies, purely due to the economies of scale. For example, there's not much out there in the way of boutique carbon frames, but many of the larger companies now have one or more carbon frame(s) in their lineup. The same goes for components: while Sram, FSA, etc. (and reputedly soon Shimano) offer carbon kit, smaller manufacturers are restricted to steel and alloys (which of course they use very well, but that's extraneous to my point).

[Bodin]

50% of my post was my opinion take it or leave it it's up to you.

I am an industrial designer by trade and worked for a refrigeration company a few years ago. Most of our parts were manufactured out of asia and we frequented the factories a lot. The conditions in some were attrocious and others were really good but the workers get paid nothing and have absolutely no rights. They are completely disposable to the factories.
I have no idea if this is the case with bike factorys but the reason stuff out of asia is cheap is because the labour is cheap. Saying this the reason the Labour is cheap is because of the amount of people willing to do a certain job is huge. So once you are in a job you do your best to keep it or someone else will gladly take your place. These people work haaaard.
In the last ten years asian manufacturers have really upped there game in the quality department and are easily on par or better than any western country. China even made it a national initiative to make better quality products with "Proudly made in China" instead of "made in China".


Cool. Thanks to your informative answer, I've now learnt even more.:cool:

[No Skid Marks]

Pardon me, I got bored and didn't read page two so sorry if this is out of context or already mentioned.
The way I see it is Taiwan has the best technoligy and skill overall as proven by all boutique brands sorcing some frame parts from there(maybee cost related), the thing is in Taiwan you can pay whatever price you like for the equivallent quallity so if you want a cheapish frame eg Craftworks, you can get it made. Craftworks is just one example where the design and quality may be good but the finnish is poorish. I also believe the Taiwaneese in general have no spunk and are not as in touch with good designs, but they can make it easy to see if it works. Just look at any pics of some of the crazy stuff seen at the Tapai(spelling) show. This is a gross genralization but it's bassed on knowledge I've gained myself in the flesh not from a magazine.

[S.]

Ok........ damn..... some days I wish I kept my mouth shut... blah

But who IS the guy who is honest? Virtually nobody mentions this kind of thing along with their marketing spiel, or even endeavours to educate the general riding public. Riders generally believe something along the lines of:
Road bikes are fine to ride on the road
XC bikes are fine to ride on dirt trails that aren't overly harsh, don't involve big jumps/gaps (this is also designed into the geometry, people simply won't do big drops/jumps on XC bikes because they're so awkward doing it). Road bikes won't handle this.
"Trail/all-mountain" bikes are made for riding up and down the hill and having fun both ways in ways that is likely to break a purebred XC racebike. Compare Specialized's Enduro series to their Epic series, or the Norco Fluids to the EXCs... you get the idea. Despite the likelihood for a grey area here, it seems (to me anyway, your warranty department might disagree) that people understand this one just fine because bike companies try to make it clear what their differences are in order that their target markets don't overlap too much.
Dirtjump bikes are designed for dirtjumping. People jump, case and overshoot some fucking big jumps nowadays, and there are plenty of heavy, rough riders doing it. Want to make a lightweight dirtjump bike? Mention that your heavier alternative is stronger, even if indirectly. People pick up on that stuff.
DH/FR bikes are *those* bikes that people generally expect to be able to hammer the crap out of, jump, drop, land sideways, plow into rocks, and yes crash now and then. You want to make your bike lighter? Mention that it's designed first and foremost as a racebike and that huckers should look elsewhere. Otherwise, don't be surprised when people said "Well I came up a foot short on a 25ft double, but that's what DH/FR riding is, isn't it?"

Hell, even just put a spiel on your website or something that mentions the levels of testing you do, and what your reasonable life expectancy for a bike is, and the tradeoffs in doing so. A generally good example of this is Turner; they tell you what the bike is for and build it to suit. Superlight XC racer (Nitrous I think)? They make that damn clear, and slap a 165lb rider weight limit on it to make it even more obvious. It'd be pretty hard to break something like that then honestly claim that you didn't know it wasn't designed for that 20ft double direct to rock garden to drop to off camber roots. I'm not going to get into the nitty gritty of it, but the stories I've heard about Turner's warranty and general honesty have been exceptionally impressive. It just shows that people appreciate it IMO.

Basically the problem boils down to this:
1. Company says bike can handle something without mentioning the associated tradeoffs between weight and strength and whatnot (except sometimes, very vaguely, in the fine print)
2. Customer sees marketing spiel, believes it (as they're entitled to), buys bike
3. Customer rides bike in way depicted by marketers, expecting it to hold up
4. Bike breaks
5. "WARRANTAAAAAAH!"
6. "Fuggoff cahn, you abused it. DIDN'T YOU KNOW THAT BIKES BREAK WHEN YOU RIDE THEM HARD?"
7. "But hang on... you said it could be ridden hard!"
8. "Yeah, well, um.... not THAT hard."
9. *internet forum* "COMPANY X R TEH SUCK ALL THEIR BIEKS BRAKE AND TEHY DONT WARENTY THEM DOES NE1 ELSE LIEK ANGELENA JOLIE"

And I ask you, why is the marketer's reality different from that of the warranty department? If it is, it shouldn't be. Yes you're trying to sell bikes, however your reputation WILL SUFFER if people think you're being underhanded about how you portray the strength of your bikes as compared to how you back it up after sale (either through warranty policy or warranty practice). Again, contrast the reputations that Turner and RM have gained for themselves. One brand has people going "Their warranty sucks and they don't back up their bikes" because of their 6 month warranty period and "void if ridden off-road" disclaimer; the other has people going "Yeah Turner said that a lot of those shock links broke and is happy to replace them, man that's good backup." It's not hard to see which one attracts more customers, particularly in the long run.


In my mind the biggest problem is that bike companies expect people to believe their marketing up till the point that they buy the bike, and from that point onwards somehow change their minds and understand that the marketing is deliberately misleading and that the bike WILL break if you go berserk on it. = WTF? Make up your damn mind or make it damn clear.


The following errors occurred when this message was submitted:
The text that you have entered is too long (10511 characters). Please shorten it to 10000 characters long.
haha ^

[floody]

6. "Fuggoff cahn, you abused it. DIDN'T YOU KNOW THAT BIKES BREAK WHEN YOU RIDE THEM HARD?"


Bikes fall over if you don't go fast?

[S.]

It's not my fault, I got a hair on me knob.

[and1]

9. *internet forum* "COMPANY X R TEH SUCK ALL THEIR BIEKS BRAKE AND TEHY DONT WARENTY THEM DOES NE1 ELSE LIEK ANGELENA JOLIE"


SHE'S GOT BIG LIPS!

[Rik]

Er, sharp tools would cut more and thus be a looser fit, in theorySharp tools = cleaner, more accurate cut. A blunt tool will chatter and make a mess of things. Think of cutting flesh with a scalpel, then with a bread knife. One will slice, the other will hack :eek:

[Oddjob]

I think your argument regarding materials holds true for top-end frames from large manufacturers, but not in regard to boutique makers. The extensive (and expensive) tooling, machinery, etc., that is required to deal with complex materials is more likely to be the reserve of the larger companies, purely due to the economies of scale. For example, there's not much out there in the way of boutique carbon frames, but many of the larger companies now have one or more carbon frame(s) in their lineup. The same goes for components: while Sram, FSA, etc. (and reputedly soon Shimano) offer carbon kit, smaller manufacturers are restricted to steel and alloys (which of course they use very well, but that's extraneous to my point).

http://www.bcdracing.com/

[Derek Yates]

But who IS the guy who is honest?
The following errors occurred when this message was submitted:
The text that you have entered is too long (10511 characters). Please shorten it to 10000 characters long.
haha ^

That's the question. Who is honest about warranty. I think your perpective on the warranty (ie rider vs bike company vs manufacturer) changes your perpective on where honesty issues lie. From my perpective a LOT of riders are not honest about what they did to a bike to break it. Bike companies probably could be more upfront about bike capabilitites and warranties also. It's something I'll take up with Norco and work on in the future.

I think your expectations for the styles of riding you posted is a broad generalisation but ignores the fact that riders often use bikes outside of the design specs. Bikes like VT's and Fluids were up at Buller last year on the DH trails. We hear about riders bending both the steel steerer and flaring CroMo headtubes on DJ frames and then claiming they were 'dirt jumping' when the bike 'just bent'. To me that's crash damage or a 50/50 landing and not warranty. How tough do you have to make 'Dirt Jump' products? It might be built strong but no one claims that something will never break. You can build something strong for a certain use but like you have posted the DJ frame that is unbreakable is a 10lbs CroMo monster. You then need to bolt on extra heavy duty parts and end up with something unrideable. Anything else is a compromise between strength and weight.

Your examples are pretty black and white also. What if your XC rider (under the weight limit) rides a drop off regularly on his XC loop. It might only be a small 2ft to rough/flat drop but the guy rides it regularly and it's just part of his XC ride. After 6-12 months the dropout cracks. Is that the rider pushing the limits? Is the bike faulty? Is that just a limitation of the design? Is the rider just too rough? Should an XC bike take anything that could possibly throw at it? In XC races in the past I've done 3ft drops to flat at speed to take a faster line. I would expect that if I did that a lot the bike would probably fail. But would the next guy? It's a 'mountain bike' after all, the guy was just riding on a mountain.

If you are out trail riding your 'All Mountain' dual sus bike in the bush and you spot some wooden 'shore' stuff or a nice log ride is it ok to ride it? The bike is sold as a 'do it all' bike so surely it's ok right? What if the structure/log ends in a 4ft drop to a trannie? Is that ok? What if the rider cases the landing and bends/breaks something?

If you are doing a DH run and see a big floating booster that will gap you 30ft over a tech section who's fault is it if you crash the landing and bike and rider end up another 20ft down the hill? Surely that's just part of DH riding right? The bike should cop anything you throw at it right? If the fork or frame fails 2 weeks later from stress caused by that crash, who's fault is it then?

You have a 'Freeride bike' it's built tough, got lot's of travel and we say it's 'built for the North Shore'. Does that mean you can huck to flat every day and it'll come back for more? Does that mean if you bail off a big stunt that the bike should handle any fall? Should a 'freeride' bike be able to drop off 40ft drops to trannies all day, every day, forever? Should you be able to pull off anything you see a pro rider do in a Video? Where does personal responsability come into it? How would you warranty that bike? I've ridden the North Shore and never broken a thing. I'm sure there are many others who break stuff regularly simply because they go bigger and harder than me.

A warranty policy can't cover EVERY possible riding posiblity for every rider weight, rider style, type of bike, model of bike, or possibility. To make bike riding a black and white thing and claim that bike companies are being dishonest because they can't foresee everything that a rider could ever do on a bike is over simplifing the issue. Then you can start adding the complex issue of the bike as a 'sum of it's parts' and you are opening a new can of worms as one designer didn't make the bike from scratch, but from 10-20 companies per bike from different parts of the world, with different quality control, parts design and expectations of use. It's VERY complicated to inform every rider of the exact cababilities of any one bike. Complicated is different from dishonest.

Cheers,

Derek @ Norco/Sportz.Au

[crabapple hitz]

Cool. Thanks to your informative answer, I've now learnt even more.:cool:

Me too, informative thread. I'm thinking about printing it out as novel for my next holiday.:D

[bradh]

http://www.bcdracing.com/
Don't worry, I hadn't forgotten about BCD. That's why I said "there's not much out there in the way of boutique carbon frames"...

[scratchy]

OK, I wish I'd jumped in earlier and stopped some mis-imformation. Please read this as someone who has actually lived in Taiwan, Worked in the industry in Taiwan and has visited a lot of factories.

Taiwan makes soo much high end stuff it would blow your mind. If someone says to me that Taiwan is rubbish, it's a clear indication they have no idea what they are talking about.

None of you seem to appreciate Taiwans situation
They have had a massive industry, lots of different factories catering for all levels. This means a massive pool of workers each one welding thousands of frames a year. With such a large skill base, the cream rises to the top, begineers, shitty welders work on the cheap bikes. Welders with years of experience and 10,000's of frames under their belt get paid more and work on the higher end bikes. How can a welder in the UK with maybe 300 frames welded in their time compete with that?
To compound the situation further, the cheap stuff is going to China. This means that a new labour pool is being used. The welding industry in Taiwan is in recession. The job situation isn't good. So factories can get rid of their less experienced/bad welders.


I've toured the Giant Factory just out of Tai Chung and seen rows of Specialized frames there. I've visited other factories and seen rows of Specialized frames there. When I visited Specialized didn't have their own factory, which is a smart move IMHO.

With so many factories catering for so many levels, sometimes a shitty factory can make a shitty frame for a company who then flogs the bike off as something it's not. There was a place for shitty factories but most have moved to China. You break the frame and blame Taiwan? Thas BS. Taiwan is THE place in the world for high end frames. But there are reasons you would manufacture in the US,UK,Europe: ie.

-It's a high end frame so you can absorb the increased cost.
-You have low production runs.
-You haven't got the frame 100% dialed and want to tweak it halfway through runs.
-You want to have a tighter reign on the Quality Control.

Realistically a lot of us on the forum are looking at high end frames. These are often such small production runs that the other forces (customs, freight time etc. ) come into play. A non-taiwanese frame doesn't mean a better welded frame, but it does mean that most companies will be able to monitor the production better (unless they have an office in Taiwan) so they may be able to address quality control issues quicker and more effectively.

Oh and Hand Made is just marketing hype.

[No Skid Marks]

I'm guessing you didn't read my posts Scratchey,if so argue them if I'm wrong. Otherwise tone it down a touch please.

[scratchy]

I'm guessing you didn't read my posts Scratchey,if so argue them if I'm wrong. Otherwise tone it down a touch please.

Er, Yup, yer wrong.

I'm talking about the actual manufacturing, the "Spunk" you talk about that is more a function of the design and specified finish by the customer. You can get some of the nicest finishes, you just have to pay for them and specify what you want. In terms of manufacturing you can't blame the factory for the product looks poorly designed, that wasn't the factories role, that's the customer DMR, Norco, Kona, Specialized, DaBomb, Surley, Jamis etc. etc.

[spinner]

OK, I wish I'd jumped in earlier and stopped some mis-imformation.......etc

My thoughts exactly , Scratchy.

*applauds*

EDIT:
I'm referring to Scratchys entire post , not just the bit quoted above.

[els]

Its so all you boys can have "wank factor". My BFs always goin on bout his bike bein hand made in the US. but wat makes that welder better than a taiwanese welder? - els

[donthucktoflat]

Hand made would refer to the welding process.

Many boutique frames are hand welded, but my experience with this is that it is no better than a machine welded frame, and in some cases even inferior. The welds are always messier when hand welded, and the only technical advantage I can think of is that any mistakes made can be fixed while welding.

I know specialized frames are robot-welded, and the welds are a lot neater, and I can't think of many that have failed, probably one of the manufacturers that you hardly ever see a broken frame from.

I'm sure for both cases there are good and bad examples, breakages would have a lot to do with design, and heat-treating - perhaps those two moreso than the welding.
i was about the say the same thing. machine welds are almost (i only say almost cos there are some people wo are pretty handy with a torch) always straighter and neater.. besides, if there IS a mistake, it can be fixed by hand later! winner!

[S.]

*counter-riposte* etc


I agree absolutely with what you say about the lines being blurred. That's where the concept of either a safety factor or full and proper information comes in. Personally I don't see the approach of a company that says "This bike will not handle heavy abuse. It's an XC race bike only." or whatever as any kind of marketing setback, in fact some companies (again, good example is Turner, for anyone who ever reads MTBR) trade on the basis of frank honesty and the fact that they will openly admit that some of their bikes just will not handle certain kinds of riding. I don't think any bike company is under the delusion that their (for example) "all-mountain" bikes should be talked up endlessly in terms of strength (remember Giant's early ads about the AC? "If you hear something snap... it won't be the bike" - ironically that was refuted pretty thoroughly when every man and his dog proceeded to break them). However, it's also pretty obvious that when someone is DHing their Fluid or VT that they either accept the likely consequences (not likely), or they are misinformed (presumably by the marketing spiel they were fed to get them to buy the bike) about what the bike is intended for and what it can handle. Whose fault is that? You can't seriously expect everyone to look beyond what they're told about their bike via magazines/ads/catalogs etc, most of them are likely to say "oh ok, so it's designed for a bit of everything... well I might take it to Buller for a couple of days, I don't ride hard anyway".

I really think it wouldn't hurt you guys to have a completely dead-honest appraisal of what your bikes are designed for, and where their limits lie. Keep it separate from your marketing spiels (yeah it would sound pretty retarded to say "Check out our new 250! It can handle anything you throw at it, unless you ride really hard in which case NO WARRANTY FOR YOU.". But yeah really, if you want customers to be 100% honest with you, how about starting the ball rolling by being clear, open and frank from your own perspective? Cannondale have a good disclaimer on their site, check http://gb.cannondale.com/bikes/tech/safety.html and scroll down to the "freeriding" bit. Plain English, and it makes the above points pretty clear IMO. It kind of pains me that we have to argue about this kind of thing, because when we're talking critical differences between potentially harmful, catastrophic failure, and having a bike that's a couple of kilograms lighter, the general public really does need to be informed of the risks. I daresay it'd even get more people to buy the right bike and thus reduce your warranty claims.

[No Skid Marks]

A I think thats what I said Scratchey, but anyway I agree with all your points, I just didn't like the way you started(moot point), I thought we were saying much the same thing, maybee I lost my thoughts in my translation,anyhow I guess this topic has been answered fully. Yeah you shoulda got in earlier and saved us all. Thanks S for you crisp clear input aswell.