-
I don't see how adjusting documented tolerances works though. If the bike is piss it would go back to the shop. If shops around the world have to deal with all these returns, presumably they will stop selling these bikes because they're more trouble than they're worth, then what?
Or do people just keep buying them hoping something changes?
hippy-
...presumably they will stop selling these bikes because they're more trouble than they're worth...
Not really.
I was working in a Trek dealer when they started putting press fit bbs in mountain bikes. The life span was terrible. They all came loose and needed warranting.
Thing was, people still bought them. They either didn’t know or didn’t care about the bb problems. I presume it was the latter as a lot of our customers were mates and would buy the same bike or next spec level up as their mate had bought from us.
Trek were pretty good at warranting stuff. They sent out oversized bearing with loctite fitting compound instead of replacing the frame (at least as a first resort) so it was a case of filling in an online form then fitting new bearings for us, Trek may even have given us some sort of reimbursement for workshop time, and the customers would tend to get us to do a service or fit new tyres etc while the bike was in getting the bb seen to so it was a win all round.
M_V
Cervelo engineers (Rinard?) changed their published tolerance +/- for their BB to avoid warranty claims to such an extent I think it was SKF said you could not use their bearings in such a poorly specced bearing seat as it would kill the bearings.