Oh Canyon! All I ever wanted was a little love and attention…….

Pennersunited wrote:

*****NEW UPDATE***** 12th June

I literally want to cry….

“has been chasing the issue with our German team for you, there has been a delay in getting the new frame-set on route to us. We are arranging the frame to ship as quickly as possible, this is likely however to take a additional two weeks. I understand this is frustrating, “

Really? Frustrating?

Blimey!

I am quite amazed to be perfectly honest. I have just noticed that they don’t have any Ultimate CF SLX Disc 8.0 Di2 framesets in stock, but do have the mechanical frameset in stock.

This might be where some other manufacturers actually surpass Canyon. Other manufacturers have warehouses in the UK full of all the frames and components required to build any of their bikes. It’s quite impressive actually, they will literally provide a new frame to a shop with next day delivery!

Are you going to proceed with Canyon or take your chances elsewhere?

   If you read the canyon

   If you read the canyon manual that comes with the bike it even advises not to use a workstand clamp on the frame.

crazy-legs wrote:

Additionally they also specifically make a claim that the frame/bike is “robust”, again this description leads one to think that the bike will not be a complete write off with a simple sideways fall with no other object/persons involved. 

Depends what it falls onto. I refer you back to the engineering and design. You can drive a car along a road at 70mph. LOADS of kinetic energy and force going through it. But if that same car falls sideways off a small ramp you’ll write it off. If it hits a wall at even 10mph you’ll bend the chassis or dent the doors or break the bumper.

If you drop a hammer or a rock onto a bike you’d expect it to dent the tube very significantly. So why should dropping the bike onto a road be any different? It’s not designed to take that force in that way.

If the rider has landed across the top tube in the fall then that’s force and weight acting in a direction and manner totally out of design spec. That said I still reckon you should be able to get the original frame back (after all it’s still yours I assume?) and just get it repaired. Any decent carbon place should be able to cut the tube and rebuild it, I’ve seen plenty of pictures of similar repairs including to Pinarello and Cervelo. One of the frames was the result of a rider sitting astride the top tube outside the cafe, not even a fall/crash. Just weight going through the bike in a way it wasn’t designed to cope with.

Spot on.

To try and explain it in, perhaps, more understandable terms; if you dropped a bowling ball (about 7kg) from waist height onto the side of the top tube, a failure would likely occur. The force of a rider falling is likely to exceed this example somewhat.

Regardless of whether one deems the event a crash or a fall, expecting a manufacturer to warranty this is unrealistic IMO. There was a similar thread a while back; a first-time poster who had damaged their frame through non-standard use, but expected a warranty http://road.cc/content/forum/220815-dont-buy-canyon

Despite this, it does sound like Canyon’s customer service hasn’t been all it might be expected in the aftermath trying to get a replacement frame – which is disappointing, to say the least!

Rapha Nadal wrote:

700c wrote:

Can’t people just admit they chose an online-only manufacturer to save money, and the trade off is there is no face to face local customer support/ handover, which has value to most/ some consumers, especially when things go wrong. Rubbishing the LBS model in this case seems to be an attempt to justify, or spin, one’s own buying decisions.

Folk are only interested in the price and not the value.

Hat’s off to the OP for trying to pass off a crashed frame as a warranty claim though!!

Falling sideways at zero mph is not a crash, that’s a fall, there’s a very subtle but significant difference to one that involves a collision which in the definition of what most people take is with forward motion and/or with another vehicle or person. The fall was no different to if you rested your bike against the shed and it fell sideways. If your £4000 bike then completely broke with little more than a sideways fall then the product is not just in my eyes but would be under EU/UK law not fit for purpose, that being a bicycle to be used by persons up to and including 120kg, which is very much above the avergae weight of a male so by definition you are led to beleive the frame is robust in nature by the claim by the manufacturer for that to be okay as a weight limit and from that kinetic energy p[ut through the frame so it doesn’t break in use by such a big person. Additionally they also specifically make a claim that the frame/bike is “robust”, again this description leads one to think that the bike will not be a complete write off with a simple sideways fall with no other object/persons involved. 

This was the whole point of the 6 year rule, manufacturers cannot simply obviate themselves of  responsibility for their shoddy products and the old 1 year guarantee nonsense particularly on goods one is told are robust and can be used by well above average size persosn that can very possibly impart large amounts of forces through the product, this would of course have been tested by the manufacturer in the first instance or they could not make that claim as it would be false.

Therefore IMO going from what the OP said happened the product falls well short of what one would consider to match to their description and what you would expect from a top quality product that is still a bicycle that could be used daily on ordinary roads and this something the manufacturer would know and should take account of when making claims and using words like “durable.”

That’s not to mention the shady BS of  ‘we aint telling you shit about our investigation’.

Quote:

Because essentially that is what Canyon have said, your low impact/low speed fall should not destroy completely a product meant for every day use and must have a certain robustness to it.

One can claim that it’s because the frame is so light, but that would be an absolute nonsense, that’s no excuse whatsoever. Bikes are not ornaments to sit on a shelf, they are used on the roads which with the daily rigours of life should mean a certain robustness when a minor incident happens, like falling over from a stationary/low speed without the product completely failing.

A car is designed to be driven at potentially high speeds, potentially fairly laden, yet if you hit a pothole or kerb (even at quite low speed) you can wreck a wheel. If you reverse into a wall (even at fairly low speed) you can bend the chassis. If you drop a brick on it, it’ll put a fair old dent in it!
It comes down to design and engineering – a bike is designed to be ridden along relatively smooth roads and absorb vibrations at that frequency with a certain weight perched on it in a certain way.

It’s not designed to be dropped onto tarmac and ironically, slow speed crashes are almost worse in that respect since it just falls over. High speed crash it tends to slide.

Whenever I feel the ‘itch’ to move to carbon I read stories like this (to add to other carbon tales of woe I’ve heard over the years) and think, no thanks.  There’s no mechanic to hand me a new bike if I trash the frame; I’ll stick with steel or titanium.

You can repair carbon more easily than titanium. Also over the years I’ve seen aluminum, carbon, steel, titanium and magnesium frames and parts break.

You don’t mention your

You don’t mention your payment method. If you paid by credit card then i would seek a refund through them first on the basis that the goods were not fit for purpose. Section 75 may well become your best friend. Will only cost you time.

700c wrote:

700c wrote:

Can’t people just admit they chose an online-only manufacturer to save money, and the trade off is there is no face to face local customer support/ handover, which has value to most/ some consumers, especially when things go wrong. Rubbishing the LBS model in this case seems to be an attempt to justify, or spin, one’s own buying decisions.

Folk are only interested in the price and not the value.

Hat’s off to the OP for trying to pass off a crashed frame as a warranty claim though!!