Snapped spindle

[Drago]

Im surprised Silva gets such a good Internet signal in his cave.

 

[Ming the Merciless]

 

[silva]

About post:

In the directory / Shimano Failures / Cranks:

What is named (hence the quotes?) "welded" is instead likely forced-bended (forging) "into" eachother, much like the male/female sides of pushbuttons each consist of, to attach to the fabric.
Shimano changed that to glueing, and Trouble Came, once again, in Shimano Paradise.

According to aboves specs:
- Ultegra models weight "win" towards the previous 105 was 705-685=20 gram, coincidently the same creditcard-calibre weight difference of this topics Spindle Snap that my calculated 29% better torsion resistence delivered by increasing the shafts wall thickness with 50% towards the inside (thus the outer 24 mm staying as required).
- Dura-Ace model increased that "win" to 76 gram.

https://bike.shimano.com/en-NA/info...owtech-road-cranksets-inspection-program.html


Soooo, Shimano Says there implicitly that in July 2019 they changed something in their production, that would have (I guess we'll see about that in the future) solved the problem they Didn't Know at that time (yes lol), and kept on declaring till september 2023 as user - not their, fault.
So back in juli 2019, some guy or girl Engineer popped up, saying from this day we will Change That, without him or her knowing it would solve a claimed as unaware of problem.
Yes, Shuuuuuure!

The Dura-Ace model is Declared as the Flagship (read: more bucks) for Racers, with the Ultegra coming in second (read: less bucks) in the weight-cheating race.
If they also rank like this in the failure race, statistics by users, or easier, by Shimano of their crank recall are needed.
But since the latter decided to Keep Silent in september 2019, the expectations are probably grim.

The US States' "Consumer Product Safety Commission" decided to judge as I said:
https://www.cpsc.gov/Newsroom/News-...t-Bicycle-Cranksets-that-Posed-a-Crash-Hazard

Release Date: March 16, 2026

WASHINGTON, D.C. – The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) is announcing that Shimano, Inc., of Japan, and Shimano North America Holding, Inc., of Irvine, California, have agreed to pay an $11.5 million civil penalty. The settlement, which has been provisionally accepted by CPSC, resolves CPSC’s charges that Shimano knowingly failed to immediately report to CPSC, as required by law, that its 11-Speed Bonded Hollowtech II Bicycle Cranksets, Models Ultegra FC-6800 and FC-R8000 and Dura-Ace FC-9000, FC-R9100, and FC-R9100P, contained a defect which could create a substantial product hazard or created an unreasonable risk of serious injury or death to consumers.

Between 2013 and 2022, Shimano received thousands of warranty claims relating to the bicycle cranksets and dozens of reports of consumers globally sustaining personal injuries while using the bicycle cranksets, including bone fractures, joint displacement, and lacerations, due to falls from bicycles, contact with the broken cranksets, and impact with the ground. During this time, Shimano, Inc. made nine overall manufacturing and design changes that resulted in over twenty-five individual changes to the bicycle cranksets to mitigate the potential for the cranksets to separate and break. Despite possessing information that reasonably supported the conclusion that the bicycle cranksets contained a defect which could create a substantial product hazard or created an unreasonable risk of serious injury or death, Shimano did not immediately report to the Commission.
...

Pay Shimano Pay!
USD 11,5 million - I'd say a cheapskate settlement.
It's 13773 Dura-Ace FC-R9100P cranksets at 834,95 each.
If I were the CPSC I'd have Tweeted Trump to take Revenge on Shimano with Wonderful Powerful Tomahawk Missiles.

Note the detail:
Over 9 (NINE!) years, Shimano did 9 (NINE!) design/production changes, together "over" 25 (TWENTY-FIVE!) individual changes, to try to prevent the Hollows in their cranks to become Exposed to the Bare Eye.
While all the time during those 9 years, they kept on denying to Complaining Customers their fault.

Did You Follow Our Instruction Manual?
Did You Throw Your Bike Against A Wall?
Did Your Kids Play With Hammers And Chisels In Your Garage?
Please Check!
Because We Don't Know Nothing Sir!

Our Crank Sets Are Engineered To PuuuuurFection!
Your Complaint Is The First We Received Since We Started Our Hollow Technology for cheating in Races!

NINE years! Lol!

 

[Drago]

Good God above, is he still at it?

 

[Drago]

It seems even Chuck Norris cant stand this thread any longer.

 

[Fastpedaller]

I've concluded he doesn't like Shimano

 

[EckyH]

Chuck Norris destroyed the spindle.

E.

 

[silva]

About /Shimano Failures/Cranks
You guys should start a Crowd Funding to pay the Fine Shimano received from US State.
At USD 11,5 million, and At The Moment with 6 to start, that 'll be 1.92 million each.
The current exchange ratio is 1.00 GBP = 1.33440747 USD
... just to aid a little in the financial planning.

About /Shimano Failures/Spindles
It didn't need Chuck Norris - roubaixtuesday cleared that job.
He didn't even do it on purpose - it Just Happened, after extra Spinach, Go Figure!
And He Thankfully Limped on 1 Leg further home, so I'd Recommend him as a candidate for a Number 7 on the Crowd Funding List.
That will reduce the per-person to 1.64 million each.

I'm Sure Shimano will be Thankfully Humping on both Legs.

 

[Drago]

I've concluded he doesn't like Shimano

Not since he caught his wife in bed with Shimano San!

 

[silva]

Another same thought as I mine:
https://www.cyclistshub.com/my-opinion-about-shimano-cranks-recall/

February 15, 2025
Why Shimano Waited So Long for This Recall?
I honestly don’t know the answer to this question. It’s one of the things that’s strangest about this whole case.
This problem is not new. For example, there are dozens of failures on this Instagram page.
Shimano Ultegra crank with info to check out to determine the needed recall.This crank doesn’t have to be sent for inspection
And Shimano certainly has a lot of internal data on complaints. So the fact that they waited about 11 years to announce this recall is alarming, maybe even scandalous.

Why They Don’t Actually Recall ALL Cranks?
Another talking point is why Shimano will not replace all cranks where a potential problem may occur, but only the damaged ones. They say in their statement that all cranks will be inspected, but no further action will be required for those that pass inspection.
...

https://road.cc/content/feature/shi...on-dangerous-debacle-damage-reputation-311573

“The advice was just to listen out for any unusual creaking,” they said. “There’s nothing to see on mine — but the riders who’ve had their cranks fall apart probably thought that too. I’ve replaced it with 105 — you don’t enjoy or look forward to riding the bike with the knowledge that the fault is potentially there.”

Another, who shared this picture [below], was left limping 33 miles to the nearest train station, mostly on their left leg, but received a replacement crankset eight days after taking it to a bike shop, faster than the expected two weeks.

33 miles, 11 times the distance the TS here had to limp (here on the other/left leg).

Because the 4 spider legs broke.
The picture shows a view (from the same angle ofc) of 3 of the breaking surfaces, all visible ends show a small surfaced "notch" protruding, irregular shaped and worn (due to relative movement) indicating the typical scenario of fatigue cracks that then grow, until the strength has decreased enough to make the remainder of the profile give up in one clean long break. (read: Disaster Day).
Note how small those protruding notches are, compared to the rest of the cross section. It indicates the small safety "reserve" strength of Shimano's Light Religion design.
Which was also indicated in Hambini's test video, that uncovered the cause of the user-reported knee pain - the lateral movement of the pedals.

The author gives valid reasons for his opinion that Shimano should have done a full recall, instead of that "inspection" programme quickly proved as guaranteeing nothing, and, puts a responsibility on the inspector / dealers, if it "passes" the inspection, yet it fails later on, means a customer that is not happy and a hassle for both sides.

One may think Shimano will replace fail flagged cranksets with just later (post 2019) product line versions, but no:
https://magazinebike.com/2023/09/22/crank-exchange-program/

The new crank mechanism will be in a special version, which may differ slightly in appearance while maintaining the same parameters.

Shimano has brought up a new product in their production, especially as fail replacement.
Its given name is NoName.
Its given specifications are Nothing.
Where exactly its mechanical design differs from the fail flagged ones, is Not Mentioned.
They only talk about cosmetics.
In Shimano We Trust.
Let Us Stand Up now People to Pray to Shimano.

Whether or not other countries Consumer Safety Committees will follow their US collega, is an open question.
The outlook atm is grim, since apparently, those Committees apparently only get out their lazy chairs after Consumers, as a Class, filing a legal action.
... read: alot effort and bucks to pay.
... so it may first require a crankset fail resulting in the death of its rider in order to get 'm out of those chairs.
Shimano declared 2019 as their (still not technical documented) Final Solution year, which is 6-7 years ago.
They probably hope is that the bin arrives sooner...

Hollow axles that break, hollow cranks that break and hollow spider arms that break.
Okay in the Church of the Light Religion of Racers, since those likely replace bicycles every season or even every race, so not enough time/usage cycles/chemical processes for metal fatigue/corrosion
But producing and selling it as a standard for everybody?
LOL!

 

[Webbo2]

That crank and bottle must be super special as they seem to be horizontal on a vertical piece of wood.

 

[EckyH]

That crank and bottle must be super special as they seem to be horizontal on a vertical piece of wood.

I have no glue what you mean. You probably chisnailed it. With a hammer.

E.

 

[Ajax Bay]

@silva - please would you stick to Hollowtech 2 spindles and their fragility or not - that's the thread's topic, and not waste your and our time on crank arms some versions of which are subject to inspection/recall.

 

[silva]

@silva - please would you stick to Hollowtech 2 spindles and their fragility or not - that's the thread's topic, and not waste your and our time on crank arms some versions of which are subject to inspection/recall.

As I showed several times earlier in the thread: 20 grammes extra material in the spindles wall (thickness, towards the inside ofcourse), would have increased its resistence to torsion forces with 29%.
The next question then is, which % of bicycle users would bother that 20 grammes extra?

The capital difference between HollowTech 1 and HollowTech 2 is that 1's crankset has 3 pieces and 2's crankset has 2 pieces - 1 being the left crank, 2 being a made-as-one-piece spindle+right crank.
So, there is no "Hollowtech 2 spindle" - it's one piece with spider / right crank, since your shown experience with bicycles, you surely know this, yet you ask me here to limit my talk to a part... of a part?

And, even in the hypothetical case HollowTech 2 had been 3 pieces as 1 and Octalink, there is a clear relevance: Weight Whining leading to safety risk.
There's the golden rule to regularly (let) inspect your bicycle (and any mechanical apparatus), but cranks, spiders and axles aren't wearing parts, who'd expect these to break?
That's as ridiculous as having to regularly inspect your car inside outside, including the cushioning of its seats, in order to discover a trend towards accident soon enough.

See Shimano's settlement text (with Consumer Safety department of US State), also mentioned on their website:
https://www.shimanocranksetsettlement.com/

Enhanced Inspections: Shimano will (1) distribute a magnifying device with enhanced lighting to every Recall Retailer free of charge

The inspection procedure for dealers:
https://si.shimano.com/en/pdfs/dm/RAFC012/DM-RAFC012-01-ENG.pdf
Note there the many points to check, even also the other piece - the left crank, proving that failures also occurred there, and ALSO on various places alike around the pincher bolts.
But nothing about the integrated spindle.
But then we read (example this topic) about spindle breaks too, and clearly ALSO due to initiation of material defects, resulting in movement, resulting in fatigue.
The very same scenario of all other locations on the crankset.

You implicitly state here crank and other failures as irrelevant - another story than the spindle section of the part, but ALL data indicates the very same story.
Imagine the TopicStarter had let his crankset inspected. If the inspecting person hadn't bother to check OTHER places than those listed in Shimano's manual, it would have been flagged as OK, and a next day he could have been dead due to spindle sections failure and bad luck.

 

[Ajax Bay]

But then we read (example this topic) about spindle breaks too, and clearly ALSO due to initiation of material defects, resulting in movement, resulting in fatigue.

The number and %age in use of H2 chainsets which have failed because their spindle failed is negligible: we read about it rarely. The mean number of rotations between spindle failures is bound to be in the tens of millions - decades in typical rates of use.
I made this MTBF point in Post #3 in this thread.
Any time it happens it is remarkable but that does not mean the design is unsatisfactory nor that any action is needed: it's happenstance.