Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

news

"Banned" bike shop claims Shimano won't let it inspect Hollowtech cranksets as part of "inspection and replacement" programme due to failing 100% of them

Concerns once again emerge from Shimano's handling of the situation, with confusion among bike shops about how best to deal with customer crank inspections...

One year on from Shimano announcing a voluntary inspection and replacement recall of Hollowtech cranks, a UK-based bike shop has claimed it has been "banned" from the inspection programme after the components giant took issue with its policy of sending all cranks back to the manufacturer due to safety concerns.

Few were surprised when Shimano finally acknowledged the issue last September, cyclists having reported cracks and delamination on 11-speed road cranksets for years. However, in Europe and the UK, to the frustration of many, including one lawyer from Leigh Day that we spoke to, Shimano opted for issuing an "inspection and replacement program" rather than a full product recall. 

2023 Shimano Ultegra Broken crank delamination 5

This meant bike shops were tasked with inspecting customers' cranks, documenting any issues and, if found, sending concerning cranksets back to Shimano for replacement. There have been numerous issues with this process cited in the past 12 months, from legal fears over liability in case of incidents, through to questioning whether Shimano should instead be recalling all relevant cranksets regardless of present damage.

> Investigating Shimano's snapping cranksets: What happened, unanswered questions and an engineer's report

Now, however, another talking point has been raised as Mapdec Cycle Works, a Lake District-based bike shop that also uploads to its YouTube channel, has claimed it was "banned" from the inspection programme after revealing it is sending all cranks back to Shimano.

The shop's owner and founder Paul Vousden posted a video last week in which he suggested that for all Shimano cranks included in the recall which are brought in by customers, "We don't bother inspecting them, we just ship them back, it seems to be the industry norm on all the bike and mechanic forums that we follow, they all just say just ship them back, get a new set."

2023 Shimano Ultegra Broken crank delamination 3

This seemingly did not go down well, Shimano's UK distributor Madison contacting the bike shop to say they are now on a 'banned list' and will not be paid the £35 that shops are given for each crank inspection. 

"Shimano took a little bit of offence to that," Vousden said in a subsequent video uploaded to YouTube. "We got a phone call from Madison who had apparently spoken to Shimano and they asked us to take the video down, which we haven't done, and they said that we are adding you to the banned list, which means that we can no longer administer their crank inspection and replacement programme."

The Mapdec owner also clarified that, despite his comments in the previous video, the shop was inspecting cranks as per Shimano's requirements, and confirmed his business will still be supplied with Shimano stock, the 'ban' relating to them not being able to receive the £35 reimbursement for crank inspections that the components giant is offering to bike shops.

"The interesting thing for me was there is a list of banned shops, I didn't realise that," Vousden said. "The guy was like 'we are adding you to the list of banned shops'... how many people are on this list? The reason I'm concerned about that is that they are judging shops on their pass and fail rate. Because we had a one hundred per cent fail rate we've been banned."

2023 Shimano Ultegra Broken Crank delamination 8

Vousden told us he had not been given the names of any other 'banned' bike shops, while Shimano and Madison also opted against commenting when approached ahead of this story's publication.

Mapdec's owner continued: "We do inspect them, even though I said we don't inspect them. We do, we have to because in order to send them away to Shimano we have to take them apart, we have to clean them, we have to fill in this form, and on this form we have to take pictures at the back, the side, the front etc and show that we have actually cleaned it and done the inspection.

"But, it asks us, inspection passed or failed? There's no in between. It's a pass or a fail, so our policy has always been if it's clearly failed, it's obvious, it's a fail. But we would never write the word 'pass', we would always write something like 'customer reports creaking, customer not happy with the pass, unsure, please check'. So we thought that we'd send them off to Shimano and Shimano would then offer a second opinion.

2023 Shimano Ultegra Broken crank delamination 1

"They didn't do that apparently, according to the guy at Shimano. We were just shipping them, we naturally thought that surely if we put some comment they have got to do some extra checks that we're not capable of doing or they have some more insights and processes, but the process clearly has been they've just been sending them [replacements] out. 

"Shimano never ever sent one of these [inspected customers' cranks] back to us [...] it never happened, they always sent out a replacement, so that's what we did, that was our policy. I've always always put our customers first and I've never thought I'm going to be on the side of Shimano here."

As per the 36-page dealer's manual for the crankset inspection method, mechanics are required to undertake a process of inspecting and cleaning. The recall of last September is for 11-speed Hollowtech II road cranksets that were produced between 1 June 2012 and 30 June 2019, and covers the model numbers: Ultegra FC-6800 and FC-R8000, and Dura-Ace FC-9000, FC-R9100, and FC-R9100-P.

2023 shimano crank recall cranksets

Once a relevant crankset has been identified, bike shops are asked to complete an inspection with the crank arm installed, looking for "cracks or gaps" in the indicated area or listening out for "abnormal noise".

Shimano crank inspection manual

With the crankset and chainrings now removed from the bike, mechanics are asked to clean it by following multiple pages of instructions included in the manual.

Then, an inspection of the removed crankset is required, again, bike shops told to look for "issues such as cracks or gaps in the crank arm" and areas indicated in the manual. If found, "immediately stop use and replace the target product", it concludes, suggesting that if no issues are found the chainrings and crankset can be reinstalled and continue to be used.

Shimano crank inspection manual

One concern that has been raised by the inspection process is the fear of riders whose cranks may appear fine at the time of inspection, but eventually fail. This is a topic that has been widely discussed online, one forum post on the topic asking: "As a local bike shop, is there any benefit in 'passing' a Shimano crank that's being inspected under recall?

"We're not material experts and even if we're sure it's okay it could fail in a short space of time. I doubt there would be any liability on the shop, but there could still be reputational impacts with some customers (you said it was fine but it still broke). Surely it's better just to send it back, the customer gets a new part with fitting and the shop doesn't have any negatives? Worst case Shimano examine it and send it back, in that case you have followed their guidance and if it fails then the emphasis is all on Shimano and their checker."

Likewise, in Mapdec's video, the second speaker explains that exact scenario happened to him, his crankset passed at the beginning of the recall only to fail during an effort not long after.

2023 Shimano Ultegra Broken Crank delamination 6

"We see comments now on our videos on this point, basically saying: 'Okay, you've checked it, what's to say it's not going to fail tomorrow or next week? What gives me the confidence to keep riding knowing that this will hold up and not fail on?'," they asked.

Madison did not comment on why Mapdec will no longer be paid for inspections, but the bike shop's video suggests it believes it was its 100 per cent fail rate that caused it. 

A quick look on online forums suggests the fail rate experienced in inspections at other bike shops varies, especially between climates. Hotter, drier locations seemingly fail fewer cranks than wetter locations like the UK. 

Shimano crank

Echoing Mapdec's stance, one comment on a relevant thread says: "My shop wants no liability for this, so customers can send it in when they want, but we are warning all of them that unless Shimano says they are safe, they are unsafe. We've sent 12 cranks in, saying all have failed. All 12 have been replaced."

Incidentally, Mapdec says it will continue to inspect and document crank inspections if requested by customers, doing the work and completing the form, but will ask riders to take it to another shop to send back to Shimano.

> Shimano lost £93 million in sales from its crank inspection programme and total sales down 30% on previous year

"Our policy was always we don't want to be the one that says this is a pass, we always thought that, even though Shimano gave a liability release, that liability release in our mind wasn't strong enough," Vousden said. "Also we had customers coming up to us and saying: 'Well how do I know it's safe?' They'd come back the week later and say: 'Can you inspect it again it's still creaking? I'm not convinced this is not going to fail... I want a new one, I'm just going to keep coming back every week until you fail it'.

"The way I've played through it in my mind is let's say you weren't a director of the business and you had a nasty accident and broke your pelvis or something like that and you couldn't work, you would call a solicitor and try to seek compensation. I think that solicitor would very quickly identify there are two places to source compensation, from Mapdec — we inspected it, we said it was safe and we would be the last person to have touched — and Shimano.

"That claim would come into me, I would say: 'Hey, I've got a liability release from Shimano, this is part of a crank recall'. But even if that played out, it is still a load of time and effort and stress and I've got better things to do than fight out a case... we're busy enough as it is, I don't need to be in communication with insurance companies and solicitors and doing this, even if it turned out I could just shift everything to Shimano.

shimano crank failure - via HawkinsPeter on rodcc forum

"I'm really proud of our stance, I will always put my customers first and I always think so long as I have customers I'll have suppliers. We've not been banned from supplying Shimano, they were absolutely clear on that. We can still do inspections, we are just not going to be paid for it."

On the legal concerns, last year we spoke to Leigh Day partner Thomas Jervis in an episode of the road.cc podcast, the solicitor telling us the whole recall is "a mess".

"I personally don't understand why it's still acceptable in the eyes of Shimano for consumers to be using this component as part of their bike until it basically fails," he said. "It's lose-lose for cyclists. Shimano can't have it both ways.

"The number one priority for Shimano should be that no more riders are harmed. I think the focus should be on preventing these accidents happening before they do, I see too many of them in my job."

Do you work at a bike shop inspecting Shimano cranks as part of the recall? We'd love to hear your thoughts in the comments, or email us at info [at] road.cc

Dan is the road.cc news editor and has spent the past four years writing stories and features, as well as (hopefully) keeping you entertained on the live blog. Having previously written about nearly every other sport under the sun for the Express, and the weird and wonderful world of non-league football for the Non-League Paper, Dan joined road.cc in 2020. Come the weekend you'll find him labouring up a hill, probably with a mouth full of jelly babies, or making a bonk-induced trip to a south of England petrol station... in search of more jelly babies.

Add new comment

17 comments

Avatar
Paul J | 45 min ago
2 likes

Shimano are ruining their reputation. As if their initial reaction to these faulty cranks wasn't bad enough - denying the issue for a long while and taking ages to finally acknowledge and do something. Now they're persisting with this utterly bonkers semi-recall scheme, where they're expecting small, independent bike-shops to become experts at identifying potentially hidden epoxy failures; and expecting customers to be happy to continue using these potentially unsafe crank-sets, and excluded from the recall programme cause their (non-expert) LBS "passed" their creaking crank, cause the LBS is afraid of pissing off Shimano and has to "pass" at least /some/ cranks.

Just keep using that crank, and just hope it doesn't one day have a sudden failure that might lead to you face-planting in style. Genius response Shimano! Great customer care there! What on earth are Shimano doing?

I will never ever buy a Shimano crank-set, or a bike with a Shimano crankset. Always been a bit suspicious of these glued-together cranks, always had a niggly feeling that HollowTech was a bit of a sketchy idea (and ugly). Shimano's reaction on this absolutely cements it for me that I'm never going near their hollow, glued cranks.

Terrible.

Avatar
anke2 replied to Paul J | 17 min ago
2 likes

The late recall was appalling. Not repeating the inspections seems weird - let's hope/assume Shimano knows why repetitions are not needed. 

Glueing the parts is a great idea for saving weight and seems to work well for parts from earlier and later batches. Nevertheless, Shimano would probably be wise to explain the cause for the failures.

Looking at the photographs of broken cranks, it seems that a thorough visual inspection of the bonds could have avoided (almost) all of the worst failures (depending on the glue they used).

Hollow parts from lower groupsets (105, Ultegra left crank) are not affected (as they are not glued).

Avatar
john_smith | 15 min ago
2 likes

Doesn't Shimano issue instructions on how the inspections are supposed to be done and what constitutes a pass or fail? If Shimano pays shops to do given checks in a given way and fail/pass the parts in accordance with given criteria, then a shopkeeper can hardly complain if he gets "banned" for doing something different (which I presume is what is happening here).

Avatar
Matthew Acton-Varian replied to john_smith | 2 sec ago
0 likes

There is an inspection sheet, however they are limited in information and you can't see inside the cranks (where most failures actually start from). Without special equipment, or destroying the cranks in the process there is no guarantee that a passed crankset is actually safe, or how far away from failure.

Cranks have passed the inspection and subsequently failed shortly after, if that's not proof the inspections aren't fit for purpose then I don't know what is.

Avatar
WattsJonson | 1 hour ago
1 like

Ah Vousden. Jerks gonna jerk. Everything he does is for YouTube views disguised as "being on the side of the consumer"

Avatar
Legin | 1 hour ago
5 likes

You may agree or disagree with the approach of Shimano to this issue. However this Bike Shop publicised that they were not following the process that they were taking the money for. Morally their approach may be correct and morally I'm sure they now feel a lot better not taking payments from Shimano under false pretences.

Avatar
Matthew Acton-Varian replied to Legin | 34 min ago
0 likes

Your point is valid but at least partially mooted by the fact that these cranks should have been fully recalled by the manufacturer. Even cranks that have passed inspections have gone on to fail shortly afterwards. I have seen the entire video, and Paul's cohost and fellow Mapdec mechanic had a set of affected cranks which were one of the first they inspected under the programming. They initially passed them only for the cranks to fail a week later, luckily he came away unscathed. Since then Mapdec's policy was to send the cranks off for further inspection, citing customer was dissatisfied by the product not outright failing. Shimano replaced any and all cranks they received without inspection. That's on Shimano.

Yes it was stupid to have said "we no longer inspect" and this was also covered - as it was not actually outright true. It would have been more accurate to claim "we no longer pass" as "any that do not fail outright we will discuss with the customer who is inclined to disagree with a potential pass findings." It might still have led to a ban, however it would have avoided accidentally misleading anyone.

But the fact there is a LIST means that other LBSs have the same inspection policy, and have been prevented from returning affected cranks. We know nothing of this list  - how many shops are on there, and whether any of them have public profiles in a similar manner. I suspect a number of these shops do not have a YT channel nor have been public about their inspection policy. That should be more concerning.

Add another spanner in the works: not mentioned here, Paul contacted a lawyer over Shimano's liability waiver following the incident as given above - and couldn't give a straight answer that it would hold up in court. Essentially, Shimano gave out a document to dealers stating that they, the manufacturer, hold full liability and that the dealers are exempt from any lawsuit or litigation regarding any set of cranks that fail following an inspection - however in UK courts as dealers are classed as professional individuals, they could still be found liable in court on the basis of neglect, declaring such document void. In other words, a shop could still be sued alongside Shimano if a set of cranks previously declared safe failed on somebody resulting in an injury or worse.

Shimano have, and still do, make some incredible and innovative products, but the handling of Crankgate falls far below what should be expected from a customer service standpoint. With the emergence of Chinese brands such as L-Twoo, Sensah and Wheeltop, Shimano have to do better to stay ahead of the emerging trend.

Avatar
john_smith replied to Matthew Acton-Varian | 25 min ago
0 likes

Are shops actually being prevented from returning cranks? What's preventing them returning the cranks independently of the "program", if they feel there are signs that something is wrong with them?

Avatar
Matthew Acton-Varian replied to john_smith | 14 min ago
0 likes

There is nothing preventing them from sending in a set of clearly failed cranks, per se, but Shimano, or in this case the UK distributor Madison, may not approve a replacement if it is not obvious there is a failure. Secondly there is a payment of £35 to cover the labour costs of the shop - who have taken their professional time to remove, clean and inspect the old cranks, filling in the form, sending them off, before fitting the new ones. The problem is that the going rate for labour charges is about £35/hour, and the sum of the active work involved in the process takes at least that long, so just covers that cost as if they were charging a customer to replace a crank. All the shops on the Banned list are no longer entitled to this payment meaning they do at least 1 hours work for nothing when they could be doing paid work for other customers. Considering many small independent bike shops are struggling, if they find themselves on the banned list they won't bother with accepting inspections.

Avatar
EK Spinner | 1 hour ago
3 likes

"mechanics are required to undertake a process of inspecting and cleaning. The recall of last September is for 11-speed Hollowtech II road cranksets that were produced between 1 June 2012 and 30 June 2019, and covers the model numbers: Ultegra FC-6800 and FC-R8000, and Dura-Ace FC-9000, FC-R9100, and FC-R9100-P."

 

That should be the end of the process for the bike shop, the next line should be ""Once a relevant crankset has been identified, bike shops are asked to return the chainset to Shimano""

 

Avatar
Nick T | 1 hour ago
6 likes

Perhaps avoid playing for social media clout with tough lad statements like "We don't bother inspecting them, we just ship them back" when you later have to claim you actually do

Avatar
Matthew Acton-Varian replied to Nick T | 23 min ago
0 likes

There is an element of truth and mislead, but most likely a slip of the tongue. All cranks received by Shimano or their distributors have to be accompanied by a completed inspection form or claims will be rejected.

It is most likely that cranks that are not obvious fails are not inspected but the form filled in with a complaint from the customer about creaking noises.

The reality is, however, that these cranks should have been fully recalled as was the case in America. Shimano should have replaced the lot no questions asked, but they didn't. Instead the inspection policy was ambiguous and unfit for purpose, putting all bike shops in an awkward predicament. Considering there is a recall ban list, it suggests more bike shops ran a similar policy to Mapdec, it's just that they're the only ones to have gone public about it.

Avatar
Nick T replied to Matthew Acton-Varian | 1 min ago
0 likes

I am not attempting to absolve Shimano of negligence, and I do not need to have their failure explained to me

Avatar
brooksby | 2 hours ago
0 likes

Quote:

"I personally don't understand why it's still acceptable in the eyes of Shimano for consumers to be using this component as part of their bike until it basically fails," he said. "It's lose-lose for cyclists. Shimano can't have it both ways.

"The number one priority for Shimano should be that no more riders are harmed. I think the focus should be on preventing these accidents happening before they do, I see too many of them in my job."

Ah, bless… enlightened

Avatar
NickSprink | 2 hours ago
5 likes

I watched the vid when Mapdec released it, and i completely agree with their approach.  They are not materials engineers, they dont have the ultrasound and x-ray equipment to establish this sort of issue (like the airline industry uses).  A visual inspection and listening for "creaks" cannot be sufficient.

If I had one of the cranks listed, i would expect a full replacement.  Anything else i would consider a fob off, and be very disillusioned.

Avatar
anke2 replied to NickSprink | 27 min ago
1 like

NickSprink wrote:

I watched the vid when Mapdec released it, and i completely agree with their approach.  They are not materials engineers, they dont have the ultrasound and x-ray equipment to establish this sort of issue (like the airline industry uses).  A visual inspection and listening for "creaks" cannot be sufficient.

Shimano pays the bike-stores to do a thorough visual inspection of the bonds (parts glued together). If Mapdec cannot and does not do this inspection (as they have admitted), then they should not take part in the inspection program. It's logical to throw them out.

I would certainly avoid this bike-store - it seems they're lying to suppliers and customers alike.

Avatar
Matthew Acton-Varian replied to anke2 | 3 min ago
0 likes

One thing not mentioned in this article (but was discussed in the Mapdec video) is the potential legal issue should a passed crankset subsequently fail - see an above post - the shop could still be held liable in court despite Shimano issuing a liability waiver.

If you have no legal protection for a very likely worst-case scenario, wouldn't you refuse to put yourself in that situation?

They were still filling out the forms. The shop wasn't charging customers for inspection of these cranks so it makes no difference to the consumer other than the peace of mind the equipment they are using is safe. the £35 payment from Shimano/Madison covers the hour's labour used up by performing this service and nothing more (being based on industry averages)

The affected products should have been fully recalled and replaced. Therefore this whole mess should not be the situation Mapdec, or any of the other unknown shops on the banned list find themselves in, in the first place.

Latest Comments