Makes me wonder if there’s a market for a set of go/no go gauges for various bottom brackets. Perhaps even make them deeper and then with an accurate bore and a ground shaft, see how well a pair of them line up.

If bottom brackets are as badly made as some of these, it would be nice to know before building up a frame.

If bottom brackets are as badly made as some of these, it would be nice to know before building up a frame.

In all the time you’ve been riding bikes how many do you personally know of where it’s been a problem? I can’t think of 1.

I can think of maybe high double figures on the internet but as a population sample that’s like as not 0.

As a rider/owner I wouldn’t buy your gauges for the same reason I’ve not got personal meteor or lighting strike insurance and any manufacturer should have one already

Not a fan of his approach (the zyklon B comment was uncalled for, and his fixation on MAB is cringy) but I like the engineering explanations and frame analysis.

The alignment on that BB is pretty shocking, and it should be correct. It shows a poor QA process from the manufacturer.

He’s a horrible little man and I won’t give him the time of day

Yep.

though saying that, he’s a classic example of survivor/selection bias with QC in the bike industry.

There is a bit to this, but it ultimately it shouldn’t leave the factory, or should be rectified by the manufacturer (albeit I’m not sure they were given the chance in Kingdoms case)

The OPEN frame was an interesting example. Assuming that there isn’t some lying going on with OPENS response, and regardless of how Hambini approached it, OPEN look foolish by saying ‘we don’t build to a standard for the BB’ – i.e. we don’t really care if your BB will perform correctly.

Having spoken to composites NDT specialists about assessing carbon frames in the past, I do query his NDT analysis – you need a benchmark to assess against.

Erm, he might be right about the frame and a good engineer but is he someone I would want to promote or give money to?

Not really based on why was reported by a female journalist.

https://ridewriterepeat.com/2020/06/05/six-bloopers-of-being-a-woman-in-the-cycling-industry/

Makes me wonder if there’s a market for a set of go/no go gauges for various bottom brackets. Perhaps even make them deeper and then with an accurate bore and a ground shaft, see how well a pair of them line up.

If bottom brackets are as badly made as some of these, it would be nice to know before building up a frame

If the frame is bad enough to cause a problem, I think you would notice it during installation…

I’d like to think I’d notice during building, but clearly some people haven’t. And if it’s true that some manufacturers are trying to claim a wider tolerance, perhaps a shop doing a lot of custom builds might like to know before getting too far into the build.

Having said that, I’ve only ever owned one bike (well, two frames of the same bike) with a pressfit carbon bottom bracket and the bottom bracket was about the only part that wasn’t out of spec or poorly made.

But thats half the point. It could well have left the factory “bang on”

In this case the NDS was out as well – the thread bore isn’t parallel with the shell (or not faced correctly on both sides). You can’t cause that through damage.

It is a sample size of 1 for Kingdom, so they need right of response (although he said he contacted them weeks ago…?) and bad BBs will float towards Hambini for obvious reasons. However, the fact that he seems to have any sort business in selling BBs to repair the symptoms of this sort of problem indicates that poor QA is an issue in the bike industry.

If I buy a frame that has an X BB, I should be able to buy an X BB and it will fit as designed. If it doesn’t (and presuming the BB isn’t at fault) then the frame is defective and the manufacturer should repair, replace or refund.

I’d like to think I’d notice during building, but clearly some people haven’t. And if it’s true that some manufacturers are trying to claim a wider tolerance, perhaps a shop doing a lot of custom builds might like to know before getting too far into the build.

To be fair thats true. I think a shop should have to think about something like this otherwise it’s harder to identify faults. Misalignment isn’t very easy to do though.

If a product requires home QA it identifies a serious issue across the industry.

One slightly off frame does not mean there is a problem with this model, or brand, or factory, or industry. Don’t extrapolate out like that, especially based on the rants of someone after attention to sell you something.

One slightly off frame does not mean there is a problem with this model, or brand, or factory, or brand, or industry. Don’t extrapolate out like that, especially based on the rants of someone after attention to sell you something.

Yup.. as I alluded to above, frames with bad BBs will gravitate towards Hambini so it becomes an echo chamber.

The Kingdom example is just that, a single example and we don’t know the back story of the frame (it could have been a ‘seconds’ frame, or a fake for all we know).

He knows his engineering onions and shows up poor QC on expensive frames. I’ve no issues with that.

Sweary and annoying yes. Dealt with way more annoying folks again no issue.

Part of the draw I guess would he get same amount of coverage if he was a monotone boring engineer?

Carry on Hambini

If a product requires home QA it identifies a serious issue across the industry.

I agree with Kelvin on this one. It identifies that certain frames/manufacturers have lower standards than others. It tells you nothing about how the industry is overall.

I’d personally have be sceptical about taking too much away from a guy that goes out of his way to convince you a bent line is straight – I mean whats that all about? Its clearly bent (You can see it is, pause the video and test this for yourself with a straight edge if you’re still unsure, it’s not straight). Weird.

If a product requires home QA it identifies a serious issue across the industry.

I said this on another Hambini thread. My guess is that the large-scale manufacturers (Giant, Trek, Spesh/Merida, etc.) will have fairly consistent QC. They turn out frames by the tens of thousands so they can afford to spend millions on factory equipment to keep everything consistent. They can also scrap frames because they will have much lower labour costs than niche manufacturers. When you have a small manufacturer building custom frames, the QC will probably be much more variable. Labour costs will be a huge proportion of their expenses, so there will always be a temptation to let stuff through if you think you can get away with it.

I agree with Kelvin on this one. It identifies that certain frames/manufacturers have lower standards than others. It tells you nothing about how the industry is overall.

And I’d agree with that 🙂 I was talking cack.

In hindsight, what I should have said was that ‘if it gets to the point where poor factory QA means that an industries products require the consumer to complete home QA, then there is an issue in that industry’.

I/we don’t know if there is and I doubt there is evidence to support that. I suspect most people wouldn’t realise if their BB failing after a few months (as a random example) is frame related, BB related, maintenance related or installation related…

I said this on another Hambini thread. My guess is that the large-scale manufacturers (Giant, Trek, Spesh/Merida, etc.) will have fairly consistent QC. They turn out frames by the tens of thousands so they can afford to spend millions on factory equipment to keep everything consistent. They can also scrap frames because they will have much lower labour costs than niche manufacturers. When you have a small manufacturer building custom frames, the QC will probably be much more variable. Labour costs will be a huge proportion of their expenses, so there will always be a temptation to let stuff through if you think you can get away with it.

It’s more important for the niche manufacturers as well. They are selling a usually more expensive version of a product and quality becomes a huge part of their USP.

As a more general aside, I worry about the idea of giving allowances for problem frames making it out to the public. A misalignment issue is annoying, a poor weld or other structural concern is a different ballgame…

Fair enough. To be honest if you fit a 30mm BB in a BSA frame you should expect it to fail within a year. There are no good ones as far as I can tell. We stopped selling 30mm axled cranks for that reason. Even the most expensive ones fail quickly relative to their 24mm equivalents. 30mm is a step too far for BSA BBs. SRAM wisely dropped a mm from theirs to make it work, and of course got panned by many keyboard warriors for being awkward despite the fact that it was completely (and obviously to be fair) necessary to make a single, large bore axle work on all platforms.

There is for sure a QC issue in the far east – they focus more on delivery of the quantity than the quality. Left unchecked they will deliver you X-hundred frames on the date you wanted them whether they’re all good or not. If you take your QC seriously you need to instigate a second level of QC away from the factory, or embed someone there. Nowadays, we bring all the frames into the UK, disassemble then reassemble each one and only after its been checked they get built or shipped out again. And we use 2 of the ‘best’ factories.

Yeah, a second (or even third) line of QC is wise… but no one should be taking away from this that Kingdom don’t do the same. This is just one frame.

One swallow does not a summer make.

Yeah, a second (or even third) line of QC is wise… but no one should be taking away from this that Kingdom don’t do the same. This is just one frame.

One swallow does not a summer make.

🙂

Funnily enough I quite like the Kingdom frames as frames go, although can’t say im sold on LT hardtails in general. I have found it hard to balance travel Vs weight Vs comfort – I always felt like I was under or overbiked for the situation

Is 9001 (or variants) widely used in the bike industry? I work in the aerospace industry and was (less so in the last year) heavily involved in the business management system, which was based on 9001. It’s great having a QC process, but unless you are holding your own internal processes to account it quite quickly becomes wallpaper (learnt this the hard way!).

Is 9001 (or variants) widely used in the bike industry? I work in the aerospace industry and was (less so in the last year) heavily involved in the business management system, which was based on 9001.

This is the same industry that made an airliner programmed to fly itself into the ground?

Neverminding the BB for a moment, and the sweary man. Remember reading somewhere that visual appearance of a Ti weld isn’t a good indicator of weld integrity, however- not sure I could part with money for something that’s as messily welded as that – not when some of the Ti specialists, Moots, Eriksen, etc, show how neat Ti welding can be… or is that neatness just artful showboating and not necessary?

He’s an acquired taste

He’s at the very least a misogynist who’s encouraged others to violence and is apparently happy to use Holocaust imagery, that’s not a “taste” anyone should be in a hurry to acquire quite frankly.

And let’s not forget the whole point of his You Tube channel is to drive footfall to his own shop. His whole “shtick” is basically “Oh look, low cost high volume manufacturers sometimes don’t have have great QC”. That shouldn’t come as a massive surprise to any fully functioning adult and that fact that he keeps repeating it, only serves to re-enforce the fact that some folk are clearly hard of thinking.  You can have your own opinion on whether slagging of other manufacturers products in order to promote your own is a viable long term strategy; personally I think it’s pretty low drawer, and will likely invariably end with a “hoist by your own petard moment” if one of his own products fails.

Given it’s a 2nd hand frame with unknown provenance only serves to re-enforce his douche-bag status to my mind.

will likely invariably end with a “hoist by your own petard moment” if one of his own products fails.

I always assumed he was the product, kinda like Donald Trump.

This is the same industry that made an airliner programmed to fly itself into the ground?

Same industry, completely unrelated process.

The story behind that is quite eye opening. BBC did a good article on the history of it. Reassuring (it wasn’t a failure method that could impact other planes) and worrying (how the hell was it allowed) in equal measure.

At best it was incompetence on behalf of the manufacturer and the authority, but some of the decisions make you wonder what was actually going on

Is 9001 (or variants) widely used in the bike industry?

Yes, and I’ve seen really sloppy QC from factories that are ISO9001 certified. One of the problems is there has to be a check for something in the first place, with so many changes to spec and design and factory efficiency being based on not changing the entire QC process every time a different product goes down the line, or no more than you really need to, that’s where errors come in.

It’s great having a QC process, but unless you are holding your own internal processes to account it quite quickly becomes wallpaper (learnt this the hard way!).

Exactly this too. A tick in a box doesn’t always mean it was actually checked.

My guess is that the large-scale manufacturers (Giant, Trek, Spesh/Merida, etc.) will have fairly consistent QC. They turn out frames by the tens of thousands so they can afford to spend millions on factory equipment to keep everything consistent. They can also scrap frames because they will have much lower labour costs than niche manufacturers. When you have a small manufacturer building custom frames, the QC will probably be much more variable. Labour costs will be a huge proportion of their expenses, so there will always be a temptation to let stuff through if you think you can get away with it.

IME it doesn’t really work like this. The bigger factories are generally big because they reliably produce on time at a workable price and quality level. Smaller factories can appeal to brands who can charge a premium, the brand pays the factory a premium them because they’re good at making things accurately, being adaptable with smaller MOQs etc. The good factories of any size pay better to keep staff as that helps efficiency which helps minimise overheads. And as Ben said, it’s the imbedded QC resources or importance of the business relationship that keeps things in line more than anything else.

IME it doesn’t really work like this.

The bigger point though was that it’s not really a problem “across the industry”, just that some manufacturers (might) have QC problems. I’ve never owned a custom frame, but the mass produced frames I’ve had have all been fine.

Agreed, I wouldn’t say it’s a whole-industry problem. I think if things generally slowed down a bit and were less price driven we might see fewer problems but there are good factories and brands out there who always have done and will do things well, and they get a deserved rep for it. I think it’s worth supporting them.

Poor QC is one thing but surely if these brands were prepared to hold their hands up and offer customers what theyve paid for on the warranty hambini wouldnt have much to rant about.

benpinnick has it right. you need people at the other end. targets will be met even if some shite needs sent to get it done.

Having a good laugh at the Kingdom apologists here “don’t expect aerospace grade engineering”!

In fairness, he’s a bellend when critiquing other manufacturers too.

How many of us actually take time to measure a press fit BB shell (for example) on a new bike though – size, ovality and alignment?

Realistically never, just slap the BB in with a bit of grease and never think about it again until it starts creaking.

Interesting video above, and quite refreshing to see a normal guy talking engineering.
Not too geeky and just normal without getting all shouty and sweary like the child who made the bottom bracket.

His talk on his new mtb was good too, will watch his vids more me thinks.

edit. Forgot to ask the main question.
Am I being a bit daft but, how does the bottom bracket go into the frame? Normally one end comes off so it can be pushed through but the talk of it being one piece etc seems to negate that.

edit edit 😀
Presumably it pushes through completely. Makes sense… doh.

Thanks for the vid Paton…reassuring as I have one of these going into my build, albeit the non-racing version.

Figured it may prove cheaper in the long run than swapping out two piece units should I get any alignment/creaking issues.

nickc
His whole “shtick” is basically “Oh look, low cost high volume manufacturers sometimes don’t have have great QC”. That shouldn’t come as a massive surprise to any fully functioning adult and that fact that he keeps repeating it, only serves to re-enforce the fact that some folk are clearly hard of thinking. You can have your own opinion on whether slagging of other manufacturers products in order to promote your own is a viable long term strategy; personally I think it’s pretty low drawer, and will likely invariably end with a “hoist by your own petard moment” if one of his own products fails.

Given it’s a 2nd hand frame with unknown provenance only serves to re-enforce his douche-bag status to my mind.

‘high volume low cost’ … they’re £1000+ carbon fibre (and in this case titanium) bikes, not £69 BSOs from Argos.

Apparently I must be hard of thinking because it was surprising to me that bikes at that price point would be leaving the factory with a crank that cannot spin freely. It’s piss poor and I’m glad he exposes it.

As for his humour, not my thing, but then again not really any worse than Frankie Boyle (e.g. ‘i bet your pussy’s seen more action than helmand province’, rape joke about victoria pendleton not being able to lift him off of her, whatever it was he said about Jordan’s disabled kid etc) that a lot of people are apparently fine with.

Apparently I must be hard of thinking because it was surprising to me that bikes at that price point would be leaving the factory with a crank that cannot spin freely. It’s piss poor and I’m glad he exposes it.

But, it didn’t leave the factory that way. It’s a second hand frame that could well suffer a bent ISG mount that could cause that exact problem, AND its a 30mm axle BSA BB being fitted years later, a style of product which are generally notorious for being draggy irrespective of the frame.

But, it didn’t leave the factory that way.

To be pedantic, I’m not sure that’s ever been established?

benpinnick
But, it didn’t leave the factory that way. It’s a second hand frame that could well suffer a bent ISG mount that could cause that exact problem, AND its a 30mm axle BSA BB being fitted years later, a style of product which are generally notorious for being draggy irrespective of the frame.

Ben, I was talking about the channel as a whole in response to nickc’s comment that these are ‘high volume low cost’ frames. Time and time again, even on expensive gear we see BBs that are oval, not aligned, undersized etc. It’s utter crap and I’m glad he exposes it.

A correctly aligned and sized BB shell should not be too much to ask on any bike more expensive than a BSO really. Let alone on a £2000+ bike.

If you think that’s the cause on this specific frame, why don’t you post it in the comments on his video. I would at least watch it first though.

A correctly aligned and sized BB shell should not be too much to ask on any bike

People would only bitch about yet another standard 😉