You talk more about the discussion than the subject of the discussion, that was, the safety risk Shimano took with its Hollow Technologies:
- axle breaks that convert their HTversion2 2-piece crankset back to HTversion1 3-piece!
> under torsion of a human left leg, damn who had thought that!
- cranks instead of massive, consisting of 2 U's glued together, to reduce weight, that return to the state before glueing!
> in such numbers and over so many years that they were forced "to do something", that is, a recall:
===
https://www.bicycleretailer.com/ind...rankset-recall-settlement-officially-approved
4 februari 2026
- Notify every recall retailer of the enhanced inspection process and ensure each retailer has reviewed and understands the training materials, use a magnifying device provided during all inspections, and contact the retail assistance agent with any questions regarding inspection protocols. Court documents indicate Shimano will provide a magnifier similar to this $33 Carson device. Previous Shimano dealer recall materials recommended that retailers inspect with an 11x magnifier but did not provide the device.
- Extend its express warranty's coverage of bonding separation and delamination by two years from the date of the settlement's preliminary approval.
- Reimburse settlement class members who previously replaced a defective crankset for out-of-pocket costs associated with those replacements.
- Pay each of the 14 plaintiffs, as Class Representatives, a $500 Service Award.
Even a loupe and its magnification level was determined, to discover a beginning (or whatever word one may give it) of the return to the 2 separate pieces.
===
https://www.hambini.com/shimano-crankset-failures-an-engineering-analysis/
Ofcourse, unlike cranks, checking for a "started" spindle break process requires disassembly, which is Veeeeeery Haaaaaandy for those that follow the note "Check Regularly".
And all aboves crap, just to win a sec a mile, and in the case of cranks, less mass = less inertia to cope with at speed changes.
So hence the statement I made: making it a standard for any1, including Hambini's "The failure occurred in someone with the power output of a shrimp.", LOLWUT?
See Mister Ecky H, above is about the subject of the discussion, not about the discussion and not about the persons that discuss, as Some here have Shown, and continued to Show, to Try To Get Away from the Shimano Subject.
that person was not a dealer: they were a bike mechanic, or a retailer, or a distributor of a particular bike brand. At a push, they were just a guy working in a bike shop.
