Cycling UK Forum

I don't care how small their production runs are (it's still a "production run"), it all comes under QC and that weld had No penetration. Therefore someone didn't do their job.
If they don't have an Xray machine then it must be randomly stress tested and destruction tested."X" amount in each batch dependent on amount made, But at least one in each batch.
One of the easiest basic destruction testing methods is to cut across the weld then polish and inspect visually for penetration and weld shape.

After all we're talking about Companies that have production models (both now have their frames built in Taiwan), Not some custom builder working out of his shed making one off items.

A few years ago ICE found out that the material used in their frames was not up to their spec's, the manufacturer used a slightly cheaper alloy and they had a few frames bend.
$h!t hit fan and it was sorted.
Someone on here had their cruciform replaced last year FOC by ICE for this reason.

nigelnightmare wrote:A few years ago ICE found out that the material used in their frames was not up to their spec's, the manufacturer used a slightly cheaper alloy and they had a few frames bend.
$h!t hit fan and it was sorted.
Someone on here had their cruciform replaced last year FOC by ICE for this reason.

I had the main cruciform of my old Q replaced free of charge because of this problem.
Both arms where bending up under stress of riding fast/hard over rough roads.
I even had to reset the tracking in the middle of a tour due to how much the frame was deforming.

I've also bent the cruciform of my Sprint due to a crash. It was only a glancing blow down a Cornish bank. But the weight of the trailer caused the frame to bend sideways under the seat.
Because ICE know I will hammer the trike over rough ground, I also replaced the back section of my Sprint at the same time because there was a slight risk of it cracking at the weld like [XAP]Bob's did.
The weld was redesigned to be more wrapped around the main tube, so stronger.

I actually think that the quality of customer (and secondary customer) care is at least as important as the initial QA.

My first trike was a Pete Ross model, basically 20 years old and took a heavy hit on a kerb when I (mostly) avoided an RTA. Over the following few weeks the main frame failed, and ICE provided expert statements to my insurance company without ever questioning cost.

As it happened my insurance paid out, and was on a 'new for old' basis (woohoo).

This trike has been utterly hammered for 6 years (not quite as many miles as Tiger, but all weather, all conditions)

[XAP]Bob wrote:I actually think that the quality of customer (and secondary customer) care is at least as important as the initial QA.

Got to disagree with you on this one. Good customer service ameliorates the situation, but if the reputation of the product is tainted by sub-standard manufacturing, then potential customers will hear about it, and go and buy elsewhere. No matter how good the after-sales service is, if you're spending your hard-earned money on a new bike, you're gonna think twice before purchasing anything that has questionable quality.

The QA is good enough for the vast majority of cases though. The trikes which are absolutely hammered... they are the ones that will fail at some point.

I'm not a metallurgist, or a welder, and neither did we go for an X-ray scan of my frame.

The weld was strong enough that a bloke leaning and heaving on a 3 foot bar through the suspension bushing to twist and pull the rear section out did indeed pull the frame out, not cause the weld to fail. But welds (or the metal around them) will fail at some point.

The weld in question (the first one, not the pictured one) is of a design which had been replaced by a much higher strength design (plated the bushing now has load spreaders which reach around the frame) - but I am not particularly light, I am usually carrying some load on the pannier, and I take corners at speed (because why not)
All of those add up to a pretty high load on that element, and I have no doubt that it would have continued to give a lot of service before it gave out gently.

QA is good, and results in continuous improvements. But...
- The company corrected the flaw without question.
- The company has maintained enough cross compatibility that the newer rear frame element just fits.
- Who knows how long that crack had been there, or would have stayed there.