A lot of words in that response. But passed over nearly everything outlined.

I understand it deviates from the OPs hilarious request (really - you guys all took this very seriously. don't you know the shtick yet?), but I think its important to address. And you've managed to avoid outlining any thoughts around the matter in multiple places across various threads. You're quick to point out the OP wont detail his real name after being provoked multiple times - but you also wont address this issue in the same manner.

Which is small bike companies are often sticking it to paying consumers. Repeatedly and often. And that pisses people off. You hear that in various ways on this forum. But you don't want to talk about how they're screwing paying customers (I'd love to see a poll done on this in some manner - but we won't). Because maybe "they're too lean for their own good". Only want to protect when they're being shit on here. In your playground.

Many many of these small companies have done it right (I wont name names in the interest of not overtly calling anyone out). Or addressed mistakes and corrected quickly. Those efforts are always, or should always, be lauded. And from what I see on ST, they are. There often is a nauseating amount of love for some. And I'll pile in there too when my experience warrants. But I'll just as swiftly pile on when these small companies repeatedly screw people.

Why is there a problem with that? Is it because you've not seen proper evidence of such scorn? And so because you personally havent its not warranted? Surely you agree thats utter nonsense.

Further - are we not adults? Can people not form their own opinions? Can adults who frequent this forum not sift through the chaff? Can we not have wildly varying opinions solidified by are own personal experiences? Extreme or otherwise.

---

"One Line Robert"

"You're quick to point out the OP wont detail his real name after being provoked multiple times - but you also wont address this issue in the same manner."

i'm dan empfield.

"Which is small bike companies are often sticking it to paying consumers."

that's a very non-specific charge. if you have a specific complaint or request or suggestion, you can make it here. you do. and i let you.

except when i point out that the one kind of company that does NOT come on here, answer their claims about warranty and service, address their customers, is the chinese open mold seller. when i point that out i'm just the man, keeping the small guy down.

you guys can be really selective in your reasoning.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

I don't understand. Does the fact that I was personally injured by bike that failed -- one that I bought sign unseen for well in excess of $5,000; that was manufactured in China but sold to me by a one-man American cycling industry profiteer; that has led to life-changing paralysis in another victim; and that people like me praise and scorn on the internet on message boards just like these -- not make me more qualified to speak to these issues rather than less? The only reason I'm not denigrating this particular company and product all over the web is because I'm litigating this issue privately, and let me tell you, it's not a fun process. I would rather have stumbled across one of these threads on mtbr.com and read some invective from a poster who found the product dangerous, flimsy, or whatever, because maybe that way I could have avoided the entire awful experience. But, seems if it were up to Rappstar, I would need to buy, use, and potentially go lose all my front teeth (again) riding a particular product to be qualified enough to assess its safety, viability, stiffness/compliance, and structural integrity.

Greg -- I'm sorry you don't find the dialogue here useful. Like slowman would say: if you don't like what I write, then don't fucking read it.

"a video that shows the frame flexing by practically a centimeter over a [mostly] static rear wheel would definitely give me pause."

let me help you out here. rather than the primal screams of wsrobert and pubes, here are 2 questions that i think are FAIR to ask:

1. should we agree on an industry standard, in this new era of non-traditional frames, for frame flex? a test? the first photo in this article is what felt does and very similar to what we did at QR. this is how we designed the gussets that went into our aluminum frames (that HED made for us). we fixtured at the BB and tested how much the head tube twisted by degrees of deformation with a specific weight added a specific distance from the steering axis (perpendicular to the direction of the bike). maybe a similar test but from the BB back? hang a weight from a rod passing through and affixed to the rear dropouts, some distance from the dropouts. measure the deformation in degrees of arc.

2. how many bikes are in the field? how many road miles are on this new bike? here is a valid question. this is where wsrobert has a point, or would have a point if he could channel his outrage into a coherent policy. ask a new bike maker (or a maker of any part) this question. i had an internet argument, maybe it was with tom a., a year or two ago about the ability to account, during engineering, for all the forces during cycling. he thinks (as i recall) that a proper engineering job could do so. i think not. i'd like to see one frame in every size on the road, and a couple of sizes have multiple frames on the road having the spit ridden out of them by big, nasty people. maybe 2 frames each of which have 200 hours or so or hard riding.

but i wouldn't ask tririg this question. i'd ask trek this question. i'd ask specialized, cervelo, canyon, everybody. maybe i will start asking that question. i suspect you'd be wrong to think that the little guys are always bad at this and the big guys are uniformly good at this.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

Yeah. So, I'm not asking for your name. I asked you to address everything I've detailed in my last two posts. And you wont. Still wont.

I'd totally take you up on that. But you delete my posts. So hard to judge what you, Dan Empfield, will allow. Because facts sometimes arent.

---

"One Line Robert"

Considering the other thread he started a week or two ago I think PubeNuts is pissed he can't afford or get sponsored to ride one of these new bikes.

"you delete my posts. So hard to judge what you, Dan Empfield, will allow. Because facts sometimes arent."

there was one post i deleted in the tririg thread: one of yours (well, one and a third of yours). so, go look at every other post, and the post(s) of yours i didn't delete. that's what i allow.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

Yes to all of this. See, we can agree on some things.

you and i have a very messy way of getting around to a rational step forward.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

lol

---

----
@adamwfurlong

But it sure is entertaining as hell and makes the day pass quickly at the office.

Kiley: I thought you rode a Felt? Were you injured on a Felt? Asking because I have a Felt too.

I'm really happy you took this here. This is what I was thinking could be the underlying beauty in Pubes' OP - while his acidic delivery can be an attention-getter and distracting at the same time, he was essentially calling for a way to compare bikes. As I had tried to point out in my first post in this thread, his suggested approach lacked a lot of scientific detail. I hoped to steer the conversation in a more constructive direction to take his proposal and standardize it to make it actually useful and meaningful. I hope we can continue the direction you are going here.

I would love to see some sort of dynamic testing that emulates real riding conditions with a real rider, but even the more static methods you're describing here and in your article you linked provide a good baseline for a suite of tests and standards. The data will become more meaningful as more is collected. Pubes' concept needed to go beyond the "craptraps" and compare them to their double-diamond brethren. The dynamic aspect is a challenge, much like having a living rider in a wind tunnel.

With all that said, I would argue (and I mean that in the most respectful way possible) that I wouldn't take these questions to Trek or Specialized. I think this belongs to the Tom A.'s and Friction Facts of the world and keep it independent. Of course, I don't know if the manufacturers would agree to that.

But, hey, if everybody wants to send me your bike, I'll be glad to try to break it.

---

Travis Rassat
Vector Cycle Works
Noblesville, IN
BikeFit Instructor | FMS | F.I.S.T. | IBFI
Toughman Triathlon Series Ambassador

No, it wasn't a Felt. I've never had a Felt I didn't like except for the original IA, because it simply didn't fit me well or at all. I ride a 2013 B2 right now and also have an AR1. They are great bikes, but they are ho hum bikes. They do not make me unique. They are not different. Maybe that's not such a bad thing though?

Dan,

You are far more knowledgeable about the bike business than most on this forum, especially the niche market in which most of us are just consumers. This particular issue of flexy chainstays on the TriRig Omni doesn't concern me in isolation.

However given a significant track record (one that is easily assessed by looking at posts on this forum which detail several reported quality and safety issues with TriRig products), it does make me second guess the design, QC procedures, and production processes of the TriRig portfolio.

There have been numerous reports of:
1. Omega Brakes breaking at either the arms or the main body
2. Sigma Stems snapping
3. Alpha bars breaking, delaminating or cracking
4. Beta Bottle holder failure.

It seems like these defects and safety issues happen to TriRig at a greater rate than other products based upon the frequency of reports in this forum.

How would you suggest we analyze and discuss these issues constructively? Do you see an inherent problem with the TriRig engineering, product development, production and quality processes in a way that is different from the rest of the industry? When do these issues become something that the CPSC would get involved in?

---

Suffer Well.

Thank you.

---

"One Line Robert"

I'd love to hear or see you map out the logic that had you arrive at that post. Knowing what you appear to know about the OP.

Are you one of those people who puts your name at the bottom of every text message you send to?

- Bill

---

"One Line Robert"

I think I'd rather be just another sheep with my front teeth intact.

I was not addressing anyone's qualifications for providing commentary; I was addressing your method(s) of doing so.



But you are not in the industry; you are a consumer who had an unlucky but avoidable incident w/ inferior materials/fabrication methods, etc., and are not a PhD in matsci, nor ceramics, right? Be reasonable and logical in your analysis and discussions, right?

It's not that I don't like your opinions (which is irrelevant), but you troll the boards, under various and changing pseudonyms, and then get upset when called on it by the site owner and moderator.

Maybe if you provide what is determined as useful and meaningful discussion, and maybe Dan won't call you out on it?

---

no sponsors | no races | nothing to see here

"How would you suggest we analyze and discuss these issues constructively?"

in general i think you guys are doing a pretty good job of it.

"Do you see an inherent problem with the TriRig engineering, product development, production and quality processes in a way that is different from the rest of the industry?"

i'm going to speak really generally. we all learned starting in the '90s and we are all still learning: forging. not machining out of billet. lots of companies apparently got the engineering wrong on machined parts, so, sometimes you learn by trial and error. i would like to know how many people get these parts, put them on bikes, go out and ride them, and for how long, before they're offered for sale. if i were nick that would be the biggie. that, and BOD or advisory panel whom he respects. everybody - me, andrew messick, donald trump, elon musk - needs to hear and listen to and respect and give great heft to more than his own voice. so i say this about nick but i mean it about everybody.

"When do these issues become something that the CPSC would get involved in?"

above my pay grade.

nick is the (and i'm only talking about the play on the field here, not the national anthem stuff) colin kaepernick of bike makers: really talented, really fun to watch, makes you facepalm. i am very glad kaepernick is in the NFL. i am very glad nick is in the bike biz. i am glad we have his brakes and his aerobars pushing the rest of the industry. yes, i understand the ramifications of what i'm saying. i'm selfish. i'm glad nick is out there, abiding, like the dude, making parts that the larger companies aren't creative enough to make, forcing them to make them, and if sometimes they fail and you have to send them back for a replacement that's your sacrifice by which everybody gains.

the trick is to preserve the positive and shore up the negative. i don't watch the niners whenever chip kelly benches kap. it's must-see football when kap starts.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

So, I get what Pubes was going for in his OP. What seems to be needed by the industry(or forum) is:

1. A repeatable way to measure the flexing that is brought up in the Omni posting. Not just for the Omni, but other "unconventional" bike frames as well.

2.This is should be considered different than current industry standards, especially since the tests are more representative of what one would see with trainer use, or otherwise outside the realm of typical riding/usage.

3. The ability to call out manufacturers when they make something that is seemingly not up to snuff. If you make triathlon gear, and you post here asking for feedback or are just participating in the general Tri conversation, then you are 100% responsible for answering any and all questions about your products or services. If I made anything that was sold to the triathlon masses, I would stay the hell away from this forum since talking here would be a huge liability in court later on. Nick has enormous cahones[sic] coming here and giving tech support and such. Anything is fuel for a lawsuit. If you make and sell stuff and you're here, you don't get to pick and choose what people say to you or about your company.

4. The need to have finished products. I get that early adopters usually have to deal with bugs and gremlins here and there, but there should be a line in the sand where the community or industry can say what is acceptable and what is just plain unfinished/untested. I know there's industry and regulatory standards, but this would be more in line with fleshing out initial QC and early production problems.

5. Also, since when is anonymity a bad thing? If Pubes was just a random troll spouting crap, then folks would just disregard what he was saying. I don't need to know his IRL information if he's making good points. Manufacturers, big or small, don't have the right to face every small accuser that says bad things about them.

Make good stuff, and everyone will back you up with their praise and wallets. Make bad stuff, and you won't be around for very long.

Conveniently binny (owner of falco) dropped off the face of the earth at the same time My falco forks snapped, the injuries were a lot less than they could have been (fractured patella, torn muscle in my shoulder amongst other things) but they didn't warrant the frame and after offering to cover costs of all the damage to groupset, cycle kit, helmet, shoes they (binny and Alistair) stopped returning calls or emails!
So yes, I would say that the falco is dangerous!

Holy tube wall thickness batman!

Not to mention a bevvy of pros that crashed, some while in races.


Hope you're alright.

---

Internet User