I'm totally with Garmin on this one. Its a critical hardware failure outside of the warranty period so offering 20% off is more than they need to do.

Also the implication is that Garmin has no idea what the issue is because they didn't try and to extensively trouble shoot the issue. I seriously doubt this is true. Garmin probably knows exactly what part or parts have failed given the specifications of the trainer and the issues it is presenting with. In all likelihood the unit is dead and that is why Garmin won't spend anymore time trying to fix it.

I think the complaint is based on the fact that the trainer was probably defective from the factory and a manufacturer should be liable for shipping knowingly defective products irrespective of their age. Sort of like voluntary recalls on cars that do not take into account mileage etc. However voluntary recalls always involve issues with safety and are to protect against lawsuits. I don't see this being a safety issue but rather an issue of the original owner keeping the trainer in a box.

yeah. I'm wondering if there is more to the story that hasn't come out but I wouldn't be happy with not being offered some sort of repair even one I would have to pay for with a unit I purchased 5 years ago for like $1200. I know from being on elite trainer boards, they send out replacement parts belts and circuit boards that the user replaces themselves. Not sure why garmin wouldn't do that in this case?

Because that would require Garmin to keep producing legacy parts for Tacx potentially using suppliers they haven’t had a relationship with in years.

Garmin has kept Tacx going after the purchase but that doesn’t mean they are using all the same suppliers, QC processes etc. I see no reason Garmin would pay to start re-manufacturing legacy parts to their current standards or ship NOS parts that weren’t manufactured corroding to Garmin’s standards.

Anyone who owns a Pioneer PM shouldn’t expect anything different under Shimano ownership. Shimano will still support the software but don’t expect them to pony up for extra repairs or spare parts.

IMO, that's crap service. 5 years old shouldn't be unsupported for an item that cost $1200. It's not like this should have been a surprise to Garmin when they purchased Tacx. They just don't care. I understand what one should expect vs the reality of dealing with companies like this. I just wouldn't like being told I couldn't have my product repaired even if it's out of warranty and I need to pay for repairs. If the company was bankrupt that's different.

The repairs cost $1200 you just get a new trainer.

Really that’s what they’re doing. The parts are too much for them to make they probably don’t have the staff to repair them.

Here's another devil's advocate point of view for you... think about the ~$1K products you have in your home if or how you could get them repaired. Appliances... there is an entire repair industry because every household has appliances. TVs? Those are pretty much disposable now. Audio components? Ditto... there are independent repair shops, but more for legacy or high-end stuff.

Maytag doesn't do repairs. Sony doesn't do repairs. etc. Independent shops exist for those, because there is a huge market for the services. Apple does repairs on their computers, but they charge consumers absurd amounts for basic parts, so Apple's intent is you trash broken products and buy new.

I think it sucks, but I have no fantasy that my Tacx would become anything less than a 50 lb. anchor if it dies outside of warranty. And, I have the same expectation for my TVs, my iPads, my home audio, my computers, and my 10 year old appliances.

Oh I get it. I think it sucks.

Also keep in mind that the older units are pre-Garmin acquisition of Tacx. I don't know how different the new units are internally but it's possible that Garmin doesn't even have spare parts to support the older units.

If I understand correctly, the issue is that a firmware issue is bricking some units and it is happening both to Neo 1 models out of warranty and newer Neo 2 models in warranty. If the company firmware breaks your hardware does the manufacturer get to hide behind the warranty?

I haven’t seen that anywhere and it’s not what is being reported in the Cycling news article. It also doesn’t sound plausible as it is incredibly difficult to write a software update that selectively kills off some units from multiple generations. If Garmin firmware breaks Neos it will happen on a massive scale which I have seen no evidence of


The person in the article is saying they are suffering from a known hardware issue but Garmin isn’t helping them out. Given the trainer came with a 2 year warranty in 2015 and it’s 2020 I’m with Garmin here.

Agree with scott8888... the article is a second-hand account, and the statement that "It appears to be a fault they know about as they have an immediate replacement policy for Tacx 2 customers with this software fault" is from the owner of the Neo. It is likely speculation and not substantiated by the owner, the article's author, or Garmin. The article does not say that Garmin recognized the failure root cause and told the owner they recognized the failure.

God help us if every forum post was made into a headline on a media website. The guy replaced a Neo with an Atom?.... *eyebrow raise emoji*...

I have an original Neo 1 from back in the day. It's still my go-to for a lot of things here in the Lama Lab. The freehub has been replaced from the shite EDCO one with the Shimano one (from a broken FLUX...so some parts are interchangeable).

Regardless of the second/third hand hearsay quotes in the article - I do believe there needs to be clearer information published regarding parts availability for the expected lifespan of these expensive devices. These new smart bikes worry me in this area.....

Side note: The support team at Tacx are really great people. I've had more than my share of tickets/emails/run-ins with them over the years. I hope this level of service remains.

---

Shane Miller - GPLama
YouTube | Web | Twitter | Instagram | Facebook | Strava

you stated my view far more clearly. I don’t mind paying for repairs out of warranty I just think that should be an option within a reasonable product lifespan. I’d expect if I paid $1000+ for a product I’m certainly expecting to get more than 5 years user out of it. And I agree who knows the full story of this guys situation.

In response to a couple of points on this thread :

I agree the manufacturer has no legal or moral obligation to fix a hardware fault on an out-of-warranty machine because the machine has moving parts which will wear out over time. The article doesn't make it 100% clear what the fault was in this case, so what follows may be irrelevant, but I'll type it anyway.

However - see also Sonos' recent PR debacle - there's a wider issue here of what the consumer is buying and what reasonable life is. As a post earlier up the thread says, we don't buy a laptop or smartphone expecting it *not* to slow down, stop running some programs and generally be a bit clunky after a couple of years.

When I bought my Tacx Neo (and my Sonos speakers), that shortened lifespan wasn't made clear. I wasn't clearly buying a piece of technology - I was buying a turbo trainer with new features and my expectations weren't managed. The technological requirement to the untrained eye is simply (I don't know how simple it is!) to receive instruction on how much resistance to generate and send back data on how hard I'm pedalling - all the graphics etc are done by the device I connect it to, which I do expect to have finite life. Similarly all the speakers are doing - to the untrained eye - is receiving 0s and 1s and converting them into sound waves - the control device is doing all the hard sums and needs to be kept current.

To tell consumers *now* that the turbo trainer actually always had a short finite life because it was always going to require firmware updates that it may not have been able to handle at some point in the future may be legal, but I don't think it's "right" and I would hope Garmin made this call eyes-open to the impact on existing customers' loyalty. If I get an email from Garmin to tell me my Neo will shortly stop working on Zwift and there's nothing I can do other than trade it in for a new one, they're getting a two word reply.

Similarly, if I were to be buying a new Neo2 and it was explained to me that it's probably only a smart trainer for 3-5 years then it's a dumb trainer, I may still buy it ... but at that price point it wouldn't be a slam-dunk.

Thanks for the clarification and my apologies if I added weight to the unsubstantiated claim about firmware. Lot's of confusion arising in the gaps of information here but ideally it should become more clear in the days to come.