[Closed] Evil Bikes - frame failures

and so it begins.....

But their track record for quality has been so goo............oh yeah I forgot.

Oh dear!

15 posts until an Evil owner gets an arse on

it's a shame, he'd been pretty wax lyrical about the ride itself.

That said, my other mate is now on his 4th Rear end on a Mojo HDII in 2 years. In the same group is an Enve rim that has split (Enve want to go halfs on replacement). And with that ther post about Bronson's - is the future Carbon?

(sshhh - i've just got some Carbon rims so fingers crossed)

Not to go against the grain and spoil the doom and gloom but I had nothing but excellent after sale service from evil. The rear triangle of my uprising broke and was warrented and replaced in 2 weeks I doubt anyone could be better and when I spoke to Mike about replacement bearings they where sent at no cost from evil Europe. So I was well impressed. Yes it goes against the general consensus but I'm more than happy with the service I received. I guess it's also down to the bike shop who supplied the frame

I must admit whilst I love the ride of my Evil Uprising I am not looking forward at all to sorting any issues that may develop. It rides so well I'm a bit 'lalalalala can't hear you' about these threads.

Steel is the best frame material for bikes designed to be ridden hard.....why do you think BMXs are all made from steel? Yeh, they can still break, but generally not catastrophically, and it'll take some time before they do.

I suggest your mate heads on over to the Cotic website and orders a Rocket. Plus, they're good guys, so they'll sort him out if he's got any issues.

Carbon frames are just a good money spinner really; cheap and easy to make; lightweight so they appeal to your average overweight mountain biker; plus when they're painted bright colours they stand out when strapped to the back of a VW Transporter.

There's nothing wrong with carbon use in mountain bikes, it can fail just like steel or alu. Let's not open this debate again, its about Evil and their ability to service their customers.

If it were steel Evil the OP's mate had broken, the response from Evil is unlikely to be any different.

The question is, do they respond differently to how everyone fears, based on their past dubious reputation on MTB forum discussions.

What I find odd is why one customer gets treated one way, another gets a completely different experience, surely the most inmportant thing when dealing with customers is consistency

Interesting to hear as I'm currently looking out of interest at the following.

Plus not all bmxs are made from steel, GT for example is carbon and others besides I'm sure.

Am sure part of the warranty process is good healthy "nice chit chat" comms and if you piss them off from word go then it will be a no go!

the damage can be seen here

http://forums.mtbr.com/evil-bikes/cracked-following-990764.html (hope he doesn't mind me posting)

I do agree breakage can happen with any material and, you are right, the customer service is where the value added is (to a point).

Any pictures or details? Where on the swing arm is the failure?

Edit, thanks for the pics!

I'm no expert on consumer law, some others on here seem to be though. But if your frame breaks in 3 months with normal use surely you should be able to get a refund from the shop you bought it from ? The manufacturer wouldn't have to come into it.

Plus not all bmxs are made from steel, GT for example is carbon and others besides I'm sure.

Difference between race BMX's and park/trail/street BMX's. A carbon race bike wouldn't last if you tried to ride trails with it. It's designed to be ridden smoothly, be very light and will probably shatter if you landed it too hard.

Having cracked steel forks on my jump bike, I'm going nowhere near carbon on my BMX!

The rear triangle of my uprising broke

So I was well impressed.

Can not compute.

Hmmm, first-gen carbon frame cracks and company with reputation for cracking frames blames customer.

I usually like to stay open minded until we get both sides of the story, but this doesn't look good for Evil.

Can't say I agree with the guy on mtbr that says that looks like an impact.

A mtb should be designed to take a certain amount of knocks and heavy, but within, reason loading.

I can see a small chip in the paint on the top but that is consistent with a crack happening and then a bit of paint flaking off. I would be inclined to suggest that the manufacturer should warranty it.

Looks more like a failure under compression whereas the red bike a bit lower down you can see the impact damage before and after the paint was removed. That red bike could be easily patched and made safe but the longer he rides it the more damage he risks to that bit and other parts of the frame that might be overloaded.

the bloke it belongs to is anally retentive when it comes to looking after bikes so quite confident in how it's generally been looked after. Also whilst not an xc mincer he's not an Enduro gnarr Josh Bender machine either

Agree with comment about the bike should be able to take some knocks, it's all to do "is it fit for purpose" - hard one to call that.

Ive dented a load of frames and bashed stays, and it wouldn't look as clean as that. I'm incredibly surprised they're not warrantying it. Maybe they've xrayed it and they can see an impact that we can't see from that photo.

I am always amazed by companies that have poor customer service. The internet makes the world a very small place and these comments and bad dealings have a way of making there way onto forums like this and MTBR and will not go away.

One of the many reasons i am a Turner fanboy is their near legendary customer service. It keeps customers very loyal to the brand and makes them happy to buy from them as they know that if there are issues then 9/10 it will be sorted promptly.

I think Banshee are gaining a good reputation as well. Maybe its a small company thing. Maybe not as Evil as pretty small themselves.

Evil are on odd case, as I understand it every single one of their 1st bikes was recalled, customers were left high and dry waiting months for refunds/replacements
Their next bike was nearly as unreliable and just as bad service ...

The latest bikes sound great, but their internet rep is so bad at this point that I'm amazed people buy their bikes

Evil have allegedly admitted problems with following rear triangles according to this chap here

http://singletrackmag.com/forum/topic/evil-insurgent/page/2#post-7105813

I'm surprised Evil took that view, given their biggest battle in gaining consumer trust is warranty issues.

I'm gutted really, my jaw dropped when I saw the Uprising, I was metaphorically on my way to buy one, when my Wife declared she was pregnant, so I put it off, then suddenly 26" was dead, so I put it off, then the Insurgent came out, jaw all over the floor again - but whilst there's a dozen very happy owners on every thread about them, there's a half dozen tales of woe, broken frames, months for replacements, or worse buyers being told "sorry, we don't make parts for that anymore - congratulations you own a £2k unweight boat anchor".

It's a HUGE purchase for me, family comes first, Evil is just too much of a gamble - they were being interviewed when the 29er came out, full off apologies and excuses about dodgy factories and scraped frames and how everything was better now - I'm not getting the feeling it's true.

Even if the crack the OP shared was a result of a crash, how robust are these things, I crash now and again, it's part of the sport - I crashed so hard once I put myself in hospital for 3 weeks and didn't ride for 9 months - but when I did, it was on the same, slightly more scratched bike.

but their internet rep is so bad at this point that I'm amazed people buy their bikes

Im amazed they are still in business.

If that earlier picture is the actual bike then I would kick up a huge fuss if I were you. There is hardly a mark on it around the crack, ludicrous to suggest that it is crash damage.

Im amazed they are still in business.

IIRC the company is basically a play thing for the owner

It would be interesting to hear from 'richiethesilverfish' about now.

Not defending anything, just adding this for a little bit of balance...

Evil blamed their manufacturer in the Far East for the problems they had with various bikes up until The Following. The Following and the new Insurgent are being made by the same factory that makes all of the Santa Cruz carbon frames now (and I suspect a lot of others), so we expect the quality to be better. Or, at least Evil went out of their way to remove that variable from their frames...

I ride a Following, and so far (touch wood) have had no issues with it of any note. I've sold several of them now too, some of those that have bought from me also dwell on this forum. I'm not saying there aren't going to be issues (every manufacturer is going to have issues, especially with carbon, it's how they deal with the issues that often counts) but given how many Followings are now out there against the number of reported issues (and given Evil's past rep, it's fair to assume we're going to hear about ANY negativity on the internet ad infinitum), I'm putting my faith in this being an isolated case and "the right thing" being done by Evil/Silverfish/your LBS etc...

From a personal point of view, the bike rides incredibly, the best bike I've owned in 20 odd years of MTBing. It's raised the bar so high for me personally in terms of my own riding, I struggle getting on with other bikes these days! As an owner myself though, I'm also very keen to know that I will be looked after should anything bad happen, but as someone who sells these frames too, I'm always paying very keen attention to how any issues are resolved.

Interestingly enough, I was speaking with Jaydyn from Fanatikbike in the US the other day on their web messenger, he was saying that The Following has been their best selling bike by far this year (they shift a LOT of them too), and the Insurgent had dozens of pre-orders from their one shop alone! And so far the only negative feedback had been to do with a couple of heavier riders struggling to get an ideal shock setup, which is more to do with the limitations of the Rockshox Debonair shock than it is Evil.

Good luck to all concerned, keeping my eyes and ears on this one with interest...

15 posts until an Evil owner gets an arse on

30...

Sooooo.....back to the original issue.
Importer said yes to a warranty and have been overruled by the manufacturer.....allegedly.

makes all of the Santa Cruz carbon frames

Not a comment on whether Evil bikes are good or bad (or their customer service or anything else for that matter) but FWIW I'm pretty sure Santa Cruz bikes come from _at least_ 2 different factories nowadays, one Taiwan based and one in China.

made by the same factory that makes all of the Santa Cruz carbon frames now (and I suspect a lot of others), so we expect the quality to be better.

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!

So weird the only other frame failure thread I've seen on here in a while is a Santa Cruz 😛

Hmmm - am in two minds about posting, as it's my frame in question and one reason being cited by Silverfish for the warranty not being honoured is me posting the thread on MTBR. I'll therefore keep it factual rather than expressing any opinion, because it is still being discussed.

At this stage, Evil are refusing to replace the rear triangle under warranty, claiming that this has been caused by crash or impact damage. They have opined on this based just on photos, as the frame has been returned to Silverfish, rather than Evil themselves. I don't believe this to be the case - I haven't crashed the bike where a big impact to the rear triangle would have occurred, and it's been ridden almost exclusively around the Surrey Hills where rocks are non-existent. My LBS concur with this, knowing both where and how I ride. I'm now waiting on Silverfish / Evil to come back with a price on a replacement rear triangle.

I'd agree with the comments on how good this bike is - it really is phenomenal. So much so, I was just about to pull the trigger on an Insurgent to complement the Following - needless to say that purchase is on hold pending the conclusion of this.

Hmmm - am in two minds about posting, as it's my frame in question and one reason being cited by Silverfish for the warranty not being honoured is me posting the thread on MTBR.

If this is true I would be using Facebook/Twitter to tear 'em a new arsehole, we'll happily help if you've got evidence this is the case.

And I though silverfish's rep couldn't get any worse. I mentioned buying an Insurgent to me LBS, they told me that I should never buy anything distributed by that lot.

Doesn't really matter how good a bike is, if the after sales support from the manufacturer isn't there then there isnt much point in buying new.

Of course a company needs to protect itself against bogus warranty claims, but a reputation for crap CS hangs around for a long time and puts off a lot of potential buyers.

Takes me back to the days of lifetime warranty Race Face Turbine cranks, that Silverfish used to routinely renege on

heihei you are being very calm about this - I would be livid if I had received this opinion. There is hardly a mark on the frame. Unless there is clearly a massive rock mark on the frame it should be quite enough to be asked if there has been an impact and then accept the answer, rather than basically telling you that you are lying on the basis of a picture.

Is Evil the problem here, Silverfish, or a combination of the two??

From reading the thread, Silverfish have been overruled by Evil.

The Following and the new Insurgent are being made by the same factory that makes all of the Santa Cruz carbon frames now (and I suspect a lot of others), so we expect the quality to be better.

Brilliant, however, that doesn't actually mean anything, as the factory will just do as the are told, if the QC doesn't exist from the first stage, then it's meaningless. Their previous frame builders also managed to make straight frames for other brands that didn't crack, yet they couldn't manage that with Evil. see a trend appearing here?

minds about posting, as it's my frame in question and one reason being cited by Silverfish for the warranty not being honoured is me posting the thread on MTBR. I'll therefore keep it factual rather than expressing any opinion, because it is still being discussed.

If that's actual fact, and I'm assuming it is, being that it's you who this involves, that's is literally, bloody genius.

Regardless of the outcome, you must be bloody mental to be considering another bike from them after that stunning little gem.

I cannot believe people buy these things. I also cannot believe Evils ability to fail, at every single hurdle, every single time.

People considering anything made by Evil need their heads checked. It's like jumping in a shark pool and then being upset when you get your leg ripped off.

How many more times?

LOL at those saying a certain percentage of frames should be expected to fail! No they shouldn't, especially at the prices paid. Surely you pay the money to buy a superior product that has been tested over and over again before coming to market?

With Evil's previous problems they should be 100% on top of this as the market will only accept so much. I had been thinking about carbon but to be honest it seems like the mtb world has not properly got to grips with it yet. It reminds me of the early 90's when lighter was better... The end. That was until the parts started failing on regular occasions and the penny dropped.

I know SOGA gets waved about all over the place as soon as something goes wrong, but I'm going to do it anyway.

Surely this part of it.....

If your claim is about a problem that arises within six months of buying the product, it's up to the retailer to prove that the goods were of satisfactory quality, fit for purpose, or as described when it sold them.

For example, by showing that the problem was caused by an external factor such as accidental damage.

one reason being cited by Silverfish for the warranty not being honoured is me posting the thread on MTBR.

what a load of horseshit

if you signed a disclaimer upon purchase saying the warranty was only valid if you kept quiet about any frame failures id maybe have that, otherwise thats very poor from the distributors

LOL at those saying a certain percentage of frames should be expected to fail! No they shouldn't, especially at the prices paid. Surely you pay the money to buy a superior product that has been tested over and over again before coming to market?

Customer came into my shop the other day, driving a 14 plate Volvo C30 1.6D. Said he'd just got it back from the dealer after the injectors had failed for the 4th time!!! On a car that's only 18 months old... Despite all this he's got nothing bad to say about Volvo (it's a Ford underneath remember!) and would happily buy another one...

There's always going to be some kind of failure rate on a product... Even planes fall out of the sky once in a while (fortunately there's a lot more procedures put in place to minimise the chances of this happening, including engine redundancy etc.) for christ's sakes! The level of care taken to make a £2.5k MTB frame isn't going to be quite as high as that of a £10m Airbus, for which I'm quite grateful!

At this stage, Evil are refusing to replace the rear triangle under warranty, claiming that this has been caused by crash or impact damage. They have opined on this based just on photos, as the frame has been returned to Silverfish, rather than Evil themselves. I don't believe this to be the case - I haven't crashed the bike where a big impact to the rear triangle would have occurred, and it's been ridden almost exclusively around the Surrey Hills where rocks are non-existent. My LBS concur with this, knowing both where and how I ride. I'm now waiting on Silverfish / Evil to come back with a price on a replacement rear triangle.

Fingers crossed for you that it's positive news...

If it was me (and as a Following owner, I hope it never is), I wouldn't even be entertaining the idea that I might have to pay for a replacement

Also would be my position. I've argued over less.

what a load of horseshit

if you signed a disclaimer upon purchase saying the warranty was only valid if you kept quiet about any frame failures id maybe have that, otherwise thats very poor from the distributors

Entirely true, you're not being slanderous (which would be a court case, but wouldn't invalidate a warranty claim in any case) - you're being totally and entirely factual. Great customer service is viral, as is poor customer service. I know which one I'd rather be as a brand, be it manufacturer or distributor.

mboy - Member

There's always going to be some kind of failure rate on a product... Even planes fall out of the sky once in a while (fortunately there's a lot more procedures put in place to minimise the chances of this happening, including engine redundancy etc.) for christ's sakes! The level of care taken to make a £2.5k MTB frame isn't going to be quite as high as that of a £10m Airbus, for which I'm quite grateful!

Evil are the only company I know of who got close to 100% failures.

Either way, how you deal with failures define your customer service. And this isn't the first story on here of then being crap to deal with. And when you consider they're a pretty small volume brand in the scheme of things, that ain't good.

Means that on a frame this new, it is up to Evil to prove that it was caused by crash damage, not up to you to prove it was not.

The important point here is that your contract is with the retailer - under SOGA, it's them you should be pursuing and asking for replacement or refund. The warranty is neither here nor there.

Maybe they've xrayed it

Customer came into my shop the other day, driving a 14 plate Volvo C30 1.6D.

Looks like a company that has bad rep for reliability and looking after it's customers is still trying to get out of a genuine warranty claims.

Just another smallish brand reckoning they're something by designing these bikes and selling them for big bucks to coincide with other big brand name prices only to realise or not as the case may be that they're way behind on design and cba to put in the leg work on cs.

And breath... Long winded right there, phew.

To mention that the rear triangle is made in a different factory does bear some relevance I think as tolerances may be altered between both triangles and when fitted together, the weakest link and all that jazz.

I'm also pretty sure all brands rush their new products to the market before carefully assessing whether or not they are safe, I mean chucks, just add more specifically woven carbon to the rear end ffs. That'll surely solve it! 😉

Still doesn't stop me from wanting one but I know I wouldn't go ahead with one and yes actually still, my head needs testing. 😆

WTF has that got to do with the OP?

Read what I wrote and you'll see I wasn't aiming it at the OP... The response I was replying to suggested that "at the price we're paying, no level of returns should be accepted". I was attempting to highlight that money really has little to do with it, and that hige companies that make millions of products each year have a failure rate too.

Are you choosing to be ignorant, or are you just being your usual internet trolling self?

I'm also pretty sure all brands rush their new products to the market before carefully assessing whether or not they are safe

Or fit for purpose... Long time Apple fan here, up until fairly recently... Seems like these days all they're concerned with is making anything more than 12 months old obsolete and useless as quickly as they can, so that they can sell you their latest product!

Read what I wrote and you'll see I was[s]n't aiming it at the OP... The response I was replying to suggested that "at the price we're paying, no level of returns should be accepted". I was attempting to highlight that money really has little to do with it, and that hige companies that make millions of products each year have a failure rate too[/s] trying to give some credit to a brand I sell/Divert the blame by pointing at another company

Hmmm - am in two minds about posting, as it's my frame in question and one reason being cited by Silverfish for the warranty not being honoured is me posting the thread on MTBR.

Wow, that is utterly ****ed up. Having read that post I can only conclude that it was factual and information seeking. Much like the posts on here it was reasonable and for saying the service you are receiving you are not slating the company.

Evil need to grow the **** up

If I was the manufacturer, I'd be a little peeved about it being in public before I'd had a chance to look at the frame too.

You seem like a reasonable man though Ben, I'm sure you wouldn't let it colour any subsequent treatment of your customer.

If I was the manufacturer, I'd be a little peeved about it being in public before I'd had a chance to look at the frame too.

Why? Should replacements only be available for those who keep their mouths shut? Surely they only have something to fear if this is a common problem

I don't know, it's never happened - but if I felt that someone was damaging my reputation before I'd had a chance to put something right, I might be less inclined to go over and above what SOGA requires.

What's important to remember here is that the retailer hasn't been mentioned at all in this. It's the retailer's responsibility to sort this out especially as it's so new. They have to prove that it was not faulty when sold.

It's especially difficult because it's carbon - looking at the pics I can't tell if it's a manufacturing fault or a rock hit it.

As a comparable example, if a random stranger bought something off you on eBay which you sold in good faith, and then the first you heard about a problem was a forum post complaining that what you'd sent them was faulty and defective, I bet you'd be a bit peeved too.

If I was at fault I'd still offer a refund, I'd also post on said forum and post my reasons for refunding or not, coz I wouldn't want anyone to think I was a conman, and I'm not a bike retailer, who relies on my reputaion

Oh absolutely. That goes without saying.

But I still wonder why the retailer is being let off so easily here.

but if I felt that someone was damaging my reputation

This is Evil though, this absolutely ties in with their reputation. You would think they would want to do everything in their power to reverse that

I'm not defending the manufacturer here, by the way - I'd never head of them until this thread. Just pointing out that we're all human, there's reasons they might be peeved at a cracked frame of theirs appearing in public before they've had a chance to look at it.

As a comparable example, if a random stranger bought something off you on eBay which you sold in good faith, and then the first you heard about a problem was a forum post complaining that what you'd sent them was faulty and defective, I bet you'd be a bit peeved too.

Except the first post was nothing but "my bike is cracked, here's a photo". He didn't fill the post with invective or abuse about Evil, he just said he was interested to see how they responded. He hasn't even posted to say how shit the follow-up from Evil was. If companies are concerned about their image they should act more like Kimbers says rather than the way Evil have behaved. Their follow-up is more worrying than the cracking frame; all frames have some faulty friday specials, it's how the maker handles it afterwards that stops me buying a bike.

I know, I'm not defending their response, just saying there might be an explanation.

(For full disclosure, I can think of two things I've sold in the past few years that broke. One was a recumbent trike, came in with one broken small bolt. Investigated, found some massive cracks, under questioning customer admitted he might have accidentally hit a post at 20mph. Ended up costing him £1200 for a new frame. Other one was an early Brompton rear triangle, broke at the chainstay bridge. I sorted it right away, and redesigned and improved that part so it wouldn't happen again.)

and I'm not a bike retailer, who relies on my reputaion

Neither is Evil by the sound of it!...they seem to get sales on the basis of a weird looking suspension linkage and high retail price which seems to appeal to a certain kind of rider who thinks it gives them a (false) sense of superiority and riding ability while out on the trail....boutique I think it's called.

It'll be nirvana cycles, I reckon. I presume the owner considers them to have done their job to his satisfaction.

Customer came into my shop the other day, driving a 14 plate Volvo C30 1.6D. Said he'd just got it back from the dealer after the injectors had failed for the 4th time!!! On a car that's only 18 months old... Despite all this he's got nothing bad to say about Volvo (it's a Ford underneath remember!) and would happily buy another one...

Not in the same league. Any product can fail or go wrong but 1 in 100,000 or similar is far removed from the failure rate this mob seem to have. You'd struggle to justify it from a 'stack it high, sell it cheap' outfit, let alone a company at the premium end of the market. Add the seemingly woeful customer service I'm surprised they're still in business.

Neither is Evil by the sound of it!...they seem to get sales on the basis of a weird looking suspension linkage and high retail price which seems to appeal to a certain kind of rider who thinks it gives them a (false) sense of superiority and riding ability while out on the trail....boutique I think it's called.

I think you've double hit the nail on the head as to what I was saying earlier on in this thread.

I hope you will give some good support to anyone that's bought an Evil frame from you should they have problems.
If you were to stand up and refund in the situation the OP's in fair play to you...

Under the SOGA it's my duty to...

Obviously I would be applying pressure on the distributor and manufacturer to sort something out (and at least refund me too), but it's part of why we act as a dealer for said brand, and part and parcel of the service we provide that explains why we are allowed to buy said products for X and sell them for Y...

Exactly. It's up the the dealer to prove it wasn't faulty when they sold it. They can pass it back up the chain for advice, but under SOGA the buck stops with the retailer, they can't wash their hands of a broken bike three months after selling it.

But apparently Silverfish have said they consider it a warranty case and its Evil saying no?

I know it's easy for me to say, like it's easy for mboy to make his hypothetical promises, but I'd be supporting the customer if I was the distributor.

Still doesn't matter - statutory rights under SOGA trump any warranty. If the manufacturer have provided an engineer's report that shows the damage was caused by a rock, then fine, that's good enough proof for the dealer to refuse to sort it under SOGA. Just saying "the manufacturer says no" isn't.

We all know that.

But if the shop gave him a new frame or refund they'd seek to recoup that from the distributor, so a decent one would just do the right thing in the first place, no?

Yes, of course. Not sure what we're arguing about here 😉

@heihei sorry to hear your troubles.

Your contract is with the shop you bought it from, not Silverfish or Evil.

If you're dissatisfied, tell the shop what terms you will accept to close the issue. If they won't come to terms or offer you an acceptable alternative, initiate the small claims process. That's what its for. To the best of my knowledge there is a small cost to start the process but no risk of being saddled with big bills if you don't win.

I'm now waiting on Silverfish / Evil to come back with a price on a replacement rear triangle.

In supplement to my comment above, if you made a small claims then you probably wouldn't claim for the full RRP as your frame has had wear and tear that devalues the frame and has delivered value to you.

So you may feel when you get your crash replacement quote, that it's reasonable when you consider the wear and tear already on the frame. Only you can tell.

they seem to get sales on the basis of a weird looking suspension linkage and high retail price which seems to appeal to a certain kind of rider who thinks it gives them a (false) sense of superiority and riding ability while out on the trail

have we met ? 🙂

If it's up to the shop to prove it was not faulty how would they do this?
I suspect by asking the manufacturer who are saying (I think?) it's crash damage.
The shop don't really need to do anything in that case. The OP is not exactly vehemently denying it was crashed...

Or does the shop need to hire a materials specialist or something?