did i dream it all or was there a cotic hemlock review on bikemagic where the bike broke on it's first ride and a pic of the broken linkage that was too weedy to do the job properly?
it seems to be missing now?
Twas in the mag - seat or chain stay IIRC
whoops it's on bikeradar.
sorry internet user fail.
I read the review in MBUK. They received the fix then the seat stays bowed which worried them alittle.
Can you expand a touch hora? Have been hoping to demo a Hemlock.
Cheers
[url= http://www.bikeradar.com/gear/category/bikes/mountain/product/hemlock-09-33753 ]http://www.bikeradar.com/gear/category/bikes/mountain/product/hemlock-09-33753[/url]
[url= http://www.bikeradar.com/gear/category/bikes/mountain/product/hemlock-09-33753 ]didn't go to well![/url]
Ouch!
Frame broke & collapsed and seatstays bowed during the test and they still gave it a 2 out of 5!!! Must have a very awesome paint finish or something :-/
It was then discovered that a crucial washer had been omitted on medium frames during factory assembly. Cotic addressed the problem immediately and the chainstays on all faulty bikes have been recalled and replaced.
"It was then discovered that a crucial washer had been omitted on medium frames during factory assembly. Cotic addressed the problem immediately and the chainstays on all faulty bikes have been recalled and replaced"
I remember Cy saying somethign about this on here a while back. He said he was onto sorting that batch of medium frames
"Travel is adjusted by interchanging the rocker plates, though you’d need suitable forks for each version as it’s designed to run forks spanning 130-160mm travel"
Where did they work that one out from? Have they missed the entire point of the hemlock?
Even after the problem was addressed, the stays still bent PERMANENTLY 🙁
Hi
I was with Deejay last week in the Peaks when he demoed the one from 18bikes-the chainstays snapped :x.
He may be along shortly with some piccies.
I had a go on it before it broke-I was really surprised how light it was and how well it rode even though it was a bit small for me.
Pity cos I think both me and Deejay would have been in the market for one!
Cheers
Steve
Even after the problem was addressed, the stays still bent PERMANENTLY
That bend wasn't caused by the original chainstay failure was it?
brant- hear what you are saying. Why havent MBUK/bikeradar carried out a follow up test or added a footnote to that? It seems abit unfair to Cotic by their silence/omission of such?
Im not implying anything either way by the above- just a test or note either way to clarify. As I feel it doesnt do any justice to a small manufacturer or brand. A bigger brand like Santa Cruz could get over something like that. Just feel its an injustice and a follow up note would help immensely. No Im not a Cotic customer or own one either.
Meh they've done it before (well WMB but same guys), there was a bit of backlash from some readers as they slated a P7 cause the sliding drop out broke calling it a design flaw - when in fact, the bloke in the workshop at Orange fitted the wrong bolts.
They never really followed up that test stating this so they hardly have a history of playing fair on these things. They didn't even tell Orange until after it went to print!
[i]They didn't even tell Orange until after it went to print![/i]
Thats not on. Its also unfair leaving a review hanging out there (probably gives them a sacrificial lamb that shows the rest of their reviews as gritty/real).
Follow up test me thinks. If its compounded then fair enough.
I think what they should do is leave the bike 'unrated'.
It's seems fair to me. It broke. Doesn't matter why.
Having almost uniquely sat firmly on both sides of the fence I can see it from both sides. Still not sure who's right though!
I think what they should do is leave the bike 'unrated'.
Why - the manufacturer had every opportunity to put up a good bike for test - the mag/site tested what they were given
it wouldn't happen with a marin/whyte review 🙂
the bike as tested was flawed, the pointed out those flaws and also the potential of the bike when sorted, i thought it was a reasonable view to take?
I think reporting on the bike and leaving it unrated and then reporting on any developments and progress is fairer.
Like someone said, it broke so why rate it even a 2? It doesn't achieve anything...
Thing is, its a potential worry to Brant as well with your stuff coming up- you can't avoid giving them one however you could find out who are most abusive riders on STW (people with a track record of cracking frames etc) and lend them one each first!
Seen the Lapierre review on bikeradar- 5 out of 5
I love mine and it was one of the mediums that didn't get the washer at the factory, so they replaced it under warranty. I've never felt any bowing when braking either, but maybe I'm not 'core enough!
Bikeradar's quote: [i]"Potentially versatile and good value, but too fragile for hardcore all-mountain use"[/i]
Hmm, try telling that to Ian and Kate Potter who ride them (and hire them out) in the Pyrenees!
Don't really see the point in that review TBH, as mentioned why not leave it unrated then update the review later. It's not unique to any one brand at all - early FSRs broke (LH chainstay), early model GT LTS and STS frames were notorious for breaking, Cannondale didn't get their "crack n fail" nickname for nothing etc etc.
Rumor has it MBR once tested a Spesh Enduro.
It bent, then snapped, then exploded into flames causing death.
It got 10/10. 😉
If I were a bike manufacturer I would very closely check and double check any bike, frame, or component I was sending in for a major magazine test. Things like missing washers, wrong bolts, and poorly set up brakes and suspension should just not be an issue if this was done. Surely this makes sense?? A review like this, easily found via a search online, could have a massive impact for a smaller manufacturer like Cotic. If I were them I would be beating down the door at MBUK/BikeRadar to perform some sort of retest.
It broke, was fixed, was flexy and then bent. 2/5 seems on the generous side of fair to me.
It's a shame - I've tested one, came close to buying one and would have considered one if I ever need to replace my Blur 4X. It's not so much the breaky thing that worries me (I'd be on a L and they've fixed that), it's the flexy, bendy thing.
I've broken the forks and the rear wheel on my Hemlock, but the frame is fine and dandy.
I appreciate the general feeling of support guys. Thanks. To be fair to Future, I had a meeting with them to work through the issues as they saw them, and whilst we've had to agree to disagree on one point they did give me the opportunity to say my piece before going to print.
Here's the official Cotic line:
[url= http://www.cotic.co.uk/news/hemlock_rear ]Hemlock Future Review Statement[/url]
I remember the Enduro (circa 05) braking its stays frequently?
[i]"Travel is adjusted by interchanging the rocker plates, though you’d need suitable forks for each version as it’s designed to run forks spanning 130-160mm travel."[/i]
That is just wrong IMO. The point of the Hemlock is that you can effectively have two different types of bike (via changing the rocker) whilst keeping the same fork up front. Shorter rear travel for punchy techy "hardtaily" riding. Longer rear travel for fast, lumpy 'n' jumpy descending. Or a "UK" set up and an "Alps" set up.
Shame about the production faults with the frame. Not good for anyone on any side of any fence.
[i]Even after the problem was addressed, the stays still bent PERMANENTLY
That bend wasn't caused by the original chainstay failure was it?
[/i]
Not my understanding but having read Cy's official rebuke/report it sounds as if the original problem has been rectified and the second problem doesnt exist. A follow up test should be done
[i]A follow up test should be done[/i]
Longterm STW test?
A follow up test should be done
I'll do it - my day rates are very reasonable...
There'll be a Hemlock in Singletrack issue 51 (July 23rd)
it's the flexy, bendy thing.
Being a bit of a Cotic fanboi, I went to the Cotic Big Day out a couple of weeks ago. Ended up riding behind a 16/17 stone real big muscular lad (think he posts on here), who was caning the large demo Hemlock uphill - big ring, out the saddle and hauling like f'ck. I could see no flex from the rear, and when we stopped I asked him how stiff/solid it felt and he reckoned it was at least as good as his Mk2 Heckler. If he couldn't feel any issue with is power output, then very few other riders will.
If you've not looked at the latest version of the rockers, you ought to. They're absolutely massive. Flex really is not an issue anymore.
Oh, and Gary. Just out of interest - why did you bring this up randomly? Are you no longer happy with your Trance and looking for something different?
I rode Cy's own bike at the sherwood demo day, I'm a big bugger (100kg)and ride quite hard. The back end does not flex in any noticable fashion, in fact it felt very hard tailey and direct with the short rockers(compared to my Heckler) and intend buy one when funds allow. I was also liked the Thor forks which were on it and took all of 30 seconds to set the air pressures.
edit...Jon that was me!
IMO, I find it really disappointing that follow up tests & reports to articles like this aren't done & published - especially when the manufacturers/suppliers have gone to the trouble to rectify things (is it just me, or do WMB/MBUK seem to be quite bad in this respect?).
I remember the P7 review, because I was about to buy a P7 frame, and it nearly put me off. When I spoke to Orange about it, they explained the situation and modification they'd made (and I did buy a P7 frame).
I'm not a Cotic owner, or in the market for one at the mo. But, having read the statement on Cotic's site, I wouldn't have any worries. Personally, I think the fact the frame has passed BS EN 14766 is a better test of its mechanical integrity than a journalist with a 'measuring stick'!
Ben is that a real test?
The last st mag I wanted, had the test commencal VS orange. It was only 2 pages short. It's a bit cheapish to make your mind...
the bike as tested was flawed, the pointed out those flaws and also the potential of the bike when sorted, i thought it was a reasonable view to take?
Agreed, also what higgo said. They tested what they were given, said what happened, and acknowledged what Cotic have done about it. Seems fair enough to me.
Blimey I've never seen a magazine put broken bits in picture before (or even mentioned it). They must have had an Ellsworth fail on them over the years ;0)
Juan, is that aimed at me? I've test ridden a few bikes and the Hemlock is the one I prefer, and it is UK designed. Not interested in French bikes thanks! I would buy from a test ride rather than a mag review.....
Not interested in French bikes thanks
No really the point I was making... Plus it was for the real ben... From ST mag
I would not buy from a mag only but it helps to make up your mind sometimes
I think we need to stop the Future character assassinations here people. They tested the bike, they tested it with replacement parts (effectively a re-test) and drew their conclusions. They informed me of the situation, and whilst I disagree with some of their conclusions and methods, I think they were fair. They may re-test the revised frame next year, they may not, but I shall be offering.
[i]IMO, I find it really disappointing that follow up tests & reports to articles like this aren't done & published - especially when the manufacturers/suppliers have gone to the trouble to rectify things (is it just me, or do WMB/MBUK seem to be quite bad in this respect?).[/i]
My guess is that given that all manufacturers know they have only one shot to get things right in a review, then the onus is on them to supply a bike that they want to be judged on. If they want to be judged on a bike that hasn't been assembled correctly then that's their choice.
I know that sounds rather harsh, but unfortunately that's the nature of a review.
Cotic offer a 2 year warranty and appear to have sorted the issue.
If I test rode one and liked it, I would see no reason not to buy one.
A good test ride is worth 100 reviews and 1000 forum recommendations IMHO.
Note to self, dont ever threaten benjag on the forum (big buggers hurt)
I'd get him whilst he was down, nursing a battered knee after a doubles jump fail at the moment!
benjag, for future reference Im 5ft 6, 20yrs old, blonde and talk with a broad Norfolk accent 🙂
Hang on, I sound quite tasty 😐
Juan - will 1000 words be okay? 🙂 We've reviewed the previous Hemlock in an earlier issue. I'm eager to see how the new Hemlock rides with the Fox shock, as the RockShox Pearl in the old Hemlock wasn't my cup of tea.
[b]hora[/b] said... big buggers hurt
I'd imagine your eyes would water at the very least.
I want to test ride a Hemlock now. Bother. Just when I need to be saving up. 😀
MBR had a canonndale fail on them and gave it 3 out of 10 but also printed what canonndle said they also rereviewed it a few months later when the mods had been done. They also put in pictures of what happened.
Juan - will 1000 words be okay?
Well I'd like to know more about how it's test, with more action pictures, etc etc...
6'4", 34, yorkshireman, although I'd be more worried about Ton than me!
Right, lets settle this once and for all; Cy, I am 6"3" and about 18 stone in kit, if you could send me a built up Hemlock, (I would like xt, pro 3's and thomson finishing kit, oh, and a travel adjust fork.) If you could also include approx 500 quid for misc expenses (petrol/B&B's/apres ride Lia Fail)
In return I will test it round the Grampians for the next 18 months, and post on this site, and Bikeradar about how I get on. My lack of any skill combined with my almost child-like confidence in my ability to get down vertical slopes makes me an ideal person to test it's robustness
Not having ANY connection with the bike press everybody can be sure of getting an impartial review, so both you and the stw users win.
No,no, don't thank me...
[i]"Well I'd like to know more about how it's test"[/i]
I was thinking of riding it a lot.
[url=
Singletrack Test Bikes[/url]
duckman - that's a lovely offer. You shouldn't have. No, you really shouldn't 😉
I'm 6ft 3in and 14st in riding kit and not exactly a pansy on the bike, so I'm reasonably well covered for big lads! I haven't broken mine, either.
...........with more action pictures, etc etc
Something you can colour in perhaps?
I hope 18bikes got mine before they ran out!
I just had to have one after demo'ing it at GT. Cy - I'm the bloke with the dodgy beard that came back grinning ear to ear!
Just wish I had the funds to get some Thors and Martas for it. First time I've ridden Magura kit and was duly impressed by it.
Oh, and while I'm here, what length stem do you have on yours? That is a great set up, it felt so 'right'.
Cheers!
uplink nope but something that is going to give me a hint about how the bike is tested.
When you pay 4£ for a mag you expect a bit more of a test than one page with half of it filled up by a static picture of the bike.
I'd like to know how many hours the bike has been ridden, by whom, where, what did they did with it etc etc...
You know basic stuff
mustard - glad you like it, I remember you! 18 haven't ordered anything recently unless they have a stock frame, so you may have to wait a while. It'll be June for sure for the re-stock.
My bike runs a 70mm x 10deg stem with Bontrager King Earl 710mm wide bars. I think the Rhythm Pro bars are the equivalent product for 2009. Seatpost had 20mm layback.
I saw a medium frame in stock at 18 bikes at the weekend.
Juan - Nice idea. I'm not sure Singletrack is the mag for that though really. We're not a product-led publication. That's kind of the point really. We're about features and words and flowery w*nk. We're about the "why" not the "what".
Did you read any of the non-test features in the issue you purchased? 🙂
Ben
I too am fed up of static pictures of bikes in Singletrack. Next time you test a bike, could you print a series of pictures of it in the top right hand corner of every page. Then I'd be able to thumb through the magazine at a variety of speeds getting a very real impression of how it will ride.
My 09 Hemlock rocks hugely.
That is all.
Second Higgo's moving pics request!
I too am fed up of static pictures of bikes in Singletrack. Next time you test a bike, could you print a series of pictures of it in the top right hand corner of every page. Then I'd be able to thumb through the magazine at a variety of speeds getting a very real impression of how it will ride.
That's a genuinely brilliant idea. Free 'video' with every copy!
I'd like to know how many hours the bike has been ridden, by whom, where, what did they did with it etc etc...
Sound like one of those Euromags. Have you seen a German cycling mag? Stats heaven! Yawn. = ;7)
Completely ignore the joke, putting little videos featuring bikes reviewed on the website when the mag hits the newsstands could be a nice idea.
Did you read any of the non-test features in the issue you purchased?
Well I didn't purchased it in the end. What is the point if what attracted me in the mag (in this case the home page of this very forum where chipp said the test commencal meta4 vs orange ST4 would be in issue XX), is only a couple of pages with very little info inside. 4£ is a price of a proper book. I am ok to pay a mag this price if it interest me in something.
If you are a non product driven mag why do you do test then? If you go through the trouble (or not) to do some testing why not do it properly?
I was looking forward to it to be honest as I would quite like the orange, however before buying a flight ticket to test one I would have love to know what people think of it.
Is it that daft to ask?
I have a pic in a recent mag (not STW)upstairs, showing a bike on next to a spirit level, clearly having angles checked with a digital measure. Shame they seem to be measuring the head angle using the fork stanchion [img] 
[/img]
FWIW, I don'r read much into most magazine tests these days. STW seems to be the only one with half an eye on real riding and riding related to wha I ride - the others seem to witter on about the same pet hates/dislikes or blow up a minor point into a big one etc etc
I didn't like the flexi Hemlock MK1, but having seen and twisted a few of the new ones, and ridden one as well, I would buy one (heck, it was plan A with short rockers on my insurance replacement rather than the ST4). I would trust Cy's response and support over the journo's, despite the clear failure.
Tests have their place in our mag but it is not the be-all and end-all of the mag. To fit more test pages in the mag would mean losing feature pages elsewhere.
Other more product-led magazines are available.
BTW get the Orange.
Second Higgo's moving pics request! Come fella's this is a good idea.
Juan, if you don't buy don't moan about the content. You could be from Yorkshire, put your hand in your long pocket and reach.
BTW get the Orange.
I did 8) It is schweeeet
Other more product-led magazines are available.
My wife bought me a couple recently. I read them and come away feeling that all they say is 'buy, buy, buy - last years is soooo crap and outdated, you *need* this new one thats en-vogue*
I read STW, and generally come away thinking 'ride, ride, ride and oooh, gotta ride there some day and hmm, they are nuts' etc