Ideally, there shouldn't be any difference in the quality and attention to detail in the manufacturing process, regardless of product line. I understand that different and higher price points allow more concern and attention to the finer details of construction, but sloppy craftsmanship is more damaging to a brand than a few extra dollars spent on doing the job right in the first place.

Shouldn’t have much difference it’s just different carbon composites used

This and Hambini’s engineering insight and analysis are the best indicators of bicycle manufacturer quality we have. The cycle industry charges astronomical amounts. That a 400cc Kawasaki motorcycle costs less than some high end bicycles is difficult to comprehend. Keep cycle manufacturers on their toes.

Hambini... lol

Especially for the $$$$$ They sell for, Cycling manufactures are taking the piss

Hambini is trash...

@@discbrakefan bambini, what has he built in carbon fibre and ridden for more than a decade.

Hambini is an absolute joke and has absolutely no engineering knowledge whatsoever - it’s all bull**it and has no credibility whatsoever. Everything he says and does has been copied from the internet. He has a a basic non engineering job.

I have had over 6000 frames come through my workshop, I often see common trends in models.

Hambini only look at BB bee it helps Gia's business. 😉🤣

Well built frames shouldn’t have Bb issues ...

if you spend several thousand dollars on a frame, then BB issues are unacceptable. Not all bikes will be manufactured perfectly, but the fact that bike companies allow these defected bikes to pass quality control and be sold in the first place is alarming.

You can only comment on what’s in front of you.Most of the frames Hambini. works on have problems with the BB hence they have not been crashed. He seems to be more focused on the engineering.

Their prices are pretty comparable to other big brands though?

DubHeem no. Much less. Canyon bikes typically run a few hundred less for low end models and thousands less for top of the line models.

Tom Zabukošek - Not counting the forks

As I said in the video, I haven't seen many problems with their BB's although I am aware of others having issues I can only talk on my experiences.

@@LuescherTeknik Thanks for sharing your experience!

Made in China

@@magicwill0705 most carbon bkes are made in either China or Taiwan

@@magicwill0705 just like many premium brands, in case of TREK even coming from the same manufacturer (Quest)

The concern with Canyon is that their stuff is made in mainland China.

Many other brands build their stuff in China, often without issues. It depends entirely on the particular supplier, not the country in which something is made.

@@tstodgell It's not where it's made its by whom. I'd rather see manufacturing back home but if that doesn't happen then the workers conditions and wages are important.

@@tstodgell As an old Procurement guy, I would also suggest that a brand has to hold their outsource suppliers to a standard - including testing a statistically significant number of products off the line, on site oversight of the factory process and other elements of a robust supplier management system that demonstrate that the brand is deeply committed to quality.

@@randallsmith7885 There are also political and human rights standards to uphold. That's why I don't like buying from mainland China.

So they fully expect their customers to do the QC for them then. That's shambolic.

Good to hear they came to the party with replacement 😃

The returns are probably the 'B stock' sold as knock offs on certain Asian websites. I'm pretty confident that some of these "less than.ideal" frames we see on certain Asian websites are indeed genuine but sold to a reseller as seconds. I've seen.genuine seconds sold to.wholesalers over the years me being directly involved. not bikes but home fittings. I think canyon and others sort out the issues asap hence those certain Asian websites only have a run.on a type.for a given time then they vanish once the seconds are depleted

Looks like this frame was lost foam moulded whereas the frame Hambini reviewed was bladder moulded. The difference in the quality of the end product is clear

No, the owner did not report any issues with the BB.

I haven't had one in yet.

I didn't say because I don't know for sure, I suspect it is 2017 model but don't have data, so I didn't comment.

For sure there are pros and cons, as you say the ability for custom geometry is a big factor as well as reduced tooling cost.

and why is that, because you worship a certain 5 year old moron?

solvent no doubt

Quest Composites in China. I forget the city. Same that manufactures for Trek.

Taiwan

One bike doesn't reprensent all of them. Sometimes even cannondale makes a good frame

luca bonato Of course that is true! But you know... if this one was a total trash I’d be worried 🙈

There is no "lower quality carbon".

You should take into account though that not all frames are equally made, I think he should cut up 20 frames of each model to get an accurate judgement in general. On the other hand Hambini roasted Canyon and it's bottom bracket tolerances, so it's all kind of in the same pool.

@@Megadeth6633 you do need to keep in mind that people tend to go to Hambini because they're having BB issues in the first place. So he is only seeing the worst case scenarios from that brand. Is this an excuse for those bikes making it through QC to a consumer? not at all.

What I am saying, people confuse themselves with those advertisements from many - we use....highest quality, military grade, aerospace even you hear - classified material available only.... That's all bullshit. If you take Toray level of grading, T700, T800 are structural, T300 more around holes, cuts. The carbon as material came down with the price so much. Resin it's essential part, but....none are going to risk such thing. If you guys want to know more about industry, Composite World is good magazine www.compositeworld.com

@@scobrackc true

I only know of Ruckus Composites in Portland that offer scans in the US, there may be others but I am not aware of them.

@@LuescherTeknik Much appreciated answer! I have one more question if you would be so gracious: How do you deal with carbon componentry in a work stand? I want something like the Park 10.2 for ease of storage but fear clamping the carbon seat post etc. Thanks in advance!

There is a whole area of mathematics/engineering concerned with sample sizes in quality control. Overly simplified it comes down to the consistency (Sigma or Standard deviation). If the quality of all tested samples is very consistent, one can assume that there is few to zero samples of extremely poor quality. If the quality varies wildly a small sample size is no longer able to provide sufficient information about the overall quality. In a ideal case, sample size should be continuously reviewed, based on actual QA testing data and adjusted as necessary.

I understand they "only" X-ray forks and cockpits, as mentioned by Raoul.

@@markus_lg even if they just do the xray it's still crazy expensive and then it's much harder to detect voids in a material with such thin walls and low density. I'd bet that they do some kind of testing (may it even be CT) but at a very low count and the rest is pure marketing. They can scan 1 frame from each model and they can tell that scan all of frames (just don't mention that's just one piece)😁

My guess is that it is used as a mandrel, similar to the wax that Time use. Once the frame is cured you can remove the EPS with a solvent like tricholoromethane.

@@earthstick maybe, but he's mentioned "semi-rigid, EPS bladders" being a more refined modern moulding method in a couple of videos, normally when looking at the more complex head and BB components. But I've never seen an example of one yet. A foam core/buck melted away with acitone is a method that has been used, but (guessing) it seems like the bigger manufacturers mostly moved away from it well over a decade ago...

For sure one needs to give a higher degree of trust into the manufacturers and their QA/QC when buying carbon (not saying alloy can't fail). On the other hand: how many catastrophic or even lethal carbon failures are reported each year? I think even more than the valuable forensic work of guys like Raoul, the fear of horrible press plus expensive lawsuits makes at least the brand names safer than many might think. Raoul outlines quite extensively (from 16:40) why voids in forks and handlebars not necessarily need to be dangerous (yet we have no proof about the actual design margins of those parts).

BTW: when googling "carbon fork failure lethal accidents" one of the first articles is about a canberra cyclist dying after a crash caused by an _alloy_ steerer. And I also found this quite interesting article www.outsideonline.com/2311816/carbon-fiber-bike-accidents-lawsuits

I am very familiar with the Canberra cyclist incident.

The seat stay would be a straightforward repair.

That's a good question.

Not generally no but but it's the welds that can crack with time.

@@glennoc8585 True I gues, but at least you can see a failure coming. It seems come carbon frames fail from the inside where you can't see it.

@@darinsteele7091 not had a carbon failure or alloy neither has anyone in my cycling circle. I've see damage from crashes but not general use. I think it was lance Armstrong that broke a chainstay on a steel or alloy frame.

@@glennoc8585 I think he was using carbon but carbon back then was probably nowhere as good as it is today.

What's unprofessional is a frame costing thousands of dollars leaving a factory without a 30 check to see if BB is round and within tolerances

@@andygrainger2151 They would check them and most would be fine, some should be finished before they leave that's inexcusable

They had some manufacturing voids.

Sorry I don't have one of those.

Quest Composite Technology Corporation

@@Mxrobius in communist China.

@@tstodgell China's very very capitaliste as well , considering they will become #1 economic power soon lol

Well what did you expect, carbon composites ARE plastic with fibres infused!? Just so happens that the right kind of plastic with the right fibres infused is a pretty impressive material.

@@ska042 look dogshit most of these frames though, like a 5 year old has put them together in a paper mache class. I'd definitely go Ti having seen most of these vids.

@@thelmaviaduct I'd put a reasonable amount of money on similar variations in weld/bond quality in some metal frames _especially_ with Ti

@@fukawitribe but they're not likely to fail catastrophically. A high end Carbon frame ala Pinarello seems to be made the same as any other carbon frame, pretty shoddily with defects hidden from sight. Can't say the same about high end Ti mfrs like Moots etc their quality shines through.

@@thelmaviaduct The wall structure is not going to disintegrate, true, but yeah they can most certainly catastrophically fail as a frame or fork. I do agree about the high quality, often bespoke, Ti manufacturers, although that also applies to similar ones producing composite bikes. The issue is mass produced but expensive frames with crappy lay-up and quality control - not the material. The flip-side is also true; there a also good quality and reasonably priced Ti and carbon frames. Each to their own, not knocking your choice and FWIW i'm a huge fan of Ti frames, this isn't some weird material fetish thing that some people seem to have :)

Yes, that was an interesting decision by them to not warranty frames on trainers, especially when at the time they showed the frames on trainers in the advertising!

As he mentioned in the beginning the owner had a crash and the issue was a crack in the seatstay. Then within examination Raoul found some flaws in the fork and handlebars which were replaced by canyon under warranty to my understanding.

I typically only look at the BB tolerances if the owner reports a problem with it, which isn't that common actually. I think the structural integrity is more critical, a noisy BB is unlikely to lead to a crash or injury.

Luescher Teknik quoting Hambini Engineering, a 5 micron misalignment (that can create creaking) can loss 3-4 watts. Which can be quite considerable. I do agree it’s not relevant for every client.

A blanket statement like that doesn't make sense as it depends on the loads on the bearing and the type of misalignment, in most cases the bearing seal and grease create the most drag at no or little load such as the typical crank spin test.

Luescher Teknik you need to see Hambini measuring the tolérances of the BB, I am sure he would be able to answer it. Certainly we saw in the video clear misalignment of the BB as manufacturers bore it out from both sides, and Carbon. I am no expert, but I do accept him as an expert. Canyon even asked him to consult for their BB issues. In terms of grease, totally agree. Good to hear your ideas.

Quest composites also make Trek bikes

Most frames are MFG'd in China.

Oz cycles chimes in! Two power houses of cycling channels.

I think originally Canyon carbon fibre frames were made by Giant but in recent years they moved to Quest Composites who are cheaper. I guess the Giant frames would possibly be Taiwan or China and Quest Composites would be China only. This I think is an older model so its likely Giant but maybe it was time when they started using Quest Composite forks. As consumers we have to sniff around trying to find out which brands use which factories for which models. I think Raoul clearly stated the similarity with Giant and did I see a made in Taiwan sticker or am I thinking of another video. I'm not really into brands myself prefer to go with actual manufacturers so I'd just buy Giant if I wanted a quality CF frame. I think this is the first CF frame I've seen on this channel that looks very well made in all areas.

Giant is /was Korea isn’t it?

One's looking at carbon compaction, another at bore concentricity and sizing, on a single example.

Raoul knows what he’s doing, Hambini is winging it under his fake name and credentials

Hambini is a kook

Yeah. Other than the fork, handlebars, and seat stays it’s great. And the titanic was mostly a great cruise.

1 sample bike is not a representation of the thousands that they manufacture and sell.

Why would you say that?

@@antoinedoinell it's a representation of their quality control, which happens to be poor. What results is a lottery for customers.

@Bernie Sanders damn sick bern

I think I have one.

@@LuescherTeknik Would be interesting to see one of those boutique brands. Where to they make them?

This channel is a thousand times better than Hambini's. Actuals analysis without the childish sensationalist bs. Honestly I think the guy hypes up "issues" for the likes. The final straw for me came the day he decided to launch an unwarranted (and sexist) character assassination on a journalist.

Send a Pragma frame to Teknik and lets see what it looks like inside...

Durian, why not support a smaller or individual builder in Alloy or if in carbon go with Crumpton, Appleman Bill Holland etc.

True

Thought they are manufactured by Quest Composites? Or is that part of GIANT?

@@markus_lg Giant and Merida make 90 % of bike frames ! 😉

@@leesuuton5083 I am well aware of Giant and Merida being the overall market leaders in bike frames and at least Merida also being a pioneer in carbon tech. However it seems undisputed that Canyon (as well as Trek) Carbon frames (at least the top end) are made by Quest. And I have no evidence that Quest is part of Giant. So what is your assumption based on?

How ?

Hambini did review the CF SL model (no X), which is a lower tier frame, I aussume that Canyon wants you to pay a premium for better manufacturing. It could also be, that this particular sample is good.