- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
TECH NEWS
2020 Specialized Tarmac SL7 - head tube.jpgQuestions remain regarding the delay in Specialized's Tarmac SL7 recall
Further concerns are being raised by owners of Specialized’s Tarmac SL7 bikes, due to what some feel is a delay in issuing warnings that strong impacts such as hitting a large pothole could cause a serious steerer tube failure, potentially resulting in a crash.
On Tuesday, Specialized told Tarmac SL7 owners to stop riding their bikes, but the news had already been leaked by the YouTuber durianrider. The recall notice stated that “harsh frontal impacts, e.g. impacting a deep pothole with significant force, may put extraordinary stress on headset components and may initiate a crack in the fork’s steerer tube. A damaged fork may break if continued to be used, posing fall and injury hazards.”
While some riders that use the SL7 will have tucked their bikes up for the winter, many - this road.cc writer included - have been continuing to use their Tarmac SL7s, and have therefore been risking a crash.
The recall itself concerns two component parts of the headset. First, the compression ring (figure 2), that allows the brake hoses and any shift cables to pass through, has been changed to a silver two-piece design with a thin sleeve that sits between it and the carbon steerer tube. This had already been shipping on bikes and framesets for a number of months, arriving on my SL7 in May.
The second, and perhaps more crucial part, is the expander plug (figure 1) which sits inside the steerer tube. It is the piece that the top cap pulls on when you’re setting the headset, and the new part has been dramatically lengthened so that, even with the maximum number of spacers sitting under the stem, the expander plug will extend to below the upper headset bearing. Having a longer expander plug helps to distribute pressure through a larger part of the steerer tube.
It could be argued that Specialized was simply trying to make the recall process as smooth as possible for users by having the correct replacement parts already in bike shops and ready to be fitted. But it may well have scored a massive own goal by trying to get everything set before warning customers of a potential issue, no matter how small the chance of failure might have been.
Specialized suggests that only two incidents of steerer failure have been reported and from this figure, Dave Rome of CyclingTips suggests that, when you consider that the number of SL7s sold in the US amounts to around 6,900 bikes (sold between July 2020 and August 2021), the rate of failure is tiny.
Specialized has been approached for comment.
Latest Comments
- eburtthebike 0 sec ago
I listened to the BBC R4 prog "Should cyclists stay in their lane" and it was pretty much what you'd expect from the BBC, a well-informed cyclist...
- perce 6 min 2 sec ago
Yep. Another scumbag using the ''truly remorseful'' defence. He will be out in months and free to get on with his life, unlike his victim. And...
- eburtthebike 14 min 32 sec ago
Of course you don't actually want to spend money intended for infrastructure on infrastructure, you want to spend it on plans for infrastructure,...
- Veganpotter 29 min 3 sec ago
My bet is that all these tires popping off are from people with bad pressure gauges or they're simply just putting too much air in on purpose. ...
- Hirsute 51 min 21 sec ago
You have to add images via a reply to yourself after the topic is created. One at a time too.
- Hirsute 53 min 31 sec ago
“Plus, riders who pair CarBack to their smartphone using the Trek Accessory app can enjoy even more features, including the ability to see the...
- Tom_77 1 hour 9 min ago
Had a Kona Blast sometime around the turn of the century, that was a pretty decent mountain bike for not much money....
- chrisonabike 1 hour 44 min ago
David9694 - you were right! These new autonomous vehicles really are conspiring to run out of control!...
- HoarseMann 2 hours 16 min ago
Decathlon have the Garmin Varia RTL515 on offer at the moment for £129.99: https://www.decathlon.co.uk/p/rearview-radar-varia-rtl515-65-lumens/_/R-...
- Rendel Harris 3 hours 26 min ago
So when you said "all Jews" you didn't actually mean all Jews, just religious ones. However even that distinction is erroneous, as you must surely...
Add new comment
16 comments
I’m really surpised that they’ve only sold 6900 SL7 bikes in the US over a 13 month period. Seems like a small amount.
Expensive bikes, middle of a Pandemic where job security is minimal (US employment laws are mostly company focused and not worker focused). Lack of parts?
Lots of reasons for the low figures but I suspect they are not significantly lower then previous model release figures anyway.
I had some forks year ago, Alpha-Q I think they were. Once the steerer had been cut a metal sleeve was then bonded in to the steerer and the expander plug fitted inside that.
Not really relevant to this but I'd have thought something like that would have been better than this. Peak Torque seems to think the lower black part of the expander is a reduced size to the upper red part and wouldn't give much in the way of added strength. Only stops the bars detaching in a breakage.
Durianrider is loving this and reckons the next recall will be the Aethos forks.
One thing is for sure, this has wiped loads off the resale value of a SL7, even more so than the usual amount. Imagine what this last year has done to the Aeroads value? They are giving owners £1000 back but I'd say £3000 is a closer amount to refund them by.
That lower part of the bung is an embarrassment, it does absolutely nothing but make the steerer even more likely to fail. If they're offering this as an engineering solution, what does it say about the quality of their engineering?
Well, remember the fanfare about reverting back to a threaded bottom bracket? The fact they couldn't get the pressfit bottom bracket standard correct is a huge indicator to the quality of the manufacturing, especially when the pressfit standard is superior to any other (possible exception being the T47).
Seeing that Specialized have been shipping the updated headset fix with newer SL7s while stealthily stocking all the dealers with them is what annoys me the most. They say there have been no reported failings. I'm sure there's something in American consumer legislation where a failure has to be proven first? So there may be a few going to court now? Specialized may already have mobilised their legal team or even silenced some consumers via NDAs?
I wouldn't be happy with the eye and nail check. I'd want the fork scanning to make sure there's no internal damage or better yet a new fork.
They're a marketing company, not an engineering company
I could see how they would want some separation between the announcement of the new Crux and negative messaging; you don't want a new realease story appearing next to a recall!
If it's serious enough to justify an immediate stop ride notice, you don't get to choose how immediate that is because of marketing concerns
Specialized uses on new bikes/frames only the new compression ring with stainless protector ring, according to the article. This is also the only part that actually prevents the fork tube from being damaged.
So the prolonged expander wedge seems only there as a patch for older bikes/frames. To prevent further damage to the fork tube. Or to prevent the handlebar to become completely detached from the bike in case the fork tube snaps. It may not allow to steer the bike, but it may prevent the rider from falling IF he can stop safely in time.
If this is the case, then Specialized inexplicitly acknowledges that bike shops are not able to fully inspect the state of the carbon fork tube of older bikes.
Sounds like Specialized has been a bit disingenuous with this. They waited until the parts were available and on their way to shops before issuing a 'stop ride' notice. Effectively putting riders at risk while they were hoping they'd come out looking good because riders were without their pride and joy for less time.
Personally this has shown to me just how overpriced and under-engineered a lot of bikes are currently. This, Cannondale, Canyon, Open and who knows how many other manufacturers are just taking the piss, putting out shitty designs with no QC and asking obscene amounts. But at the end of the day if idiots didn't keep handing over these obscene amounts then they wouldn't charge them. Cheap credit, GCI, BTW have allowed the highest earners to get the biggest reductions.
For all his failings and unwarranted profanity, this is why I like -in small doses- watching a Hambini video from time to time. Shocking how he can excoriate some supposedly high end frames while pointing out and measuring their weaknesses on camera. Few industries harbour as many snake oil peddlers as the bike industry. I know one engineer -specialised in computational materials stress analysis- who used to do contract work for a well known brand but quit accepting commissions after repeated cases of having studied a proposed component according to specs given, then pointing out that for a sometimes very marginal extra cost (we're talking 2 or 3 eurocents on a piece costing 8 euro to the manufacturer) that the quality would benefit massively from the modification only to be told that the lower spec was 'good enough considering typical use and warranty conditions'. The proverb is supposed to be 'pay peanuts get monkeys', not 'pay a fortune and receive a gilded turd'.
It will be more telling how many forks are found to be damaged and need replacing as this will give a better indication of what could have happened in the future if this problem hadn't been sorted.
Bike manufacturer wants to ensure replacement stock is in place prior to safety recall that has effected just 2 bikes.
Was this really worth a story Road.cc?
Where's the number "2" coming from? And even if that is the correct number of known cases, how many forks are accidents-waiting-to-happen?
After all, Specialized issued a stop-ride-notice.
The article states "only two incidents". I would think that a stop ride notice would be necessary during any recall regarding safety, regardless of whether it was a major risk or insignificant.
Though, I am confused by the use of the word "voluntary" in the notice.
I think the 'voluntary' means they've decided to recall them themselves, rather than, say, a regulator requiring them do it.