Tern Link D8 frame shearing in two

April 2, 2014 - 6:52am
Rager

Country: France


I wouldn't expect Tern to enter into private corresponsdance on a public forum, however I think current and potential owners are very much due an explanation.

Can Tern - or anybody - tell us:

How many broken frames were there before the 2013 recall?
How many broken frames do there have to be before a 2014 recall?
What were the findings after the 2013 recall?
When do you expect preliminary findings from the current breakages?
When will you be able to inform customers, like myself, who bought their bike at the same time, if they are in the same batch as the broken frames?

BTW I still have heard nothing since my email to Tern last week.

Regards.

April 2, 2014 - 12:23pm
Keith C. Johns


Country: USA

jfx wrote:

I had exactly the same thing happen to me last night with a six month old Eclipse P9. Leaving me lying in the road, glad that the dent in my cycle helmet was not in my head and that I was not on a busy road.

I have only ever ridden this bike on roads and cycle paths. Tern need to take these reports very seriously before someone doesn't walk away from one of these failures. These frames are not safe to be on the road.

JFX, I'm sure we are all glad to hear that your bike helmet saved you from serious injury! And hope you have no lingering ill effects.

This raises to five the count on this thread, if I have kept track. And the first of a different model bike, Eclipse P9, which probably means it came off a different assembly line and batch. And only six months old.

While statistically still a blip out of over 100K Terns out there, it is nonetheless very significant to these five people, and of concern to all others riding Tern bicycles who worry about it happening to themselves also, no matter the low probability.

I have faith in the people running this company; they would not have this forum if they didn't have a great attitude regarding making and standing fully behind a great product line. While they have periodically checked in on this thread and volunteered information, I am certain that they are totally addressing this issue in their private offices. Possibly even in serious overhaul mode to get to the causes and cures. I realize that everyone on this thread would like to see a bit more fur flying to be assured that something is moving toward resolution on the manufacturer's part, but I just want to say that I am certain that they are not taking this lying down, and the lack of visible movement belies what is undoubtedly going on behind the scenes. I don't think they are in "business as usual" mode right now.

Having said the above, I just want to speculate a bit in terms of frame design. I am not a mechanical engineer by training, so this is amateur musing only. But I want to note a trend of this company which began back with the Dahons of moving away from the double diamond frame designs which are so well proven for well over a hundred years to the use of single down-tubes and discarding the top-tubes. Of course to manage this, the down-tubes were made more robust, oblong in the vertical dimension for greater strength in that direction, like I-beams. I think the idea was to unclutter the bike frame, making it look simpler. But the architectural strength of the triangles they gave up is undeniable. Perhaps the oblong downtubes made up a great deal for that loss of strength. Certainly made of steel they did. Then the next step in this design evolution was moving to aluminum alloy contruction which didn't change the look so much as lower the weight of the bike, and please the public expectation that "high-end bikes are made of aluminum, not steel." Perhaps this was a marketing move. I doubt it was an engineering move. But here is the problem: the design was weakened by removing the top-tube, but bolstered by making the down-tube bigger; then weakened by making it out of aluminum instead of steel. They undoubtedly made the aluminum thicker to compensate. The remaining question is did they compensate enough? Steel bikes, when well engineered, last generations. Aluminum bikes are typically rated at five years lifespan in the industry, at least in terms of warranty. Their defect is cyclic fatigue causing stress fractures which eventually cause failure. To compensate, they are made as rigidly as possible to forestall this vulnerability.

All of these failures have happened at the weld near the middle of the down-tube, where the greatest stresses are applied. Even choosing heavier tubing can't undo the weak point in this process: the welds, which are never perfect due to the variables in the process. So there will always be a percentage of welds which are sub-par. Hopefully these are weeded out during QA checks. But all things being equal, a sub-par steel weld will outlast a sub-par aluminum weld just due to the greater strength and resilience of ANY grade of steel over aluminum.

Thor has made a point with me that the design trumps the materials, and a poorly designed steel bike will fail before a well designed aluminum bike: quite so. So all this boils down to whether the marketing choices to go with lighter weight and appealing aluminum alloy were compensated by a more robust design, and one which allows for variations in welding quality during manufacture. Only time will reveal.

But if I were on their team, and I AM, just unpaid, I would say, "Josh, start making some steel bikes again. And beef up the aluminum models with extra gussets, if not returning to a diamond frame structure." That is my take on all of this.

April 2, 2014 - 3:27pm
martinq

Joined: 2013-10-02
Country: USA

I've been watching this thread with great interest as an owner of a Link D8 and a newly-acquired Verge P9. Seeing a similar failure on a completely different frame design certainly adds some anxiety that this may not be limited to a particular run of the Link frame.

I realize that the balance between transparency, due diligence, and liability concerns is a tricky thing to manage, but I find it troubling that the current thread is unreadable to unregistered users. See the screenshot below; if you're not logged in you see that the thread reports 154 posts, but only Lee Tibbetts' initial post is viewable. If Tern simply wants to keep discussion limited to affected users, a note to that effect might be a good idea rather than an ominous-looking report with no responses at all.

April 2, 2014 - 5:54pm
Steveroot

Country: USA

I don't even see that much if I'm not logged in:

Steve

April 2, 2014 - 6:15pm
martinq

Country: USA

Steveroot wrote:

I don't even see that much if I'm not logged in:

Steve

That's because you logged out while viewing the last page of comments. They weren't deleted, just hidden from anonymous users. If you go to the first page of the thread you'll see the OP. It certainly minimizes visibility of a lot of speculation and scary photos, but it also makes it look as if Lee's issue has gone uninvestigated since December. I'm not in a position to offer advice on how to better handle this, but hiding it like this (and leaving logged-in users unaware of the change) isn't what I'd recommend.

April 2, 2014 - 9:05pm
Steveroot

Country: USA

martinq wrote:

That's because you logged out while viewing the last page of comments. They weren't deleted, just hidden from anonymous users.

O-Kay... and that's why I'm not working in I.T.!

Steve

April 3, 2014 - 3:38am
pdenton

Joined: 2014-04-03

martinq wrote:

I've been watching this thread with great interest as an owner of a Link D8 and a newly-acquired Verge P9. Seeing a similar failure on a completely different frame design certainly adds some anxiety that this may not be limited to a particular run of the Link frame.

I realize that the balance between transparency, due diligence, and liability concerns is a tricky thing to manage, but I find it troubling that the current thread is unreadable to unregistered users. See the screenshot below; if you're not logged in you see that the thread reports 154 posts, but only Lee Tibbetts' initial post is viewable. If Tern simply wants to keep discussion limited to affected users, a note to that effect might be a good idea rather than an ominous-looking report with no responses at all.

First of all, I like to express my sympathies to the riders that have had thier bikes suddenly break on them, I hope they are all healing well!



Yes, this is indeed very worrying to say the least ! I've also been keeping an eye on this forum thread for a while now as I have a Link D8 bought in 2013. Now it's happening on OTHER Tern bikes sounds like theres a bit of a problem there!! Also, I've now had to create an account just to see the replies, not just customer replies but most impotant Tern's replies! Very poor I must say.



Lets hope it's just something as innocent as an IT problem with the forum rather than Tern themselves stopping the general public from stumbling across the increasing amount of pictures of broken bikes!

April 3, 2014 - 9:59am
cygar

Joined: 2014-04-02
Country: France


Hi,

Like pdenton I have created an account in order to follow this thread. I was about to buy a tern verge p20 after reading all the good reviews about tern bikes (and some nice threads from steeveroot!).

Now it makes me feel suspicious that the forum suddenly become private. I really would like to know if these failures are random or if it only affect a particular batch of bikes. I am ready to spend money in a folding bike but I need to know it won't just fail randomly. Is this kind of failure common to any folding bike brand?

I hope we'll soon have some informations about that. I am postponing my purchase for the moment and will look for last resort alternatives.

Cheers,

C.

April 3, 2014 - 11:16am
Re-tern




Country: UK


Still no more information from Tern; just to confrim they are NOT updating the people with the broken frames. Interesting to see they have removed the thread to non-subscribers.

April 3, 2014 - 4:54pm
bikerrrguy

Joined: 2014-04-02
Country: USA

Re-tern wrote:

Still no more information from Tern; just to confrim they are NOT updating the people with the broken frames. Interesting to see they have removed the thread to non-subscribers.

I am not surprised the forum became private. I expect this entire forum to be removed from the server shortly. Josh is probably trying to sell the company to his father.

April 3, 2014 - 6:26pm
Steveroot

Country: USA

bikerrrguy wrote:

I am not surprised the forum became private. I expect this entire forum to be removed from the server shortly. Josh is probably trying to sell the company to his father.

Your cynicism is neither amusing nor helpful.

April 3, 2014 - 6:52pm
bikerrrguy

Country: USA


I did not intend to be amusing. Is it more helpful to be ignorant to the facts? To sit here and act like something is happening from Tern? Given the history of Tern my conclusion is very logical.



Do people here know how Tern started? The real story? Feel free to do searches about Tern Vs Dahon lawsiuits and decide for yourself how this situation will play out. FYI I expect this post to be deleted in a day or two.

April 3, 2014 - 6:54pm
orbit

Country: UK

No. Josh has and is trying to make a product that people want and enjoy. The concept behind the bikes is a good one. I'm very sorry these failures have occurred. Will it put people off? Maybe it will.

But engineering is difficult especially with mass produced items,

April 3, 2014 - 7:00pm
bikerrrguy

Country: USA

Apologies for the triple post. Please see http://www.bikeforums.net/folding-bikes/753768-dahon-files-lawsuit-against-tern.html and you tell me what your expectations are for this.

April 3, 2014 - 7:01pm
orbit

Country: UK


I think if this post was deleted itt would be very bad. It would only make matters worse.

April 3, 2014 - 7:40pm
thor


Country: USA


all the lawsuits from one company to the other have been settled long ago. why somebody without a name brings it up is ?

April 3, 2014 - 8:05pm
bikerrrguy


Country: USA

thor wrote:
all the lawsuits from one company to the other have been settled long ago. why somebody without a name brings it up is ?

Here comes Thor with his head in the sand, hear no evil see no evil.



The suit claims Josh was an executive of Dahon and transferred intellectual property rightfully owned by Dahon into a corporation owned by him. In short he stole Tern from his father. He also stole the dahon.com URL from his father.



Would I trust Josh if I was a customer? No Have the customers with broken frames received anything from Tern? No

If my conclusions are wrong please correct me, I do not want to be right about this matter.

April 3, 2014 - 9:11pm
Steveroot

Country: USA


You must be new here. This is all old stuff. And Josh has tolerated much more provocative posts.

Relax. What's it to you anyway?

Steve
________

April 3, 2014 - 10:09pm
bikerrrguy

Country: USA

Steveroot wrote:

You must be new here. This is all old stuff. And Josh has tolerated much more provocative posts.

Relax. What's it to you anyway?

Steve

What's it to me??? Very interesting, 5 frames have broken in 5 months. Additionally 95% of Tern riders do not visit this forum. I can guarantee there are at least 5 more frame failures ( probably over 10 ) that are being hidden from the public. I think your question should be relating to Tern's intentions.



I have nothing to add to READERS of this forum, clearly you know more than me. However someone has to help people that don't know about these failures. If something bad happens to a rider I can guarantee they will not be here posting about their experiences. I encourage the 5 KNOWN riders that have failures to work together. They should give Tern the necessary time if they believe Tern is doing their best to solve the problem. However if they feel Tern is not doing their due diligence they must call the police ASAP.

An accident could happen tomorrow if no one acts. I think 4 months is more than enough time! Bikes that are unsafe must be removed from the market!

April 3, 2014 - 11:01pm
Keith C. Johns


Country: USA

bikerrrguy wrote:

Joined: 2014-04-02Country: USA



I am not surprised the forum became private. I expect this entire forum to be removed from the server shortly. Josh is probably trying to sell the company to his father.

April 3, 2014 - 6:52pm

I did not intend to be amusing. Is it more helpful to be ignorant to the facts? To sit here and act like something is happening from Tern? Given the history of Tern my conclusion is very logical.

Do people here know how Tern started? The real story? Feel free to do searches about Tern Vs Dahon lawsiuits and decide for yourself how this situation will play out. FYI I expect this post to be deleted in a day or two.

It is my view that Tern was born out of a difference of opinion as to the direction to take Dahon, and that Josh rightfully took with him the contributions he had personally contributed to Dahon. In any event, this is settled case law.

Bikerrrguy, I want to respectully disagree with your negative perspective of this company; in fact, I suspect you may be a Troll taking advantage of what may resemble a crisis. I advise you to reign yourself in and remember that you are likewise also a guest on this forum. Please contribute if you can add something of a constructive nature to the dialog.

When your posts (except for multiples of the same post) remain on this forum for weeks, months, years, it will be obvious that this company is bigger in every way than you have surmised.

I welcome you to this community if you care about bicycles, cycling, folding bikes, and cyclists and have something to say to the betterment of all of these.

It is my sincere belief that Tern is an honorably run company with the highest aspirations for both its products and its customers. Everything else on this thread is merely a technical conversation aimed at improving some unfortunate defects which have shown up in a microscopic percentage of their product line. The hyperbole blowing this out of proportion is unrealistic, and time will show that this company knows how to improve its product line and get closer to its zero defects product goals. Josh, we are on your side and have confidence in your team at Tern. Please don't be distracted by a few over-zealous forum posts; I know you guys are already on top of this issue.

April 3, 2014 - 11:28pm
bikerrrguy

Country: USA

Keith C. Johns wrote:



Bikerrrguy, I want to respectully disagree with your negative perspective of this company; in fact, I suspect you may be a Troll taking advantage of what may resemble a crisis. I advise you to reign yourself in and remember that you are likewise also a guest on this forum. Please contribute if you can add something of a constructive nature to the dialog.

Is it possible that a troll is the voice of reason?

I waited over two months for something to happen with respect to the defects, and something did. The forum is no longer public.

April 3, 2014 - 11:39pm
Keith C. Johns




Country: USA

bikerrrguy wrote:

Keith C. Johns wrote:



Bikerrrguy, I want to respectully disagree with your negative perspective of this company; in fact, I suspect you may be a Troll taking advantage of what may resemble a crisis. I advise you to reign yourself in and remember that you are likewise also a guest on this forum. Please contribute if you can add something of a constructive nature to the dialog.

Is it possible that a troll is the voice of reason?

I waited over two months for something to happen with respect to the defects, and something did. The forum is no longer public.

I can understand damage control. They are confining the discussion to anyone interested enough to sign in--that is not that restrictive surely.

May I ask what your interest is in this discussion? Are you a cyclist? Were you considering purchasing a folding bike of any brand? Besides attacking a company when it is having a PR dip, what did you hope to achieve here?

I can understand the Ralph Nader type who wants to save innocent consumers from corporate greed, but I really think you have judged this company too quickly on too little evidence. I want to advise you to be patient and I am confident that this company will justify my faith in them.

April 3, 2014 - 11:50pm
bikerrrguy

Country: USA

Keith C. Johns wrote:



I can understand damage control. They are confining the discussion to anyone interested enough to sign in--that is not that restrictive surely.

May I ask what your interest is in this discussion? Are you a cyclist? Were you considering purchasing a folding bike of any brand? Besides attacking a company when it is having a PR dip, what did you hope to achieve here?

I can understand the Ralph Nader type who wants to save innocent consumers from corporate greed, but I really think you have judged this company too quickly on too little evidence. I want to advise you to be patient and I am confident that this company will justify my faith in them.

I assume Josh signs your checks given your attempt to defelect the issue from the faults and on to me. I pray no one gets hurt moving forward.



The is not a PR blip. Do you know people have gone to the hospital??? This has criminal intent written all over it moving forward.

April 3, 2014 - 11:56pm
Keith C. Johns


Country: USA

bikerrrguy wrote:

Keith C. Johns wrote:



I can understand damage control. They are confining the discussion to anyone interested enough to sign in--that is not that restrictive surely.

May I ask what your interest is in this discussion? Are you a cyclist? Were you considering purchasing a folding bike of any brand? Besides attacking a company when it is having a PR dip, what did you hope to achieve here?

I can understand the Ralph Nader type who wants to save innocent consumers from corporate greed, but I really think you have judged this company too quickly on too little evidence. I want to advise you to be patient and I am confident that this company will justify my faith in them.

I assume Josh signs your checks given your attempt to defelect the issue from the faults and on to me.  I pray no one gets hurt moving forward.

The is not a PR blip. Do you know people have gone to the hospital??? This  has criminal intent written all over it moving forward.

I take it that from your perspective, no one ever defends anyone else unless it is for monetary greed reasons. So who is paying you to be their attack dog? You obviously have no interest in bicycles. What is your motivation? Are you an ambulance chaser?

April 4, 2014 - 12:05am
bikerrrguy

Country: USA

Keith C. Johns wrote:

I take it that from your perspective, no one ever defends anyone else unless it is for monetary greed reasons. So who is paying you to be their attack dog? You obviously have no interest in bicycles. What is your motivation? Are you an ambulance chaser?

Does this have any relevance to the thread? My posts are relevant.



I waited patiently for 2 months for Tern to do something, some people have waited over 4 months. I assume that doesn't matter.



I do not want to live in a world where this stuff is swept under the rug. Karma is kind of rough, you'll find out soon enough.