spot wrote:
I'm wondering if you can explain this in your post:
"The frame I received for Kona 2015 was demonstrably worse. Unfortunately, due to the compressed timeline that results from the far too common "we want you on a new frame for Kona!" attitude - something that I have agreed to more times than I should have, the true depth of these defects did not become apparent for quite some time. As an engineer, I'm sad to say that it took me until July of 2016 to realize just how damaged this frame was. It had the same issues with the saddle rail clamp, which should have been a red flag.
And the new seat-post binder wasn't any better - and was in fact worse - than the old one." Considering that you posted this in Oct '16:
"The seatpost clamp has been entirely redesigned. The original design was a "pinch" design that was super sensitive to any variance in tolerances on the frame or seatpost.
They've since replaced that with a back-to-front plate design that is much better and with which I have had no issues. I can post pics showing the difference if it is not clear."
I don't think it really matters does it? He had multiple concerns about multiple frames that Dimond sent him, which he emailed Dimond about, providing video evidence, he wanted out of the contract, it should be a case of doing the "right thing" rather than suing.
Having to epoxy the saddle rails is just whack..