| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
CaptainCaveman
Mangled
Joined: Jun 18, 2004
Posts: 11,500
Location: Wherever...
|
 Posted: Fri 7/Nov/08 12:15pm Post subject: |
  |
|
| philstar wrote: | | nostromo wrote: | I don't see why some posters are giving the guy a hard time, I mean IF there is a problem there that did contribute to or cause the crash then the guy sues Fox, gets money, Fox has to make a safer fork.
Why does that get people angry? |
the reason is two fold
1) most kiwis find suing distasteful as we don't have a culture of suing because of ACC 
2) people as scared that if there is too much suing that the cost of bike parts will be made up of mostly insurance premiums, or worse good companies will go out of business cos its not worth the hassle, of being sued for all your lively hood. |
And there is a third - most Kiwis like the idea of personal responsibility.
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Spokes
Wrecked
Joined: Nov 13, 2005
Posts: 5,784
Location: Skyway
|
| Posted: Fri 7/Nov/08 12:15pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Thermo wrote: | | Robbie wrote: | Why? all they need is proper tabs that encompass the QR.
My Pace forks for example, very happily have really large tabs that run right around the QR, excepting only the dropout groove.
My old Fox ones, I would not know ! |
I'm not saying they don't work now - my forks have the same dropouts as yours and they are fine.
I'm saying that with the increasing popularity of thru-axle designs (especially ones that have a QR functionality), forks manufacturers might just decide to flag traditional QR designs in order to avoid POTENTIAL lawsuits. |
I can see QRs slowly going but they will never stop making them as people buying budget bikes what the ease of them. Im sure they will go from "real" mtbs.
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nick_K
No frills, just hardcore
Joined: Oct 05, 2004
Posts: 9,942
|
| Posted: Fri 7/Nov/08 12:20pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Spokes wrote: | | Thermo wrote: | | Robbie wrote: | Why? all they need is proper tabs that encompass the QR.
My Pace forks for example, very happily have really large tabs that run right around the QR, excepting only the dropout groove.
My old Fox ones, I would not know ! |
I'm not saying they don't work now - my forks have the same dropouts as yours and they are fine.
I'm saying that with the increasing popularity of thru-axle designs (especially ones that have a QR functionality), forks manufacturers might just decide to flag traditional QR designs in order to avoid POTENTIAL lawsuits. |
I can see QRs slowly going but they will never stop making them as people buying budget bikes what the ease of them. Im sure they will go from "real" mtbs. |
Even for xc jeybois? They won't be happy with the increased weight (even if it is only 50-100g)
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Thermo
Worn
Joined: Apr 16, 2007
Posts: 633
|
| Posted: Fri 7/Nov/08 12:27pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Spokes wrote: | | Thermo wrote: | | Robbie wrote: | Why? all they need is proper tabs that encompass the QR.
My Pace forks for example, very happily have really large tabs that run right around the QR, excepting only the dropout groove.
My old Fox ones, I would not know ! |
I'm not saying they don't work now - my forks have the same dropouts as yours and they are fine.
I'm saying that with the increasing popularity of thru-axle designs (especially ones that have a QR functionality), forks manufacturers might just decide to flag traditional QR designs in order to avoid POTENTIAL lawsuits. |
I can see QRs slowly going but they will never stop making them as people buying budget bikes what the ease of them. Im sure they will go from "real" mtbs. |
I would agree there. I s'pose those retention hook things you get on lower-end kids bikes could make their way up the food chain. But then they would all negate the QR concept if you have to be octopus to take a frickin' wheel off.
As an aside, do thru-axle forks need a new hub or can you retro-fit a thru-axle into an existing hub?
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jono
High grade mental defective
Joined: Dec 25, 2001
Posts: 7,922
Location: Wellytron
|
| Posted: Fri 7/Nov/08 12:30pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Thermo wrote: | | As an aside, do thru-axle forks need a new hub or can you retro-fit a thru-axle into an existing hub? |
depends on your hub. The cheaper ones tend to be made for a specific purpose, but many "after market" hubs (hope, chris king, hadley for example) can be retrofitted.
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
radiusq
Scuffed
Joined: Sep 29, 2005
Posts: 478
|
| Posted: Fri 7/Nov/08 12:32pm Post subject: |
|
|
| CaptainCaveman wrote: |
And there is a third - most Kiwis like the idea of personal responsibility. |
I'll accept that there are risks inherent in mountain biking. However, I do expect the bike and hardware I perform the activity on to be up to the task.
Unfortunately, the only available mechanism to ensure that companies produce reasonably safe products (when used within the limits of their intended use) is the lawsuit process itself. It's a necessary evil.
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Spokes
Wrecked
Joined: Nov 13, 2005
Posts: 5,784
Location: Skyway
|
| Posted: Fri 7/Nov/08 12:35pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Nick_K wrote: | | Spokes wrote: | | Thermo wrote: | | Robbie wrote: | Why? all they need is proper tabs that encompass the QR.
My Pace forks for example, very happily have really large tabs that run right around the QR, excepting only the dropout groove.
My old Fox ones, I would not know ! |
I'm not saying they don't work now - my forks have the same dropouts as yours and they are fine.
I'm saying that with the increasing popularity of thru-axle designs (especially ones that have a QR functionality), forks manufacturers might just decide to flag traditional QR designs in order to avoid POTENTIAL lawsuits. |
I can see QRs slowly going but they will never stop making them as people buying budget bikes what the ease of them. Im sure they will go from "real" mtbs. |
Even for xc jeybois? They won't be happy with the increased weight (even if it is only 50-100g) |
Guess that depends if any fork makers care about em.
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wobbler
Mangled
Joined: Nov 21, 2005
Posts: 13,534
Location: doing a skid
|
| Posted: Fri 7/Nov/08 12:39pm Post subject: |
|
|
| jeremyb wrote: | | Robbie wrote: | Why? all they need is proper tabs that encompass the QR.
My Pace forks for example, very happily have really large tabs that run right around the QR, excepting only the dropout groove.
My old Fox ones, I would not know ! |
Have you seen Colins picture of the broken pace dropout?? |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
iodi
Ridden
Joined: Aug 28, 2008
Posts: 235
Location: Wellington
|
| Posted: Fri 7/Nov/08 12:40pm Post subject: |
|
|
| radiusq wrote: | | Unfortunately, the only available mechanism to ensure that companies produce reasonably safe products (when used within the limits of their intended use) is the lawsuit process itself. It's a necessary evil. |
While lawsuits play an important role in determining what is resonable and what isn't, they are hardly the only mechanism available. It is primarily various standards and consumer protection laws that ensure product safety.
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
radiusq
Scuffed
Joined: Sep 29, 2005
Posts: 478
|
| Posted: Fri 7/Nov/08 1:07pm Post subject: |
|
|
| iodi wrote: | | It is primarily various standards and consumer protection laws that ensure product safety. |
Honestly, I'm not familiar with any safety standards that exist for bike hardware outside of those for bicycle helmets.
I don't know much about consumer protection law, but I doubt that I'd have much joy in applying for compensation for being paralyzed. A replacement fork maybe.
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
iodi
Ridden
Joined: Aug 28, 2008
Posts: 235
Location: Wellington
|
| Posted: Fri 7/Nov/08 1:13pm Post subject: |
|
|
| radiusq wrote: | | iodi wrote: | | It is primarily various standards and consumer protection laws that ensure product safety. |
Honestly, I'm not familiar with any safety standards that exist for bike hardware outside of those that for bicycle helmets.
I don't know much about consumer protection law, but I doubt that I'd have much joy in applying for compensation for being paralyzed. A replacement fork maybe. |
The main applicable standard is 'AS/ NZS 1927:1998 Pedal bicycles – Safety requirements', all 46 pages of it. The Consumer Guarantees Act and the Fair Trading Act may be applicable too.
In terms of compensation, the ACC scheme gets in the way of most law suits, for better or worse.
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Henry Dorset Case
Mangled
Joined: Apr 10, 2002
Posts: 10,326
Location: Talos IV
|
| Posted: Fri 7/Nov/08 1:36pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Wobbler wrote: | | jeremyb wrote: | | Robbie wrote: | Why? all they need is proper tabs that encompass the QR.
My Pace forks for example, very happily have really large tabs that run right around the QR, excepting only the dropout groove.
My old Fox ones, I would not know ! |
Have you seen Colins picture of the broken pace dropout?? |
|
link please. I run RC31's on one of my bikes. Need to know and all that.
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RussS
Ridden
Joined: Aug 11, 2006
Posts: 164
Location: Hamilton, NZ
|
| Posted: Fri 7/Nov/08 1:59pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Jono wrote: | | banga wrote: | | Just out of interest what sort of burden of proof (is that the right phrase?) applies in this type of case? |
I have no idea. The judge asked me questions like "why did the manufacturers move to the new QR15 and bolt-through standards?". |
Easy answer according to a guy who designs this stuff (Not Fox) - in his companies case because people were jumping bikes with QR and breaking them. The forks/wheelset used were not designed for that activity.
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
radiusq
Scuffed
Joined: Sep 29, 2005
Posts: 478
|
| Posted: Fri 7/Nov/08 2:00pm Post subject: |
|
|
| iodi wrote: |
The main applicable standard is 'AS/ NZS 1927:1998 Pedal bicycles – Safety requirements', all 46 pages of it. The Consumer Guarantees Act and the Fair Trading Act may be applicable too.
In terms of compensation, the ACC scheme gets in the way of most law suits, for better or worse. |
Interesting, although it would appear that the standard is more aimed to limit the parc that the likes of the The Warehouse sell - making sure that they have two brakes and reflectors etc...
A standard that was comprehensive enough to cover the bikes we ride would not really be possible, and compliance would be ridiculously expensive.
I don't know what the best solution is. It would be nice to think that bike companies would be inherently good, and make well designed products and respect their customers enough to treat safety as their number 1 priority (above profits). Personally, I'm going to steer clear of cutting edge products.
Last edited by radiusq on Fri 7/Nov/08 2:11pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jeremyb
BRAP BRAP BRAP BRAP
Joined: Jan 12, 2003
Posts: 32,882
Location: Derailled
|
| Posted: Fri 7/Nov/08 2:05pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Henry Dorset Case wrote: | | Wobbler wrote: | | jeremyb wrote: | | Robbie wrote: | Why? all they need is proper tabs that encompass the QR.
My Pace forks for example, very happily have really large tabs that run right around the QR, excepting only the dropout groove.
My old Fox ones, I would not know ! |
Have you seen Colins picture of the broken pace dropout?? |
|
link please. I run RC31's on one of my bikes. Need to know and all that. |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
