Shimano Crankset Recall

[avalonracing]

If I were someone who just did recreational rides on bike paths this wouldn't be much of a concern but I still attack on fast group rides and sprint up power climbs at 100% effort. A crank failure could be life-threatening. I don't expect lightweight parts to last forever but I have three of these cranks and it would be well over $1000 to just go replace all of them. As I mentioned before I think Shimano should at least give us the option to replace them at Shimano's actual cost even if the cranks show no evidence that they are currently failing. Because now, even if they inspect okay I'm going to be wondering when they might separate... the last thing I need to think about when I'm elbow-to-elbow in a group ride where we roll into a hill at full throttle. This is enough to make a guy think seriously about Sram (or Campy if it is affordable).

[fried bake]

I find it interesting that in the auto industry a work order is standard practice. Whether an inspection or a repair, there is documentation confirming the work performed. Doesn’t it seem odd then that the bike industry wouldn’t require such documentation as part of a recall?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[robt57]

Fuel for thought, what is wrong with this picture:

[BumbleBeeDave]

. . . I wouldn't touch this inspection program with a ten foot pole. Any crank that "passes" my inspection shifts the liability risk from Shimano onto me if said crank fails in the future. That seems to me to be one of the main goals of this recall as far as I can see. Shimano is trying to shift any future liability onto the LBS.

Additionally, I haven't seen any information whatsoever on what qualifications an LBS owner or employee must have to perform inspections, what procedure they must follow to perform the inspection, or what equipment (if any) is needed or will be provided by Shimano.

Anything less than replacing all of the affected cranks–failed yet or not–just reeks of lawyers trying to design a program that will shift all future liability off of Shimano.

There's also the obvious question of why Shimano waited this long to initiate a recall for something that by now has mountains of evidence that it was a known issue for years. I remember the "exploding Pinto" lawsuit many years ago with Ford, when it came to light that Ford had made a conscious decision that it was cheaper to pay any lawsuits settlements that arose from injuries and deaths than it would be to redesign the cars so they wouldn't explode if you tapped the rear bumper.

Did Shimano make this same judgment and only initiate a recall when CPSC forced them to? A good question.

BBD

[GregL]

Originally Posted by robt57

Fuel for thought, what is wrong with this picture:

The pictured crank was not included in the recall. As stated previously, this recall, as currently implemented, will very likely be expanded. The class action floodgates are wide open…

Greg

[ssb94]

Saw a sign about the recall on the service counter at the local Trek shop and jokingly asked the mechanic if he'd been inspecting lots of cranks lately. He just rolled his eyes and said, "what cranks?" which I imagine is how all mechanics must be feeling right about now. Major L for Shimano. Should have been addressed years ago, replacement should be the standard, and they should make sure the shops aren't left holding the bag. I have my gripes about SRAM's crank design, but I still feel good about making the switch several bikes ago.

[TonyG]

Originally Posted by robt57

Fuel for thought, what is wrong with this picture:]

Like me you once purchased a Shimano crankset?

[BdaGhisallo]

Now that Shimano have acknowledged bonding issues with it's 11sp generation of cranksets with this recall, what have they done with the 12sp cranksets to ensure that this problem doesn't develop in them?

Anyone know if they've changed anything in their manufacturing with the new generation?

[oldpotatoe]

Originally Posted by BumbleBeeDave

. . . I wouldn't touch this inspection program with a ten foot pole. Any crank that "passes" my inspection shifts the liability risk from Shimano onto me if said crank fails in the future. That seems to me to be one of the main goals of this recall as far as I can see. Shimano is trying to shift any future liability onto the LBS.

Additionally, I haven't seen any information whatsoever on what qualifications an LBS owner or employee must have to perform inspections, what procedure they must follow to perform the inspection, or what equipment (if any) is needed or will be provided by Shimano.

Anything less than replacing all of the affected cranks–failed yet or not–just reeks of lawyers trying to design a program that will shift all future liability off of Shimano.

There's also the obvious question of why Shimano waited this long to initiate a recall for something that by now has mountains of evidence that it was a known issue for years. I remember the "exploding Pinto" lawsuit many years ago with Ford, when it came to light that Ford had made a conscious decision that it was cheaper to pay any lawsuits settlements that arose from injuries and deaths than it would be to redesign the cars so they wouldn't explode if you tapped the rear bumper.

Did Shimano make this same judgment and only initiate a recall when CPSC forced them to? A good question.

BBD

And to save money.

I guess some video and an online 'exam..but yup, pretty weak.

But what it indeed does is ADD to the future liability for shimano for this cursory, one time, not documented 'exam'.

I think this is exactly it...quietly pay for replacements or lawsuits rather than re-design...for 11 years.

Quite the *****-Show..makes a failed derailleur kinda small potatoes by comparison...

[GregL]

A few notes to prevent misinformation from developing/spreading. I agree that this recall is long overdue and is being handled poorly by Shimano. At the same time, we need to stick to the facts.

Originally Posted by BumbleBeeDave

Additionally, I haven't seen any information whatsoever on what qualifications an LBS owner or employee must have to perform inspections, what procedure they must follow to perform the inspection, or what equipment (if any) is needed or will be provided by Shimano.

Personnel at Shimano dealers participating in the recall program are supposed to watch training video(s) detailing the inspection procedure. Shimano originally released a consumer video to YouTube showing the procedure, but have since removed the video from public access.

Originally Posted by BumbleBeeDave

Did Shimano make this same judgment and only initiate a recall when CPSC forced them to? A good question.

Shimano launched the recall voluntarily. That has allowed them to better tailor the recall to their liking. If mandated by the CPSC, the recall may likely have been much broader in scope. I’m hoping public pressure forces Shimano to recall ALL affected cranks, not just those showing signs of breakage.

Greg

[NYCfixie]

Shimano is being guided by teams of lawyers (and not by marketing) so...

Until this gets widespread coverage on the national news and social media (outside of bike industry outlets), Shimano is not going to anything more than the bare minimum.

[5oakterrace]

I guess if there is a silver lining in this - some people (like me) did not pay much attention to this crank issue before. Now, I will be checking the crank all the time. I do my own maintenance and, frankly, I am not sure if the small bike shops here will be official inspection stations. The one I have a measure of confidence in, is probably not such a place.
My hope is that any failure is not catastrophic. If it is gradual you might catch it. Getting an okay from an lbs leaves you in the pasition of having to inspect the thing afterwards, all the time, anyway.
I think the hallowtech goes on the dedicated roller bike.

[charliedid]

Originally Posted by robt57

Fuel for thought, what is wrong with this picture:

Is this your crank, do you have more pics?

[jadmt]

I have FC-R8000 with UK date code and you can not even remotely feel the seam where it is bonded. looking at some of the photos of earlier ones it looks like you could feel the seam with a finger nail but maybe that is just how they look in photos. I wonder if someone with one of the earlier date codes could confirm if they can feel where the seam is?

[rowebr]

Originally Posted by jadmt

I have FC-R8000 with UK date code and you can not even remotely feel the seam where it is bonded. looking at some of the photos of earlier ones it looks like you could feel the seam with a finger nail but maybe that is just how they look in photos. I wonder if someone with one of the earlier date codes could confirm if they can feel where the seam is?

On the R8000, the bonding seam is the faint line on the inner side of the DS crankarm, visible in the photo of failure above. The bonding line continues down past the failure crack and goes down around the pedal eye.

I can't feel the bonding seam either on my R8000 cranks. Maybe worth noting is that there isn't a seam on the R8000 NDS arm, so maybe comparing the NDS to DS on your crank may help you find it.