Broken On Live TV: The Untold Story of Pivot’s New Phoenix DH Bike 

Rather than gaslight the customer for ‘external forces’ on repeatable frame cracks on the same frames. ⛰️

A better method would be not putting your riders in danger with bikes that fold like a cheap lawn chair. Reminds me of the Titan Sub, but without the designer suffering the consequences.

@@Videomorgue they all but said that in the interview, we are happy to take this risk as it’s cheaper, but it’s the riders who take the risk, shouldn’t they decide?

There's a guy that's local to me and has a RU-vid channel. One of the bike shops was there with a tent. I was talking to one of the guys and the RU-vidr rolled up. They made a comment about his new Pivot frame. Not sure which model but it was a nice light green metallic. He was relaying that he paid 1k for a new frame under crash warranty. Then he said it really wasn't a crash but that his bottom bracket hit a rock and broke his frame. I guess from being an outsider listening, that he didn't 100% get denied a crash replacement for 1k was good. He didn't get hurt which is the most important thing unlike the brand Orange who really did a RU-vidr wrong after his frame broke and he got injured. Back in the early days of carbon fiber there were some fatalities. I think that was a wakeup call for a lot of brands to start over building them, hence the weight difference isn't like it used to be when carbon was really light. I ride all carbon, including rims. I frequently look it over to make sure I don't see any cracked paint from stress fractures. I'm just glad Bernard didn't get hurt, and I'm sure Pivot will do everything possible to make sure they stay on top of quality.

I Work at a shop that sells pivot, I ride a pivot, hands down my favorite bike and company I’ve ever ridden and seen in this industry.

Yeah me too, really interesting stuff.

Evil and Orange could both take a lesson.

The frame wasn't actually cracked, it's more like the carbon tubes linked by piece of metal in the front of the bike "fell off" of it, like the piece of metal separated itself from the carbon.

Yeah ilove how pivot come forward and own the fault and don't hide a thing

@@apersonontheinternet8034 Norco they easily crack, my Norco Sight cracked after 2 days in Whistler same for my friends Norco Range, Aurum and Truax

Saw a vid about santa cruz making a rider pay because it crack it the way it wasnt intended for the design. Basically the rider made a small drop but landed on a loose rock. That loose rock hit the frame, so it's no covered under their "lifetime warranty". I'd never buy carbon bikes, and from santa cruz. First, all trails I go to have loose rocks. 2nd, if you're a company and sell your bike lifetime warranty, shouldn't you back your product? I have 2 santa cruz sitting in garage, those are the last frame I buy from them.

And it shows that Pivot takes this seriously. I’ve had 5 pivots and their quality is second to none. As an engineering Director in Aerospace I can tell you stuff like this happens. What separates great companies from mediocre ones is how respond to adversity. From afar, it seems their response is text book for a segment leader.

This is the best way to handle it. Straight forward with honesty. The engineers found the root cause. Addressing it any other way would do way more harm to Pivot. I have no doubt that Pivot as a company will get this behind them and strive to be even better than there already are.

I was thinking the same thing. This looks like a "documentary" about an incident. But it's actually a paid PR piece via the biggest mtn biking media platform.

In engineering the idea of a prototype is to test concepts and ensure the theory is realised in reality. Often this results in failures (fail fast, Learn and move forwards) so BK breaking a prototype should be no surprise. Better break a few prototypes than 100’s of production bikes. I think that’s one of the reasons for running a pro team also.

Agree totally re; the parallel entry of the top & down tubes into the head tube. No way that is ideal as you say.

They admit to acid etching the aluminium but when you do so the acid is never neutralised so it will continue corroding the alloy indefinitely. The way they applied the bonding glue is amateur, if you don't actually physically press it into the pores of the material it will just sit on-top, most contract and shrink while curing so it will not expand into the pores

Not in competition. That's what in-house testing is for.

He might ride faster but i guess compared to us he is riding way better lines so you would also have snaped the bike.

@@sloops4398 fair point.

The frame didn't snap. The tubes pulled out of the headtube lug because the adhesive failed.

The adhesive failed because the bike smacked into a tree hard on practice before the final run. Bernard commented at the time on how much the bike compressed. It was lucky he wasn’t hurt in that incident.

Bullshit. He said they analyzed the frames made before and after and couldnt find bonding issues. And they replaced all the frames of all the riders just to be sure. And guess what, not another failure since then.

Couldn’t agree more! It’s basically just a fluff piece promoting Pivots new bike.

@@Ganiscolwell at least no failures that were live streamed…

​​@@Ganiscolsome people refuse to be satisfied. Yet I'm sure their favorite company has had failures, I guess it's nice for them to have not been broadcast live. Some serious head in the sand logic.

Robot

To my knowledge it started off with roadbikes not long after carbon monocque frames coming into use. So about 20 years ago i think.. I love it how people were saying Pivot was copying Atherton, but they didnt say the same about Specialized Gravity. The only reason Specialized didnt look "like an Atherton" was because they used Ohlins suspension. If Specialized Gravity used Fox like Atherton & Pivot did, then Specialized would have looked "like an Atherton" too. Actually more so because Specialized used carbon lugs, like Atherton did, vs Pivot who used CNC machined lugs.. And yet after all that, Atherton werent even the first to use lugs, just the first WC MTB frame to..

​@@crasymummabefore robot bikes gt did the lobo.

Gt did the lobo and sts like 15/20 years ago.

I was going with I think robot where the first to have lugs and tubes. Enabling them make bespoke bikes etc.

The glue didn't bond properly due to taking too much time before attaching the carbon tubes to the lugs. They spent a bunch of time talking about it

Comprehension isn't your strong suit or you haven't watched the whole thing. Here's spoonfed link: 8:32

Great news, no one in the world can buy one that is glued in like that. That was only for prototype testing. The production model that's available for purchase is full carbon with no lugs and no glue.

​@@DontWorryImAPilotit's tried and tested, giant was doing it in the 90s.

@@DontWorryImAPilot Atherton’s are for general public sale and before this crash I think they were going to follow suit

@@glennbroad2543 You can think whatever you want. Just because you think things doesn't make them true. Pivot was talking about that frame before the break happened and had said their intention was not to sell it as a lugged bike. According to them, they were doing the lugged design in order to be able to change geometry/kinematics easily and be able to dial in their bike before going to a full carbon build. People have been doing lugged bikes for years so it's not like the Atherton bike (which is a sick bike) all the sudden gave them permission to follow suit. According to an interview (I THINK it was a podcast, I can't remember which anymore) the designer had said the lugged construction was not going to be for sale and was being used only for ease of iterating prototypes with a full carbon model to follow at the conclusion of development.

@@thegarageluthier I guess by "one" I was meaning a lugged Pivot DH bike. One of my old road bikes had lugs on the tubes. It looked awesome!

Ariel Shalom - reload

@@mattnewfoxred big ups

They admitted to failing their own established protocols for the assembly of the frame as the cause for its eventual failure. Recalled every frame and started fresh. I don't know how a technical discussion on the specific bonding method would increase accountability.

@@vashusan1984 they made some very vague statements about how the timeline was altered by the presence of media and possibly letting media handle the carbon tubing. This seems to directly contradict their own official statements post crash about it being a bonding issue to the lug side of the joint. You’re filling in all the other blanks yourself.

@@JamesJozef I see someone being allowed to modify a prescribed timeline and or handle the parts as a reasonable explanation for a bonding failure. If the timeline for curing the bonding agent was disrupted from QC standards, why could this not lead to a bonding failure. Whether that bond broke away from the lug or the carbon tube is immaterial. It failed. I'm not assuming anything, I just don't feel an in depth technical discussion of a proprietary process is necessary to admit fault. Beside the fact that the bike made for the public is not utilizing the failed portion of the design in the first place.

@@vashusan1984 Again, the problematic part is that the statements made in this video directly contradict the official statements of the same people after their investigation post-failure. The mode of failure is critical so that the proper deficiencies can be addressed. If the adhesive did not bond to the lug, individuals handling the carbon tube didn’t cause the failure. Also, there’s nothing proprietary here. There’s an off the shelf adhesive being used with manufacturer guidelines for working time and surface preparation. Outside of those, the integrity of the joint isn’t guaranteed. This is a very mundane process.

@@JamesJozef I can appreciate where you're coming from. But I can tell you, as someone who has spent hard earned money (not dentist salary 😉) on multiple Pivot bikes, I don't sense any nefarious cover up or lack of accountability. I'm not an engineer or a chemist. Not sure why exactly things went wrong. In my eyes this video was an attempt to both acknowledge they failed in the instance, but also shine a light on their commitment to high quality. It's tough when the failure is public, but I don't think that would have changed their approach to recalling bikes and fixing the issue. I think it's smart to make the final product full carbon, thereby removing the questions over manufacturing.

It’s complicated for a reason, explained in this video. It’s a race bike for the fastest racers so no you won’t be a customer

@@samuelparamor3726 neither will you