Shimano Crankset Recall

[Permanent socks]

Originally Posted by AngryScientist

I completely agree. as has been said, this is a no win situation for the LBS. The only reason that an LBS would participate in this process is to serve the customers.

If I understand it right, if the LBS inspects the crank and does not find a defect, they do not get paid. I'm thinking in order to thoroughly inspect a crankset will be at least 1/2 hour to get it cleaned properly, in the stand, etc. That's all just sunk time. I dont know what the going hourly rate is for shop mechanic, but even if they find a defect and send it in, $75 to remove a crank, pedals, etc, pack it for shipping, ship it, receive a replacement and install it is pretty slim.

The lbs ONLY gets paid when a new crank is sent out from shimano. If the lbs sends a crank to shimano who then in turn deny the claim, the lbs gets nothing and is expected to install the old crank at no compensation from shimano.

Maybe you're starting to understand why so many people from industry and the consumer side are pissed off.

Keep in mind, and this is the important part.. for 12 years shimano denied warranty claims for the problem they have now sort of recalled. All while engineering a fix and quietly implementing it.

[donevwil]

Originally Posted by Waldo62

That's seriously screwed up -- I ride 180s, which are nearly impossible to find already.

Same here, I'm currently running a qualifying pair of 180mm FC-9000s. What to do, see if I can get them replaced with 177.5s I'll never use and source some other brand of compact 180s for this application (good luck and $$) or cross my fingers?

[Pegoready]

Originally Posted by AngryScientist

If I understand it right, if the LBS inspects the crank and does not find a defect, they do not get paid.

The qualified LBS gets paid (again, they have to be qualified and signed up for the Inspect program) for any crank they inspect that has a date code affected by the recall, regardless of whether they find a defect or not. They just have to log it on Shimano's web portal.

So, finding a defect actually takes more time to earn that little bit of money because you have to box the crank, request a call tag, hang onto the customer's bike, install the new crank.

Not finding a defect is much more profitable and I'm hoping smart bike shops figure out a way to do it often, efficiently, and obviously accurately. If 99/100 cranks pass the inspection then bike shops should be able to log tons of inspections for only 20-30 minutes of time invested.

[Pegoready]

Originally Posted by Permanent socks

The lbs ONLY gets paid when a new crank is sent out from shimano.

Not true. There is a lot of misinformation in this thread.

The LBS gets paid for any qualified inspection of a crank that is covered by the recall date code whether it passes or fails.

As long as they log a pass/fail on Shimano's B2B site with the required info (serial number, picture, details, etc.) and they are part of the Inspect and Replace program, they get paid regardless of whether a replacement crank is needed.

[AngryScientist]

Originally Posted by Pegoready

Not true. There is a lot of misinformation in this thread.

The LBS gets paid for any qualified inspection of a crank that is covered by the recall date code whether it passes or fails.

As long as they log a pass/fail on Shimano's B2B site with the required info (serial number, picture, details, etc.) and they are part of the Inspect and Replace program, they get paid regardless of whether a replacement crank is needed.

Thank you. That is helpful information.

[Permanent socks]

Originally Posted by Pegoready

Not true. There is a lot of misinformation in this thread.

The LBS gets paid for any qualified inspection of a crank that is covered by the recall date code whether it passes or fails.

As long as they log a pass/fail on Shimano's B2B site with the required info (serial number, picture, details, etc.) and they are part of the Inspect and Replace program, they get paid regardless of whether a replacement crank is needed.

Good to know that at least shimano fulfilling their obligations to dealers.

Having the crank serial number logged in the b2b system and inspected tells me that shimano is only wanting customers to have their crank inspected once.

Will shimano pay to have the same crank inspected going forward?

Has shimano given an indefinite period of warranty for the affected cranks? If so, can I have my crank inspected annually or semi annually.

Given that a lot of roadies can't change their own tires or bar tape. Will shimano pay to have their crank inspected more than once?

[AngryScientist]

There is an underlying, basic question here, and that is: What is a realistic expected life of lightweight road parts?

We all know that as you drop weight, generally durability goes down also. Ultegra and DA cranks are specifically made lightweight road components. I think we all accept that most road parts have a finite lifetime.

I dont know how you would measure such a lifetime, but I know a lot of the failed cranks that I saw photos of sure looked well used and well abused. I dont know if it's fair to think road components used in the most severe of services should last forever.

Food for thought.

[rowebr]

Originally Posted by Permanent socks

Good to know that at least shimano fulfilling their obligations to dealers.

Having the crank serial number logged in the b2b system and inspected tells me that shimano is only wanting customers to have their crank inspected once.

Will shimano pay to have the same crank inspected going forward?

Has shimano given an indefinite period of warranty for the affected cranks? If so, can I have my crank inspected annually or semi annually.

Given that a lot of roadies can't change their own tires or bar tape. Will shimano pay to have their crank inspected more than once?

For myself, I don't mind to continue to ride my recalled cranks and occasionally look them over myself. Understandably, many other riders don't have confidence in their recalled cranks and prefer a replacement. If you aren't happy with the recall process and have the funds, decent alternatives can be found for around $200 or even less. Although you may not want to buy another Shimano crank, the 105-R7000 is still available from reputable sellers like biketiresdirect and jensonusa, it is made with a different design that is not subject to the bonding failure, and can easily replace for Ultegra 6800/R8000 and Dura-Ace 9000/9100.

[unterhausen]

Originally Posted by Permanent socks

Having the crank serial number logged in the b2b system and inspected tells me that shimano is only wanting customers to have their crank inspected once.

Will shimano pay to have the same crank inspected going forward?

I feel like they would have to see evidence that inspected cranks are failing. Or at least this is what they thought at the time this policy was put in place. This is actually pretty common, I have had more than one toyota inspected to make sure the floor mats are properly installed. Which can lead to fatal crashes if not. Although I think they just did another such inspection on my car.

The crank recall probably caused Shimano a lot of problems. You can see here that people don't want to use their affected cranks. I think that's going to be a pretty common response when people find out about the recall.

Originally Posted by Permanent socks

Given that a lot of roadies can't change their own ... bar tape.

I feel seen

[Permanent socks]

Originally Posted by AngryScientist

There is an underlying, basic question here, and that is: What is a realistic expected life of lightweight road parts?

Food for thought.

This is not germane to this discussion seeing as the original manufacturer warranty has elapsed on all of the affected cranks. Some were manufactured in 2013 and are way past their 3 year warranty period.

No where in the release info from shimano does it state what they intent to do going forward for people who currently don't have a cracked crank.

Are they extending the warranty for life? If not then not replacing all the cranks is even worse...

Does anyone with trade knowledge know?

[Pegoready]

Originally Posted by Permanent socks

Having the crank serial number logged in the b2b system and inspected tells me that shimano is only wanting customers to have their crank inspected once.

Will shimano pay to have the same crank inspected going forward?

Has shimano given an indefinite period of warranty for the affected cranks? If so, can I have my crank inspected annually or semi annually.

Given that a lot of roadies can't change their own tires or bar tape. Will shimano pay to have their crank inspected more than once?

Shimano says they will only compensate dealers for one pass/fail per crankset.

So yes, we can see this is problematic since every crank in this recall is at a different stage in its life. So a pass/fail today is just one moment in time.

I am sure a good and moral dealer will still inspect cranks more than once but they just won't get paid for it.

[RacerJRP]

Originally Posted by Permanent socks

This is not germane to this discussion seeing as the original manufacturer warranty has elapsed on all of the affected cranks. Some were manufactured in 2013 and are way past their 3 year warranty period.

No where in the release info from shimano does it state what they intent to do going forward for people who currently don't have a cracked crank.

Are they extending the warranty for life? If not then not replacing all the cranks is even worse...

Does anyone with trade knowledge know?

By nature, safety recalls are open ended, is my understanding.

[TonyG]

My DA crankset was sent back to Shimano after they received the photos. I'll find out in 10 days or so if they are going to replace them. I had brought them back home a week before this recall because the last time I used that bike there was a noise from the BB area and I intended to have it serviced.

As an aside this bike has low milage. I purchased it new in the fall 2018 and during that time I was nursing a back injury. And when I did ride, I always had 5 to 8 other bikes that I'd rotate through. The bike did cross the Golden Gate bridge frequently, so it spent time in a damp environment and salt air. Although, the noise started after doing rides with very steep climbs. So, there was a lot of standing on the pedals.

I don't feel that it is relevant that I should consider that light parts might fail... at least in this case. This was simply a bad design or poor execution of the manufacturing process. If I was talking about a 950-gram scandium frame that I rode hard five days a week; yes, that frame isn't going to have a long life.

I've also thought of the .6% failure rate and wonder what the real rate is after you factor out the bikes that are hardly ever used and/or only used in dry climates.

I'm just very happy that of the 14 road bikes I have only two are Shimano groups. I should give SRAM a go someday... assuming they still do rim brake groups.

[robt57]

They will no doubt use the inspection data to narrow the scope. This is exactly what GM did with Bolt EVs 2021-2. For cars it is the NHTSA, for bicycles I dunno, CPSC? But GM had to get the initial scope limited by application. I'd assume [guess] which ever body is in charge determines if a scope may be limited.

Perhaps someone here knows legal detail of this process, mine clearly limited.

Originally Posted by unterhausen

I feel like they would have to see evidence that inspected cranks are failing. Or at least this is what they thought at the time this policy was put in place. This is actually pretty common, I have had more than one toyota inspected to make sure the floor mats are properly installed. Which can lead to fatal crashes if not. Although I think they just did another such inspection on my car.

The crank recall probably caused Shimano a lot of problems. You can see here that people don't want to use their affected cranks. I think that's going to be a pretty common response when people find out about the recall.


I feel seen

[RoosterCogset]

Apologies if this has been said or addressed elsewhere in this thread, but is there any indication that Shimano had production runs in a manner that it's possible that there's variation in how the cranks were made, and some cranks made in this manner won't fail, while others were possibly on different assembly lines and likely will fail?

That is, is there any acknowledgement that there are quality differences throughout the production run that affects some undetermined serial numbers, and Shimano only has date codes to go by, and not any finer details on specific serial numbers? (at least til they maybe get more faulty cranks returned and can assemble a better pattern/predictor)?