Thomas Gerlach wrote:
Thomas Gerlach wrote:
My experience with the Dimond bikes was pretty disappointing. I test rode one from a local dealer and was shocked at how harsh the ride was compared to my 2016 P2, especially considering that the selling point of a beam point seems to be the added comfort. This was with the stock Profile deep dish wheels, so perhaps those wheels are harsh as compared to the 808s on my P2, but my bike felt like a magic carpet ride next to the Dimond.
Still, on a whim, I bought a used Dimond bike sans wheels from someone on the forum here last Spring. It was a killer deal with a Di2 build, Quarq power meter, ceramic speed bearings, etc..., and I figured I could use my 808s to smooth out the ride. The bike arrived and the fit and finish was so poor that it looked like the very first attempt someone had at building a bicycle, or anything for that matter, in their life. The paint was flaking and chipping to the touch and there were cracks all along the bottom bracket that were impossible to discern whether they were structural or not. The bike was still under warranty to the original owner but Dimond was basically worthless in addressing my concerns. According to the seller, Dimond said they would take care of me if the cracks turned out to be structural, but I never got anything in writing. Plus, the offer was worthless in that they evidently said they would give me a tiny discount on the full retail price of a $4,000 Xpress frame if mine failed. In other words, they refused to warranty their workmanship on the frame, knowing full well that the paint was problematic on a ton of their frames. I even offered to pay them to repaint it properly and they told me they were too busy. I asked them how much to upgrade to a Superfork and they told me those were only available to 'customers', i.e. not me because I didn't buy the bike new from them. So much for standing by your product.
It was so apparent to me that this company was not headed in the right direction that I sold it immediately and am happily riding my heavily upgraded P2, at a fraction of the cost.
Finally, does no one else seem to care that the Dimond wind tunnel testing showed no measurable improvement over a Shiv or a P5-three with the rider onboard? That fact alone tells me that there is no real reason to buy a Dimond other than to look cool. You aren't going to be faster on it, hell, you may even be slower than a P5-Six, you can't ride it on a trainer, the resale value is terrible, and the company doesn't appear to stand behind their work.
#1 - Who in their right mind test rides a bike, doesn't like it and then goes and buys it anyway????
#2 - You say later on in another post that you didn't deal with Dimond, that the original buyer did. But yet in your original post you say Dimond wouldn't address "your" concerns
#3 - You complain about the aerodynamics of the bike, yet you still went ahead and bought the bike????
I don't get it, but that is me. The warranty belongs to the original owner - Dimond doesn't owe you anything. In addition, I have more to say about this if you purchased the bike from who I think you may have purchased the bike from.
It is pretty obvious that you don't get it since you didn't mention anything about the facts I stated with respect to the quality control issues on the frame and Dimond's own aero data that shows no discernible advantage with a rider on board vis-a-vis a Shiv and a P5-three.
But to address your cross examination...
#1. I was pretty bought in to the marketing of the Dimond and thought they looked cool as hell. As mentioned, on my initial test ride I found the bike to be extremely harsh, but wasn't sure if that was due to the stock Profile wheels or the frame. When a used one came available in my size I decided to try it out with my Zipp 808s, knowing I could probably sell it and get my money back if I preferred my Cervelo, or even use the Di2 and Quarq and just sell the frame.
#2. The seller dealt with Dimond as he was a friend of the company and the bike was actually shipped by Ruster Sports. We both were in contact with them. Again, I even inquired about paying them to check out the frame for structural cracks and repaint it as well as pay them to upgrade the fork, to no avail.
#3. To be honest, it wasn't until after I bought the bike that I started to realize that frames are pretty low on the totem pole as far as aero savings, when compared to clothing, helmets, wheels, etc...upon realizing that the aero savings were likely negligible, I couldn't justify the hassle of not being able to use the bike on my computrainer.
Thomas, do you now or have you previously owned a Dimond? Just curious why you seem to be so dubious of my shared experience? I don't have an agenda, but it kind of seems like you do?
For the record, I don't own a Dimond. I have trained with TJ a few times and I consider him to be casual friend at best. You can be assured that even casual friends - or even friends for that matter - I hand it to if they pitch things I don't agree with.
Also for the record, I am not a Dimond fanboy by any stretch of the imagination, with that being said, I do occasionally stick up for brands/people/products that I think are not getting a fair assessment, in which case your's was. Again, I see you admit the seller has some relationship with Dimond. Do you know their agreement, he/she very easily could have taken a frame with issues for a steep discount and they are trying to pass it off on you. Regardless, Dimond knows you are not the original purchaser. Maybe the standard should be different, but when you buy things second hand that is a risk you are taking. That is why the resale value of bike parts is a fraction of what the initial cost might have been.
I think I understand your situation, maybe I don't, but it seems like a classic case of buyer's remorse. You should be dealing with the original seller not Dimond.
As for the aero gains, Dimond, didn't put that whitepaper out and candy-coat it like some others bike companies - frankly you should applaud them for trying their best. As I said, Dimond is not Trek, they don't have the same R&D and will never, but they were open and honest, even if it didn't reflect their bike the best. This wasn't some sort of secret. They don't promote their bike in my opinion as the absolute fastest, they take a different approach highlight "made in america" or "comfortable". As Rapp said, before, teasing out which bike is faster is useless when the body accounts for 70-80% of the drag on a bike. Maybe you didn't know this, but this isn't Dimond's fault. The bike is plenty fast and I am confident I could ride it to splits within seconds of my current bike given the same positions, equipment etc over a 70.3.
Knowing the legitimate backstory of TJ, including the expiration of his Specialized deal, and his own back issues, I feel confident the Dimond bike is comfy bike. I have talked to other riders and friends who ride Dimonds and will give me the real story. I also have friends who ride bikes, and are paid to ride bikes and complain not stop about the bike. I'm sorry you didn't find the bike comfy.
Again, I apologize if your experience with Dimond is frustrating, but please understand it is only in my opinion that I think you are being a little biases. You can see earlier in this thread where I attacked certain aspects of Dimond as well as compared to Specialized/Cervelo/Trek
Thomas, I appreciate your thoughts in the matter but would like to point out a few aspects of your posts that make it hard to believe you are not a bit of a fanboy.
You are absolutely correct that Dimond should be applauded for putting out a white paper that didn't necessarily represent their bike in the best light. I couldn't agree more, however the paper clearly concludes that the bike is the fastest on the market and suggests that the bike with rider tests aren't as accurate. You state that Dimond don't market their bikes as being the fastest, but rather 'comfy, when that couldn't be further from the truth. Dimond clearly markets their bike as the fastest and to assert otherwise is bizarre. You state that you know the bike is 'comfy' because TJ has a bad back and you have some friends that told you so, but how can you state this as fact if you have never actually ridden one?
My original post was merely meant to offer some perspective to would be purchasers based on my own experience. I'm not losing sleep over this. For me, personally, I would not consider a Dimond for the following objective reasons, plain and simple.
1: I'm not convinced by the aero testing against a basic Shiv and a P5-Three that the Dimond is any faster than a conventional frame. If I'm not mistaken, the frame was not designed in a tunnel. They built the frames and then had the bike tested hoping it would put up good numbers.
2: My own experience riding a Dimond did not lead me to conclude the bike was more comfortable. It revealed the bike to be harsh, at least with Profile wheels and the stock 3T fork.
3: The Dimond frame I purchased, while used for a few months, was not representative of a top tier bike in terms of fit and finish. Not even close.
4: Dimond didn't stand behind their product because it wasn't bought new from them, nor would they stand behind the product for the original owner. This is certainly their prerogative, but shortsighted at best. Again, I offered to pay them to check it out and fix the faulty paint as well as buy a new superfork, but was told in no uncertain terms that I was not a 'real' customer. For a new company trying to build a brand and reputation for quality and customer service, this is moronic. When someone is trying to pay you money to fix and upgrade a bike your company built, they are a customer in my mind. Yes, I do know the circumstances of the original seller. His frame was not sold as a blem model. He didn't know there were cracks in the bottom bracket until I received it.
I sincerely hope the company continues to grow and innovate. I wouldn't even discount owning one of their bikes in the future, but not until they mature into a company and product worthy of the pricing. I still regularly follow their bikes and still believe they are the coolest looking thing on the market.