You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Sick released the Grim Ripper in this months drop.
Essentially a steel Gnarcasist. Various reviews trickling in about that which sound interesting.
The medium is v slack, long and has a steep ST. It’s essentially a more extreme Geometron Argon for £500. Weight estimated at 2.7kg. So also reasonable.
I’m tempted to pick one up and see why it’s like.. back end is the same length as my current bike so flicking it around should be just as easy, but will the long front make it difficult to manual? Might be a bit too planted.
Either that, or go for the new Cotic SolarisMAX (out in 6 weeks) or the Santa Cruz Chameleon. Very different bikes mind.
I’m sure it’ll polarise opinion on here (Sick always do), but any comments before I give it a shot?
I like that. Well, I hate everything about the graphics. But still
Hand made in Peru?
That's a new one?
Is that a Marino bikes (Peru) frame for more money in a different guise from someone else?
I follow Sick as I find their stuff interesting but it appears to me that they design their frames by sitting down in a pub, writing down some numbers over a beer and then getting a few made which are sold in their batch drop or whatever they call it. On the whole there's no testing done (bar the original gnarcassist from what I can tell) to see if it actually rides well so its a bit of a shot in the dark. I may of course be doing them a massive injustice here and if so I stand corrected.
That aside from experience of long reach bikes I don't expect you'll find it overly hard to manual, I think the stays have a bigger impact on that than the reach. My guess would be that it will feel a bit wandery and lethargic on more benign trails unless you're going full bore flat out. Good on steep rough stuff as you'll get confidence from having the front so far ahead of you. You've also got to be a weight the front style of rider otherwise the front end will feel vague in corners, particularly flatter ones.
Fwiw the new Chameleon is an ace do everything bike.
Their design process does look a bit like that, but actually it’s a bunch of guys who are highly skilled at 3d modelling and manufacturing who can make decisions very quickly and move through to production using proven techniques very fast.
No presentations to the board of directors and sign off from three departments.
Really refreshing.
I'd love a shot, as said, graphics are 'a bit Ellsworth'...
Interesting and good to get some insight.
Not my cup of tea, but kudos for a a genuinely amusing bike name.
Either that, or go for the new Cotic SolarisMAX (out in 6 weeks)
Say what now, how did I miss that? Anything known yet?
Looks interesting but would definitely need a test ride first with that head angle, in combo with the long chainstays it might be very ponderous and not sure how well the forks will work on flatter stuff. I would like a nice cheap light steel hardtail in giant- friendly proportions though. I wonder if the angles are based on real world test riding or trying to appease forum geometry whores, who will be along shortly to say it's too short and steep.
Bigjim, pretty much my thoughts.
On paper there's some extreme figures, but when I think of my current bike some of the changes are what I'm looking for (I think..). As you say, the problem is getting a test ride. I've asked before and it seems it's not possible. The geometry for Grim Ripper is proven though, as it's the exact same as the Gnarcassist.
Shackleton, Cotic aren't stocking anymore current SolarisMax. I asked Cy and confirmed was 6 weeks out.
Any news on the Solaris Max?
About 6 weeks.
Also, seems Sick have seen the thread, so to add a bit more info/context to the brand/bike;
I follow Sick as I find their stuff interesting but it appears to me that they design their frames by sitting down in a pub, writing down some numbers over a beer and then getting a few made which are sold in their batch drop or whatever they call it. On the whole there’s no testing done (bar the original gnarcassist from what I can tell) to see if it actually rides well so its a bit of a shot in the dark. I may of course be doing them a massive injustice here and if so I stand corrected.
<li class="_ezgzd">sickbicycles<span title="Edited">Hello forum user. I know you follow us so I’m going to answer some questions off the STW forum before the same 5 blokes jump on me for answering it. 😂 I can totally understand why people think we throw a few numbers together and see how it goes, especially since the bike scene does stay pretty fixated on certain attributes being desirable ones. They have been used as a strong consumer selling point the marketing and budget of the big companies is pretty fierce . Stepping out of that is risky, it really is. Whilst a few early adopters will jump on. The majority, won’t. This makes it hard for a startup to make a profit. You are actively encouraged to play it safe. First and foremost we are a rider owned brand. We have 6 riders we sponsor, that seems generous but really they are our defacto R&D department. In terms of prototyping, man, that could not be further off, I feel if anything we do far too much, mainly because it’s the best bit of the job (20% of turnover last year went on r&d, not profit!). We love testing prototypes. There is way more than just the Gnarcissist. I have a workshop desk covered in bits and pieces.
And I thought we were pretty good covering it here too, I like to think we all share in the brands journey. In terms of things just getting released. Well they are planned months in advance, we need quite a bit of testing and safety testing, to just make a bike is reckless and not a great long term business strategy. Broken bikes and dead riders hurt sales. So why wouldn’t you hear about them? Press junkets, we can’t afford to build up lots of complete bikes and take a bunch of journos around and buy them some ales to get a bit of press. So we do the r&d we make the bike. You buy it or you don’t buy it. Luckily, a lot of people do! But also we are here we are open ask!</span>
Dibs when you sell it
'Is that a Marino bikes (Peru) frame for more money in a different guise from someone else?'
Yeah they put on their Insta page last week that they have been getting Marino bikes/frames in Peru to manufacture some of their frames.
I still find it amazing when guys like Sick produce great value frames for the cost. Considering established brands such as Cotic/PACE and others are all in similar price brackets , and yet these guys http://trillioncycles.com/prime/ seem to take the weewee with their pricing.
Trillion are made in the UK, which is hard to compare to Sick's Taiwanese machines. But Sick's UK bikes are probably comparable.
Looks like a great bike, shame about the leather biker Nazi font lol
Buy that or just steal the geo (or customize your own would be the gentlemans approach...) and buy directly from Marino for less money. I have a custom Marino myself, cost me $430 with headset, rear axle, seat clamp and shipping included (then another $100 with import fees). I'd buy another one from him without hesitation.
I don't know much about Sick but I'd rather support the maker when it's possible rather than the dudebros of instagram.
They produce a product fairly similar to Cotic but are polar opposites in the development for product - just listened to SI's podcast where he talks about long term testing and refinement before sale - SICKs bikes won't be unsafe as they use builders that know their stuff but they do seem to lack direction at the moment flitting from frame to frame and ditching designs all over the shop when realities seem to hit home (glued cnc aluminium swingarm etc) regarding potential costs of the actual requirement for the product to go through a realistic development cycle.
Brant - I'm not sure where you get the info from but the 'front men' have almost zero applicable engineering experience, they get a guy to do drawings / 3D work for them, thats fine though, a business needs people to cover roles and they do the job of marketing and branding well.
I would buy a hardtail, I wouldn't buy a fs though - pre selling a full TI frame when they don't even have a sample isn't a great idea.
im sure they will calm down, reduce that ultra complicated list of frames to a realistic range and crack on with things when they realise it's the simple / niche stuff people want from them.
Oh, and the usual screendump from this forum is up on Sicks instagram now - you guys are 'famous'.....
I've never seen one in the flesh but the member who got one of the gear box bikes posted a few pics and it looked far nicer than it did on their site.
<span style="font-size: 0.8rem;"> As for this one.. Must be a fairly limited market fir a hard tail with that head angle, but I'm sure it'll appeal to some folks. </span>
Interesting input from brant also..
I really like their stuff, their attitude to Bike design, and their use of social media. It’s an incredibly accessible company. The Have Blue F/S is a stunning bit of kit.
They are really open about trying stuff building concept bikes and that leaves them open to some critisim but I really like seeing what they are doing, It’s far from a back of a fag packet design process. There are a good load of bikes out there already and none coming up as broken or faulty. I hope they keep doing stuff the way they are, it makes their life harder ( as they take flak) but it’s great to see how it’s being thought about and done.
I’d 100% buy one.
Don’t understand the hate they got on here.
ooh they're watching us
this might be the first bike that stw has not labelled "not as progressive as I'd like to see"
Looks really good that.
Shame more builders don't use a 44/56 HT though . Allows all the slackset options to mess around with angles.
Don’t understand the hate they got on here.
There was a thread a while back, one of the sick guys was ranting on about something and just generally being a bellend. I can't even remember what it was about, but I do remember thinking 'those guys are never, ever getting any of my money'.
nope, never. Not even if it had less weird geometry.
That said: I am happily not the target market, who presumably don't care about the behaviour of a company they buy stuff from.
You are wrong dude! They just looked at a Kingdom Vendetta frame and grabbed a tracing paper, after the stick they got from the first HT they released which was pig ugly! Since then, much better but pretty much the same as Kingdom...in fact it’s like they live in the shadows of that brand!? Might as well move to Denmark as well!?
The geometry for Grim Ripper is proven though, as it’s the exact same as the Gnarcassist.
The Grim Ripper has a shorter wheel base than my Gnarcissist but the rest of the Geo is similar. If you look at the range it looks massive but is only 5 frames really in different materials (Ti, 853 & 4130) and Pinion versions.
Really like the stuff coming from Sick bikes ATM, their frames look like they would be heaps of fun.
The graphics aren't my taste, but pfft, who cares about that shit.
that'd be perfect for the professional vacuum-er, they should sponsor me
I'm a hardtail fan, I'm wondering what jumps and drops are like on a head angle of 62? Not just the sick frame, but the BTR frame as well is similar I think. It must put a lot more stress on the headtube and forks landing a drop to flat? Or is it not that much different to a bike with a more conventional 66 degree HA?
I’m a hardtail fan, I’m wondering what jumps and drops are like on a head angle of 62?
A huck to flat could be interesting!
it’s a bunch of guys who are highly skilled at 3d modelling and manufacturing who can make decisions very quickly and move through to production using proven techniques very fast.
The website says "Handmade in Peru". What do they use, Inca metalworking techniques?
"Superstu:
Don’t understand the hate they got on here."
They're pure fannies and seemed to glory in being pure fannies. Doesn't mean the bike's not great though.
They’re pure fannies and seemed to glory in being pure fannies.
I like fannies, probably explains why I like the Sick boys too.
“I’m a hardtail fan, I’m wondering what jumps and drops are like on a head angle of 62? Not just the sick frame, but the BTR frame as well is similar I think. It must put a lot more stress on the headtube and forks landing a drop to flat? Or is it not that much different to a bike with a more conventional 66 degree HA?”
About 15% more leverage with the slacker bike when landing to flat.
**waits for that’s fella from sick to come on and chuck a massive tantrum (again)**
Bike looks interesting though
Na, Jordan and Tim are too busy designing their new cruiser 😛
[IMG] 
[/IMG]
So that’s why I have a drawing of a bike on my head!
The website says “Handmade in Peru”. What do they use, Inca metalworking techniques?
No Just a guy who anyone can go and buy from , it seems they try to hook up with lots of people to make their stuff for them and its "Cred" bro, made in the UK was big till it wasn't then copying lots of other stuff and blowing hot air seems to have the 10 year olds hitting the like button
The joke is that they have a massive online following but technically make pretty poorly finished stuff that people still want to buy.
A huck to flat could be interesting!
Is there actual proof of any of their products being safe to ride despite them banging on about testing?
The above looks like the rear end would fold on landing.
Philxx1975
The gnarcisist is being raced by their team so that seems like it's passing tests.
What have you experienced to say they
"technically make pretty poorly finished stuff"
Care to enlighten us on that? I'm really interested to know.
They still make their UK frames per their website but these other offshore models are at a lower price point. It's what you may call a range of products. Far out.
I think 'testing' / a genuine product development cycle is something that isn't perhaps done to the same level as other brands - The use of the hardtails by the team isn't really applicable as the are UK made frames to different designs, different materials, different dropouts etc - essentially different things entirely.
They are very transparent with things there and bikes do seem to be ordered from manufacturers (UK, Taiwan and Marino in Peru) based on the manufacturers rough design but with their geometry (OS dropouts etc) - That's fine but there isn't any kind of actual real world testing that seems to be getting done before sale on new models - how can there be when you the customer are pre-ordering bikes and their own personal frames are not built up yet - you are getting them at the same time.
They did come back to this thread on social media as stated here but just how can you test a frame that was designed a few weeks earlier?
As I say, people like Cy at Cotic put months and months into his designs under several different riders, working out small issues (or potentially large ones when you are talking about full suspension frames) and refining things until they are production ready - same for Stanton's new frame.
I would happily buy a hardtail frame from them if I liked the geo - after all the guys making them will do so to their own standards so unlikely to be any issues, basically like you ordering a custom geo frame yourself (Sicks geo) full suspension however, that's a different thing entirely.
I have completely lost track of all of the bikes and names they have now, there are loads but it does seem they have stalled on the genuinely interesting bikes they teased - the gearbox high pivot and the single pivot with a link and glued aluminium CNC rear end but I expect actual manufacturing costs came back a lot higher than expected there which has kind of forced that one.
It would be good to see them focus on 4-5 frames, a few hardtails and some simple, well tested full sus options - their target market wants something different after all, but maybe not a £2500 titanium suspension frame on pre-order before one has ever seen soil to be tested.
The gnarcisist is being raced by their team so that seems like it’s passing tests
When did that become a CEN test like everyone else has to pass? Oh it isn't ,far out eh?
Care to enlighten us on that? I’m really interested to know
I visited the LBS and saw it with my own eyes mate you only had to look at the other stuff on display, I mean Starling were as crap but at least hes upped his game with the TW made frames which I would actually buy now I know its made by a quality outfit.
Struggling to understand why all the hate. Again.
The bikes look pretty good, especially the Wulf 4130, which looks like a decent frame that could handle more abuse than I could throw at it, and the Have Blue Mk2 - ooooh! And all of them look better than a Nomad 4.
D&D cycles? The sea foam or whatever they call it? Genuinely interested what you thought rather than just referencing poor quality. Thanks for clarifying.
Yeah team reference not the best point by me. Just pointing.out they still do the original handmade ones.
The quality of the sick pinion bike posted on here last week looked top notch.
Hopefully with the numbers selling they'll start popping up and us mere mortals can see in the flesh
teethgrinder - why is any form of comment that is anything but out and out praise 'hate'?
I don't 'hate' sick or their bikes one little bit, I have written my personal opinion, I'm not just sitting saying 'looks crap'.
As I said, I'm sure their HT' frames are perfectly capable of all kinds of abuse, I'm not sure anybody is questioning that.
Have Blue MK2 however - are you 'OK' with purchasing a pre-order Ti frame that is a new design and by their own admission doesn't exist yet? - The MK1 was a Ti front end with an open source carbon swingarm anyone can get from Taiwan for $200 and an open source suspension system including the linkages, the new one will apparently use a full TI swingarm too - will that work out OK?
I'm not saying it wont, I'm asking a question, that's all.
I think they're quite likely getting round/trying to get round CEN by leaning on the handmade/low volume thing. Basically what Pipedream tried to do with the Sirius but less badly.
CEN for pushbikes is shite though.The test is unrealistic bollocks. There was a lot on the subject when it first became a problem.
I mean Starling were as crap but at least hes upped his game with the TW made frames which I would actually buy now I know its made by a quality outfit.
not sure why you think that a guy hand-welding front triangles in Bristol and attaching them to a hand-welded rear triangle made by a guy in shropshire is more crap than a frame welded in Taiwan
When did that become a CEN test like everyone else has to pass?
I think they’re quite likely getting round/trying to get round CEN by leaning on the handmade/low volume thing.
They said they use Veritas in the UK for ISO / EN testing. Seems reasonable.
They have to pass ISO to be sold, low volume or not. Only a custom 1-off can get round that and there's still an obligation for the builder to be able to show that the design is sound.
CEN for pushbikes is shite <span class="skimlinks-unlinked">though.The</span> test is unrealistic bollocks. There was a lot on the subject when it first became a problem.
If it's a set of fatigue tests that doesn't favour steel bikes in a couple of areas and if their bikes pass, all the better right?
they have stalled on the genuinely interesting bikes they teased – the gearbox high pivot and the single pivot with a link and glued aluminium CNC rear end but I expect actual manufacturing costs came back a lot higher than expected there which has kind of forced that one
For those that are interested in this approach there is a US builder that seems to have been doing the same thing for a while now. No idea if the kinematics and all that hoooobery are the same but it looks to be a similar principle, stemming from the Brooklyn isn't it? Anyway...
http://www.peregrineindustry.com/
Jamesco - what does 'pass ISO' mean? genuine question - my perception of ISO is a guideline for manufacuring standards not product design or testing?
I would be genuinely surprised if any of the frames have been near lab testing in any way - selling batches of 5-10 frames of any type how could you? Profit would be wiped out on the whole run for lab costs for a start and there are about 10 models minimum.
Jamesco – what does ‘pass ISO’ mean? genuine question – my perception of ISO is a guideline for manufacuring standards not product design or testing?
Passing ISO (ISO replaced CEN but the tests are largely the same) in this context ie those sceptical of what Sick are doing, means your frames have passed a set of fatigue tests that are industry standard. They're not the only tests you can use or a complete set for every bike type but they're more than rider testing. Northwind saying that they're unrealistic bollocks is probably based on the way the tests are pretty harsh in some aspects, beyond average XC riding stresses (but not beyond casing average jumps at all) and they don't favour steel frames - so I'm saying them passing ISO should be a reassurance here.
I would be genuinely surprised if any of the frames have been near lab testing in any way – selling batches of 5-10 frames of any type how could you? Profit would be wiped out on the whole run for lab costs for a start
I'd be amazed if they'd not been to a lab. Really.
If you build a bombproof MTB and you have some engineering and process experience then you'll know how to pass the test before you build a frame. Even I can do very basic FEA to show that and I don't have the 3D design ability myself that these guys work with. A few prior tests to validate calcs vs reality and you might pass all frame fatigue tests with one frame, maybe two - not impossibly high cost for a run of 10 frames. Profit is only wiped out by testing if you're such a poor businessman that you didn't factor in samples and testing and all other costs in getting a product to market.
"I’m a hardtail fan, I’m wondering what jumps and drops are like on a head angle of 62? Not just the sick frame, but the BTR frame as well is similar I think. It must put a lot more stress on the headtube and forks landing a drop to flat? Or is it not that much different to a bike with a more conventional 66 degree HA?”
About 15% more leverage with the slacker bike when landing to flat.
Interesting, *seems* like it ought to be more. I realise that *seems* isn't a very good engineering term though. Can I ask how you calculated that figure? There must be a tipping point where the ground forces don't get absorbed by the forks moving but instead get directed into bending forces on the stanchions and head tube. I remember the Santa Cruz team saying that fork stiction increased beyond 63 degrees to a point that it negated any desire to go slacker than that. And that was on a full sus bike designed to go down steep world cup DH tracks.
Jordan sent me some photos of a Grim Ripper in 'real life', so he has clearly got a sample/test frame for that. I assume the same applies to all the other frames.
Sick are a brand that outsource everything, bar social media, as far as I can see.
- Clothing art work: outsourced
- UK Build frames: outsourced
- 3D designs/Cad: outsourced
- Ti frames: outsourced
- Steel overseas frames: outsourced
- Components: outsourced
- Decals: outsourced
- Order fulfillment: outsourced (clothing was bigcartel), some by Jordan and Tim
Their USP is radical geometry and social media profiling 'disrupting the industry'.Their social media accounts have far more followers than more large & longer established bike businesses. A real success story there.
It's no bad thing. I really like them now. I have no doubt they put in a huge amount of effort pulling all of the above together. Lots of brands do the same as above too. Initially I had my judgments, but after listening to their podcast I was converted. I've now bought various bits and considering their frames. I think the geometry is just to radical for me though. With those numbers, I may as well go FS to make the most of the downhills. If they do a 29er with slightly more conservative figures, I'd have it.
Wish them all the best!
Ah OK, ISO to me is an approval system for manufacturing standards, I always associated bicycle frame testing with CEN.
As I say, sick are so transparent with their business and take every opportunity to show cool bits of manufacturing including 3D printing factory visit etc.
I'm sure if they had actually been near a lab they would have blasted it on social media, especially as an answer to this forum thread which was brought up on Instagram by then - it would have immediately shut down any suggestions of making bikes with no testing and been a giant middle finger to the 'haters'
As I say, you are suggesting they test frames for each design when they sell them tiny numbers? UK frames, Ti frames, frames from Peru, all tested before production? Pretty much impossible when the frames are all on pre order and the first ones to arrive in the UK are paying customers, no?
As I say, not trying to be a 'hater' it's just that there is a reason other brands don't operate this business model, and it's not because of a lack of board rooms or the because of their new school thinking.
I think that £550 single pivot is a bargain, if they can prove some longevity and get some demo bikes going I might even be a customer myself, they just need to take their time a bit.
If they do a 29er with slightly more conservative figures, I’d have it.
I'd be interested too at that price point. But yeah I think this one just looks a bit out there for a 29er especially without a test ride option down the lbs. I like the Ellsworth styling, though even though I say dude and cool all the time, sick=vomit for me, not a problem though.
if they outsource it the liability should in theory lie with the manufacturer ,outsource everything it might become a blame game somewhere else , i e you designed this and I made it to your spec
there's an argument that a responsible manufacturer should not build something if it would cause risk and advise accordingly it could come back to bite you in the arse , reputable companies will have liability insurance in place , if someone proves you were culpable or negligent your insurance might no cover you but hey
As I say, you are suggesting they test frames for each design when they sell them tiny numbers? UK frames, Ti frames, frames from Peru, all tested before production? Pretty much impossible when the frames are all on pre order and the first ones to arrive in the UK are paying customers, no?
As I say, not trying to be a ‘hater’ it’s just that there is a reason other brands don’t operate this business model, and it’s not because of a lack of board rooms or the because of their new school thinking.
I may be wrong, but I doubt it - yes, I am suggesting they're tested sufficiently. ISO is partly about self-certification, ie you need to meet the standard but you don't need to test every frame in every way if the tube spec and general design is based on a previous design that passes. ISO verifies a design, QC/QA of production is another process. As mickmcd says, some of this will be an outsourcing thing, ISO testing is often outsourced anyway unless you're BMC or Trek etc with a big lab, but the responsibility lies with the importer / brand however you do it. Most brands outsource production to some extent.
Short version - I would be suprised if guys who are smart enough to figure out their product, brand and market won't have figured out how to read an ISO doc and send a few frames to a test house and pay the fairly small bill that will come back.
it’s just that there is a reason other brands don’t operate this business model,
That's where I like what they're doing. I'm quite un-Sick, I like metal but I don't have tats or loud Ts and I haven't sent anything to flat in 15 years or so, I ride drop bars even, but I do appreciate strong brand work. Create a strong brand and you can make small runs that build the brand. Better than sinking £20k in a digital marketing agency or some other pointless stuff.
(edit to add, ISO, CEN, same thing really, sorry. Current docs are ISO-numbered so that's what I call them)
Interesting point Mike, I'm not sure about that one other than for when you are just plugging geometry into the manufacturers design though - If you change aspects of the design in terms of gussets, dropout type, travel, kinematics etc beyond their original design then I think its upto the designing company to ensure everything is OK.
That's just the worst case scenario though and as you say, in the case of Sick it looks like the people actually making the bikes wouldn't supply anything if it was dangerous but if the bike rides like crap because of geo that doesn't work together, poor kinematics or flex etc who is to blame then, certainly not the manufacturer.
Some people think a frame needs a good year of use (in terms of riding time) plus testing certs before it should be publicly available, in the case of a FS frame, I have to agree.
Jamesco - I understand ISO, working with ISO 9001 accredited companies on a daily basis but it really wont make any difference to the construction of a bicycle frame in Peru which are 100% not ISO approved, will ?- Sick are also not ISO approved.
You are lumping lab / CEN testing of frames to European standards in with normal ISO 9001 quality management and I fail to see how ISO processes ensure a frame has tested geometry, rides well or is lab tested? - its almost completely irrelevant to all of these, all it does is ensure the company produces its goods to a certain standard of quality.
As I say, I would be very happy to be proved wrong, but I doubt a single frame has ever been near a laboratory for testing, they are exactly the kind of guys to let us all know if they had - It would have shut this thread down for a start.
crankrider - there's more to ISO than just ISO9001... The older (C)EN standard for bike safety has been replaced with ISO4210:2014, and Veritas do provide testing to that standard. Sick may well not be ISO9001 certified as that's simply a quality management system, but they may well have submitted frames for ISO4210:2014 testing. If they have, and the frames have passed, then in theory they're as safe as anyone elses.
Crank rider - you clearly don't understand ISO.
There are many many ISO standards.
ISO9001 or whatever is the quality system and is pretty irrelevant to what Jameso is saying.
ISO4210 is a standard for bike frame fatigue testing. Veritas has a lab somewhere near Manchester that does it for a surprisingly reasonable price. I'd love to know if Sick have done it.
I have one of the Eastern Ti Sick frames, quality looks lovely. Hopefully it will last just as long other frames I have, two of them from before CEN testing was even a thing
States in one of their Instagram posts they use Veritas as they are legally required to have them tested.
I am well aware that there are more standards than 9001 but what was being described was a general methodology to production which falls into the 9001 remit, not the specific testing of a product which is a different thing entirely - as you say ISO4201.
As I say, I am not trying to 'hate' and would be happy to see that Sick have used some form of testing to verify their products, I am just doubting it has been done as of yet as they are the kind of guys that would show the world this kind of thing - it would silence the critics and be a middle finger to 'haters' - they publicly document everything else after all.
Jamesco – I understand ISO, working with ISO 9001 accredited companies on a daily basis but it really wont make any difference to the construction of a bicycle frame in Peru which are 100% not ISO approved, will ?- Sick are also not ISO approved.
You are lumping lab / CEN testing of frames to European standards in with normal ISO 9001 quality management and I fail to see how ISO processes ensure a frame has tested geometry, rides well or is lab tested? – its almost completely irrelevant to all of these, all it does is ensure the company produces its goods to a certain standard of quality.
As I say, I would be very happy to be proved wrong, but I doubt a single frame has ever been near a laboratory for testing, they are exactly the kind of guys to let us all know if they had – It would have shut this thread down for a start.
ISO also covers test standards for a lot of stuff as Mick says. Lights, racks, e-bikes, etc. You make stuff, you refer to an ISO doc for testing. 9001 is just one for company process. The frame tests won't test for geometry or how it rides though, can't test for the subjective. So you ISO test and you ride test as needed.
but what was being described was a general methodology to production which falls into the 9001 remit, not the specific testing of a product which is a different thing entirely – as you say ISO4201.
That it was about 9001 was an assumption you made, not what everyone else was talking about re CEN/ISO 4210.
I doubt they'd feel the need to post to prove anything on here as I don't see any reason to call out a brand for not doing what anyone would do - with respect, it's a bit much to say a brand makes and sells unverified goods that don't meet import and safety regs w/o a good reason for it or via misunderstanding of what ISO means here. But that's all I'm saying on this now, has gone a bit beyond my original comment on testing. And nothing personal at all, just a point about how small brands operate and are misjudged.
Crankrider, the guys at sick are pretty easy to contact and happy to answer questions, you could get in touch with them and find out for yourself, y'know?
It’s almost as if they are already on this thread...
James O said:-
> The frame tests won’t test for geometry
Having been out of the bike industry for a few years now, I've just been looking over DIN.EN.14766.E.2006.
Maybe things have been changed since it moved to ISO, but this standard details:-
The steering geometry employed, as shown in Figure B.1 , will generally be dictated by the use for which the bicycle is intended but it is nevertheless recommended that:
a) the steering head angle be not more than 75° and not less than 65° in relation to the ground line
Clearly only a recommendation. But perhaps they'd get a pass with an advisory 🙂
Pfft, what would you know Brant, you are/were part of the established bike industry. Haven’t you heard? everything that’s been done before is all bollocks. Sick are the saviour of the bike industry, and anyone who says different is a *ing *.
am I getting it now? That’s how their marketing works, right?
If you’re attending Bespoked on the Saturday I’m hosting a panel Q&A with BTR, Starling, Ted James, Sick and maybe one other builder tbc. Should be good!
Likewise if you have Carbon questions I’m doing one with Filament, Duratec, fifty one and Allied bikes plus one other tbc.
Shameless plug; early bird tickets have a couple of weeks to go.
Veritas ...isnt that the swiss euthanasia place
Dignitas mick...
youre thinking of the enterprise backup software...
Brant, the same steering range point is in ISO. Part 2, Annex A - Informative (had to look up where). Put in as a recommendation not a test as they could see sicker HTAs coming.