The Sketchy World of Fake Bike Gear
bicycling.com
bicycling.com
This article rides that line between expressing genuine problems and trying to scare people.
Yes, there are plenty of fake frames around. Yes, I'm sure some EBay carbon handlebars are unsafe.
But at the same time there are lots (more?) Chinese frames around that aren't "fake", but are just less costly. For example, there is the Hong-Fu FM-066/069, which is kind of a cross between a Cervelo R5 and a Cannondale SuperSix, except around ~$500. It's light (around ~800 grams) and has a good reputation for quality.
Interestingly, one of the big selling points is that they are quicker to market with features than the major brands. Until last year if you wanted a Cervelo R3/R5 with Di2 cable routing you had to drill holes in the frame yourself. The FM-66 could be ordered like that, or with conventional cables, and with your choice of bottom bracket (instead of the annoying BBRight thing Cervelo uses). Same with disc brakes: the FM-069 is a road disc bike, out two years before Cervelo or Cannondale managed it.
"When it says 'email for color/graphics', it likely means the seller has omitted those details to evade brand security"
Or, like you point out, it actually means you get a choice.
What's the link to your site?
This is like generic drugs at some stage, all the US prices are high subsidizing low cost elsewehere. grey market importation is basically a sensible solution. the incumbents will rely on brand name and safety scare tactics to limit the arbitrage. but its probably worth seeing thru this.
carbon reinforce plastic is ultimately just fancy plastic. there is also no need for an 800g frameset, most punters are better served by 1100g of more durable and longer-lasting design. That is, those people buying retail. If your stuff is free or grey market or pro-deal its another story...amortization of capital expense is entirely diffent math in that case.
NO, it isn't.
That is a very erroneous and dangerous assumption.
Carbon Fiber Composite is an Engineered Material, which is very different from ordinary plastics or metals, in just about every important way.
Please see my comment above and do some research, but do not spread this false concept.
I'll also provide a bit more detail here: Monolithic materials, such as ordinary metals or plastics are substantially the same in all directions. You can work with them by getting the basic info on their properties, and then design and cut them from any direction. Other than edge cases pushing the limits where you have to watch for grain effects in some metals, you can cut it and shape it any way you like.
In contrast, for engineered materials, at the most basic level, their properties are HIGHLY directional. The cool thing about this is that it means that we can put the strength exactly where it is needed, and omit the strength (and weight) where it is not needed.
BUT, this means that these materials MUST be engineered. The designer MUST understand the details of the loads and load paths, and design the material to handle it. The fabricator MUST follow those designs exactly in hundreds of parameters. Otherwise, the part will fail.
On the good side, it is not unusual for us to beat the performance of aluminum by 40-50%.
On the bad side, it would not be hard to make a carbon part that appears massively overbuilt, heavier and thicker than steel, yet would fail catastrophically.
(note that this is just the most basic level, and overlooks issues of the many types and grades of carbon or the hundreds of types of epoxy, chemistries, cure rates, bonding, inserts, etc., and their appropriate application.)
Carbon Fiber is most definitely NOT "just fancy plastic" or 'black aluminum', and that assumption is wrong and can be very dangerous.
(ironically, I agree with many of your other points, but that assumption really needs to be put to rest)
I don't follow the scene much anymore. For specific recommendations, spend some time reading the (many) forum threads in http://forums.roadbikereview.com/bikes-frames-forks/
But I absolutely would not trust a fake/knockoff carbon fiber frame or any knockoff helmet. My safety's just too important, and it's too difficult to detect impending failures in carbon fiber products, nor the lack of engineering in a safety product like a helmet. I ride bicycles and motorcycles and race cars. There's definitely a price/quality curve, but when safety is in question, I'd like to have a throat to choke. It's not about actually suing, it's about knowing someone reputable, with a legal presence in this country, stands behind the product.
I probably wouldn't have similar qualms about buying an off-brand or knockoff metal frameset, or a watch or something. I wouldn't have commented, but it pains me to see this (and followups asking where to buy) as the top-ranked comment.
1) Try to dissuade people from buying cheap Chinese frames (not just the counterfeit frames in the article, but the higher quality ones that have been gaining popularity on various internet forums).
2) Justify Specialized's extreme litigiousness with respect to trademarks (which has gotten it a lot of negative press) by spreading the idea that it's motivated by the goal of protecting its customers from unsafe products.
On the other hand, I'm sure counterfeits are really a problem. It's probably tempting for Chinese companies that are making a pittance selling bike parts to other companies to make copies to get prices that are many times higher.
This line is when I decided this was probably a PR placement. I guess that maybe took me a bit longer than most, but it just feels so stilted.
"We passed our test, but we'd want to pass more." - then why did it 'pass'?
The article also contained examples of catastrophic failures in use of handlebars and catastrophic failures in testing of helmets.
It may have been—which is what makes the angle in this PR piece so questionable. The minimum might be a value that is equivalent to a 200kg rider jumping off a 15ft cliff and not breaking the forks.
(or it may not be, but I'm sure you get my point: Specialized just wants to seed doubt regardless of quality)
I would not be surprised to see Chinese products that are identical in quality to their genuine counterparts within the next couple years, especially for high-end products.
This doesn't mean that brands never fail or do wrong (cough VW) but the fact that they have something to lose is a good thing. Also you are more likely to hear if there are huge problems with a product.
Bikes are commodities now, except on the high end. Thus the cheap stuff can be sold as expensive.
These are complex machines. TREK had a recall for an issue that caused a bunch of injuries.
http://www.sheldonbrown.com/qr-disk-brake.html
"Ideally, we would want bicycles which are properly assembled, adjusted and maintained to be free of problems which lead to sudden, catastrophic, unexpected failure. Any mechanical system will deteriorate sooner or later, and so an incipient failure should preferably give warning in advance, or be preceded by another, more benign failure which puts the part out of service, or be so very unlikely that it is not of serious concern, or a second system should be able to take over from one which failed. A properly-adjusted enclosed-cam quick release assembly on a bicycle with no front disk brake meets this test, by being very unlikely to fail."
I noticed that Spigen uses this approach, after buying a $9 case for my phone.
Specialised doesn't do this exactly. Their bike registration form doesn't provide any incentive except that they'll inform you of any important news about your bike: http://www.specialized.com/us/en/support/bike-registration
This guy straight up says he was "comfortable" buying a counterfeit frame (anything coming direct from China with a non-China trademark), so what exactly is the point of this article? He played around and lost.
China, being an entire country, has some great stuff and some absolute shite. If bike parts are anything like electronics, I'd recommend buying unbranded or Chinese-branded stuff. Inspect the quality thoroughly on receipt. And if you want the ability to return poor quality, pay a little overhead and buy from a US middleman who is incentivized to do the QA legwork for you.
What I can't really figure out is how to reliably get the "better" unbranded parts (small quantities, using ebay/aliexpress). The only indicator seems to be how consumer-targeted the particular item is. Electronic components / assemblies have been fine, while 4 out of 4 phone chargers I tested were pure garbage.
Obviously creating a relationship with a manufacturer is the way to go for larger batches, which is another reason buying from a US importer makes sense. Then again I've got to wonder when I see the same-looking unbranded items in US retail stores, if those ones actually meet their ratings or if the type of people buying them will never verify.
I ended up choosing American-made Velocity rims for my bike, but there are definitely competitive Chinese bike brands.
It seems unlikely that a frame sold in extremely limited quantities would be reverse engineered and copied. It is more likely that OEMs have lost control of their suppliers while chasing cheaper costs. Boo fricken hoo.
The more limited and sought-after a product is, the higher is the incentive for a faker.
The world's main carbon manufacturing base (for bikes at least) seems to be in Taiwan. It is not surprise that when you have all the tools (Mandrel's, carbon sheets, etc) and expertise that there is a class of people building knockoffs. I don't think you could find many people in the US even remotely capable of making a knock-off.
Any pressure against China will need to be well-defined, meaning it will take a decade for some committee to figure out regulations.
Some of these resellers have excellent reputations - here in the UK, Planet X are extremely popular amongst serious racers. There is a crucial difference between these products and an unbranded product from Aliexpress. Western sellers are obliged to perform product testing, they have a brand name to defend, and they can be sued.
I know lot about carbon fiber. I own and run a business designing and hands-on fabricating carbon fiber components and products for aerospace/defense, top motorsports teams, UAV/Drones, sporting goods and more. (started this 12yrs ago after one of the software companies I co-founded sold).
I was a competitive cyclist and still Mtn Bike a lot and race occasionally. Obviously, I think carbon components are fantastic. I could make my own, but I do not.
Here's why:
ENGINEERED MATERIALS: Carbon Fiber composites are an engineered material. This is great because the strength is very specific, and we can put the strength exactly where we need it, and omit the strength -and the weight- where it is not needed.
This also means that the materials MUST be properly engineered to yield acceptable performance. This is NOT just fancy plastic or "black aluminum".
Get the engineering right, and you have amazing parts that are both stronger and lighter than steel or aluminum. It is not unusual for us to outperform an aluminum product with a 40-50% weight savings and higher strength numbers.
BUT, get the engineering wrong, and a carbon part that looks massively overbuilt, thicker and heavier than the equivalent steel part, will fail catastrophically.
Moreover, there are THOUSANDS of combinations of grades of carbon fibers and epoxies, all appropriate for different applications, and these must also be properly selected.
So, even if you obtain the exact molds used by Specalized to make their frame, without knowing the exact materials and design, it would be very difficult to make a frame that performed properly.
FABRICATION PROCESS: The fabrication process is critical. - Everything must be cleaned properly. - Every single one of the hundreds of pieces of carbon fiber must be cut properly, then placed properly in the mold, in the correct sequence, and the correct orientation. - The mold components and compression tools must be placed properly and achieve and maintain the designed pressures. - The heat and cooling cycle must be applied properly. - The demolding must occur properly. - Any post-cure cycling must occur properly. - Any secondary bonding must be prepared and executed properly.
Any failure in these hundreds of steps, and the frame will have a flaw that can hurt of kill someone. (not that it necessarily will, but it easily could -- simply consider hitting bumps in a fast descent -- that will be the exact point of maximum load, most likely to cause failure, and now the cyclist is Wyle E. Coyote... not fun).
The fabrication process is analogous to having to ship software where we cannot make an error-corrected perfect digital copy, but each new copy must be hand-transcribed before shipping, and of course cannot be destructively tested. How well would you trust bootleg software running your heart pacemaker if it had to be copied the way monks copied bibles in the middle ages?
TESTING PROCESS: Both the engineering design and the fabrication process must be subjected to rigorous testing.
On the engineering side, even the most sophisticated modeling software needs real-world test validation of even basic parts models, as the number of variables is huge, and an initial design often does not yield the expected results.
On the production side, every step of the process must be carefully designed, and verified to accurately and repeatedly produce parts that perform as engineered.
BOTTOM LINE: This is obviously just skimming the surface, but the bottom line is that there are hundreds of opportunities for failures to creep in even when trying to do it right, and ridiculous opportunities for counterfeiters to cut corners. And most of them will NOT be readily visible to casual inspection of the product.
I could, with my knowledge and access to my own shop, make a pair of carbon fiber handlebars to ride tomorrow. But I wouldn't ride them further than around the parking lot. We'd need to make a big investment in designing then fabricating and testing scores of units before having the confidence to take one for a real ride.
But, standing in the shoes of a desperate counterfeiter in China, where ripping-off IP is the ethical norm, and who will be selling parts to unseen and probably despised customers on the other side of the globe, and who probably doesn't understand enough about the engineering pitfalls anyway ... ... sure, just copy some molds, buy any old carbon, and start slapping it in and cooking it, just make sure it looks good.
I've seen even legit parts come in from Asia with crazy shortcuts, never mind the counterfeit stuff. I've also personally witnessed those parts causing disasters.
As a rider, just seeing this crap coming into the US is truly frightening. Even the legit parts are cause for worry -- are the US guys actually riding herd on the Chinese QC well enough? Probably.
The counterfeit or low-market stuff? Forget it -- you literally couldn't pay me enough to ride it anywhere further than across the parking lot. Anyone who considers doing so is really ignorant of the real risks.
It's just physics, and physics does not care about you.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NF4MIEkIBZs
When cycling your power/weight ratio is determined by you. Its obvious the purpose of these $1000+ bikes is to be status symbols for rich idiots.
If you use a bike for exercise, then you want it to be hard work.
If you use it for moving around, then add a motor and battery.
Lightweight frames are only for artificial competitions. Then what are you competing at? Who can afford the most expensive equipment?
Also wind resistance goes up as the square of velocity so it's harder to go faster than it is to simply ride around a clunky heavy bike.
There is a saying in cycling: strong,light, cheap. Pick two.
Batteries and motors are more energy efficient than humans, so it's good from a more pure energy point of view too.
Garbage equipment isn't inspiring or enjoyable. Nice frames and wheels are nice to use, and that gets a person out on the bike.
There another reason many people ride bikes: purely for fun. High performance equipment tends to be more satisfying for many.
A dedicated TT bike for your triathlon is a status symbol if you're not a pro. A quality steel frame and fork, 105 groupo and well built wheels with good hubs is not and can easily run you 2000 and I would say there is a huge huge huge difference in that and a 750 dollar entry level bike with crap hubs.