Thoughts on Boardman bikes
- Thread starter kingspirit
- Start date
-
- Tags
- boardman
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
Chislenko
Veteran
Had the same problem with a bike I built which had a huge FD. Don't hacksaw the mudguard you will weaken it. Do what the chaps on here suggested which was heat up the offending area of the guard then reshape it with something, I just used a garden dibber but a hammer shaft would work.
Edit. I am assuming they are plastic guards.
Lovacott
Über Member
It's a classic example of the economy of scale (the more you make of something, the cheaper it gets to make).
The bikes are well designed, well specced and then mass produced for a large supplier.
If there is a design fault or manufacturing process fault, it will manifest itself in every unit. The price of getting it wrong is potential ruin for the brand, the manufacturer and the supplier.
Not bike related, but I spent time in China as a client quality controller for a mass produced item from prototype through to the end of the first production run.
Every nut, weld, paint job, stitch, torque setting etc. was analysed to the nth degree. Everything was tested well beyond its limits, every process on the line was scrutinised.
The end product was pushed, pulled, dropped from height, thrown around and then torn apart.
Only once we were 100% happy with the prototype and manufacturing process were the factory allowed to enter mass production.
Halfords may not be the trendiest of bike shops, but they can't afford to sell £1000 bikes which fall apart as soon as they hit a pothole.
I did 30 hilly country miles on my SLR 8.9 this morning. Pure heaven.
cyberknight
As long as I breathe, I attack.
- Location
- Land of confusion
Lovacott
Über Member
People diss Chinese manufacturing, but that is based on the plastic rubbish you buy in pound shops.
I was involved in the manufacture of accommodation units for the Australian mining sector. They had to be built to Australian standards and fully cyclone proof.
I was stationed on site for seven months from inception to completion of the first batch but during that seven months, around twenty different specialists in their fields came over to sign off their particular part of the build (electrical, hydraulic, air conditioning, acoustic and structural engineers to name but a few). No stone was left unturned.
If one error got through the prototype phase, it would be replicated throughout the whole production (over 8,000 units at $100,000 AUD each).
The site I worked on is run by the worlds largest manufacturer of sea containers who also happen to build all of the modular units for Travelodge, Premier Inn and so on. They even manufacture rolling stock for the US Military (true, I have photos).
Once they've got their manufacturing processes set up, they turn out a consistent quality, unit after unit.
If we (the British, US etc) want to compete again in manufacturing, we've got a hell of a lot of ground to catch up.
Last edited:
Rusty Nails
We remember
- Location
- Living in the slow lane
A lot of carbon frames have creaking problems with press-fit BBs, not just Boardman.
I had the same on my Genesis Datum but cured it by fitting a replacement Wheels Manufacturing BB where the two sides screw together. Not cheap, around £70, but then neither is a carbon frame.
Lovacott
Über Member
My Boardman roadbike is like a dream come true to ride.
Smooth, precise, responsive, comfortable, fast and light.
Having said that, my recently purchased Voodoo Marassa Hybrid is almost as sweet.
Bikes have come a long way since I was a kid back in the 1970's.
rogerzilla
Legendary Member
I can't fault the quality or reliability 0f the Team Carbon, but the frame feels dead; at no point has it ever felt like it wants to go faster, unlike a couple of my steel bikes Having not ridden other carbon frames, it may just be that I don't like carbon. It certainly amplifies thunks and rattles on bad roads.
AIUI it's the mould used for Nicole Cooke's World Cup-winning frame, but cheaper carbon material.
AIUI it's the mould used for Nicole Cooke's World Cup-winning frame, but cheaper carbon material.
Darius_Jedburgh
Veteran
Not if you fit them properly. I have two bikes with press fit bb. I've replaced bearings on both, and both run silently. Do the job right and you get no creaking.
Rusty Nails
We remember
- Location
- Living in the slow lane
Yes, it's such a difficult job to fit press-fit BBs properly.
Improper fitting is one issue. Carbon in particular is prone to creaking as the frame is prepared by hand and difficult to get the tolerance right. So it is the luck of draw if you end up with a frame where the housing is not as close to a perfect circle or the tolerance has been breached.
SkipdiverJohn
Deplorable Brexiteer
- Location
- London
The main problem with PF BB's in carbon frames is poor manufacturing tolerances and non-existent QC. There are plenty of bits of industrial equipment around that use bearings press fitted into machined out housings and on to rotating shafts. If the holes and shafts are made to spec, and the bearings are made to spec, they don't make a racket and they dont wear out prematurely.
All the creaking problems with bikes are down to corner-cutting. Either the QC isn't being done, or it is done but out-of-spec frames are being allowed out the door anyway because too high a rejection rate would wipe out the manufacturers profit margin. They work on the assumption that half the customers won't notice any problem, and most of those who do notice will just moan and groan about it but not take the bike back and will keep buying more of the same crap. If the public are willing to put up with crap QC, then the retailers will carry on selling substandard goods.
It's entirely possible to build PF bearings accurately, but it costs money. Theoretically, PF can outperform threaded cup & cone BB's if made to tight tolerances, but in reality an average threaded square taper job is less troublesome than a mediocre PF example because threaded can self-align to a certain extent which means it doesn't creak or have tight spots. Those makers unwilling to swallow the cost of proper QC should have stuck to old-school threaded square taper and avoided PF. Unless a threaded BB runs as rough as a badger's arse, no-one even notices it and it doesn't attract any comment. They just work and are just not on the rider's radar until they need lubrication maintenance or one of the cups has worked loose.
All the creaking problems with bikes are down to corner-cutting. Either the QC isn't being done, or it is done but out-of-spec frames are being allowed out the door anyway because too high a rejection rate would wipe out the manufacturers profit margin. They work on the assumption that half the customers won't notice any problem, and most of those who do notice will just moan and groan about it but not take the bike back and will keep buying more of the same crap. If the public are willing to put up with crap QC, then the retailers will carry on selling substandard goods.
It's entirely possible to build PF bearings accurately, but it costs money. Theoretically, PF can outperform threaded cup & cone BB's if made to tight tolerances, but in reality an average threaded square taper job is less troublesome than a mediocre PF example because threaded can self-align to a certain extent which means it doesn't creak or have tight spots. Those makers unwilling to swallow the cost of proper QC should have stuck to old-school threaded square taper and avoided PF. Unless a threaded BB runs as rough as a badger's arse, no-one even notices it and it doesn't attract any comment. They just work and are just not on the rider's radar until they need lubrication maintenance or one of the cups has worked loose.
Last edited:
Lovacott
Über Member
I collected my Boardman from Halfords as a built bike. When I got it home, I went over it with a fine tooth comb.
The Halfords build was pretty terrible TBH. The indexing was all over the place and the front mech was misaligned.
The engineering of the bike was excellent though. Everything worked and moving parts were practically silent.
Quality control is a big thing for western based retailers outsourcing their production to China.
The hotel I lived in was full of QC's from all over the world overseeing one or more aspects of a product build.
Major retailers can't afford to launch a £1000 product only to find early buyers moaning online about the poor quality.
The Boardman is the first "expensive" bike I've ever bought with most of my previous bikes costing me around a hundred quid.
As I said earlier, to me, it's a work of art.
SkipdiverJohn
Deplorable Brexiteer
- Location
- London
You expected it to be poor and therefore sorted out the things Halfords should have done. For you it was the path of least resistance, less hassle than taking it back and arguing the toss with the shop manager. I would have done the same, because I trust my own work more than a min wage spanner monkey in retail. Halfords got away with selling a substandard product because to you the value was good enough to swallow some DIY fettling time. A mechanical numpty buyer would have just tried to ride it straight away then started moaning loudly about the build quality.
Halfords get away with it because they are a national chain and they sell a lot of bikes through C2W. The convenience outweighs the mediocrity for enough buyers.
