Hunt issues recall for 48 Limitless Aero Disc wheels - "worlds fastest road disc brake wheel set"

Mathemagician wrote:

On a separate note, why doesn't this article appear if I search for "Hunt", or "Hunt recall" on this website's search engine?

The search is very hit and miss, I've found it easier to do a seperate search engine search to be fair even for specific RoadCC articles.

Regarding the Hunt wheels, it would be interesting to actually hear about the actual number of damaged wheels against the number sold, how many is a 'few'?

It's hard to imagine that they've sold a bucket load not just because they've only been out since June, so in % terms the number of damaged wheels could be relatively high when compared to the bigger/mass production companies who have a 'few' incidents and the recall job involves sometimes tens if not hundreds of thousands of units.

It's interesting reading the articles back (pt1&2) the subtitle reads "Find out how Hunt has been updating its new wheel design for the real world UK conditions"

it comes across as not much to do with actual UK road conditions and robustness - given the report and recall  and on the basis that Hunt have assessed there's a flaw/not up to snuff, not just a random scenario that would exceed the limitations of fair use which would have meant they'd not be recalling the product in the first instance, but lots to do with how windy it is.

No good having slippery wheels if they're made of biscuit and with the tubeless tech/designed for a wider than standard race tyre, this should surely have enhanced the wheelsets impact resistance compared to a narrower tubed tyre and narrower bead wheel. Hunt decided to overcome the weight conundrum that occurs with going with a much wider wheel track by using a LOW DENSITY polymer instead of actual carbon fibre because the polymer was lighter. How much they used to kep the wheel weight down who knows but that in itself rings alarm bells.

I've still got some CF wheels that have seen more than a few bumps and with a significant rider load on them (well over 100kg for too many miles), they're not amazingly light compared to modern rims but by god they are absolutely bombproof (24/20s on lightweight alloy Italian made hubs), if I had to choose a CF rim for a wheel build I'd prefer Gigantex every time if they're available, if not Corima, I'd rather have superior robustness over a small incremental weight advantage and indeed aero advantage.

Maybe the industry standards aren't representitve of real world use, maybe that's what needs addressing, similarly to the way some wheels seem to be knocked out that aren't meeting ETRTO standards accurately which comes up many times with regards to tyres fitting or not to certain rims, Veloflex specifically mentions this in a recent article with regards their updated/strengthened tyres to combat this problem.

And lastly regards to what a recall means, to my mind its' the minimum a company should be doing, it doesn't reflect "positively", it reflects that a company is abiding by the law to not sell substandard products that don't meet the criteria that you thought they were been sold on not to mention being a premium product to boot with the matching price tag (admittedly the Hunt wheels are lower priced compared to similar branded products but that's all for nought if you're left face down because you hit a pothole you'd ordinarily expect to get through just fine but didn't.

Mathemagician wrote:

On a separate note, why doesn't this article appear if I search for "Hunt", or "Hunt recall" on this website's search engine?

..because the search functions on this site are almost entirely broken, have been since the last re-write. Only real way of finding stuff (unless lucky) is via Google (or similar) with a 'site' option to road.cc. The feedback from road.cc staffers has been (IME) that it works fine - it's trivial to show it's not, so not really sure why that is. If you do get some results on road.cc itself, good luck sorting or filtering anything. Christ, gopher had better functionality...

rjfrussell wrote:

"It should be added that Hunt has a very good reputation amongst cyclists with its wheels proving popular and a good customer service track record. "

 

The love-in continues.  Even in an article about a product recall road.cc manages to give Hunt a blow job.

Product recalls are a good thing.  I had one on a wheel for my Arkose (Evans just sent a new wheel, also had the option to take it to the shop for them to swap it over), and I've had a couple of recalls for my car.  This is a lot better than a company that shirks its responsibilities and doesn't recall a product with a fault. 

Obviously a product that never needs a recall is the ideal.

DoctorFish wrote:

rjfrussell wrote:

"It should be added that Hunt has a very good reputation amongst cyclists with its wheels proving popular and a good customer service track record. "

 

The love-in continues.  Even in an article about a product recall road.cc manages to give Hunt a blow job.

Product recalls are a good thing.  I had one on a wheel for my Arkose (Evans just sent a new wheel, also had the option to take it to the shop for them to swap it over), and I've had a couple of recalls for my car.  This is a lot better than a company that shirks its responsibilities and doesn't recall a product with a fault. 

Obviously a product that never needs a recall is the ideal.

You're kind of missing the point. There's no getting around the fact that a recall is bad publicity, and it's an editorial decision to attempt to soften this by inserting a sentence that belongs to an opinion piece into a news article. 

I'm glad I'm not the only one that thinks road.cc is biased toward Hunt. Mason too, in my opinion. 

Mathemagician wrote:

DoctorFish wrote:

rjfrussell wrote:

"It should be added that Hunt has a very good reputation amongst cyclists with its wheels proving popular and a good customer service track record. "

 

The love-in continues.  Even in an article about a product recall road.cc manages to give Hunt a blow job.

Product recalls are a good thing.  I had one on a wheel for my Arkose (Evans just sent a new wheel, also had the option to take it to the shop for them to swap it over), and I've had a couple of recalls for my car.  This is a lot better than a company that shirks its responsibilities and doesn't recall a product with a fault. 

Obviously a product that never needs a recall is the ideal.

You're kind of missing the point. There's no getting around the fact that a recall is bad publicity, and it's an editorial decision to attempt to soften this by inserting a sentence that belongs to an opinion piece into a news article. 

I'm glad I'm not the only one that thinks road.cc is biased toward Hunt. Mason too, in my opinion. 

And if there was a recall from a customer with a notorious reputation for bad customer service and they happened to mention this in the article you'd be querying it as well?

Yes they do seem very pro Hunt, Mason and a few other brands, but usually because these brands have provided reasons to be very positive, openness, great customer service, a product they stand by etc.

It's a shame that they've had to issue a recall, but as others have said, I'd rather a company did this than looked at the numbers, went 'it's very unlikely to happen to most riders' and just set aside a provision to cover the occasional cost of damaged wheels, which is what a lot of companies do when they identify a potential fault.

RobD wrote:

Mathemagician wrote:

DoctorFish wrote:

rjfrussell wrote:

"It should be added that Hunt has a very good reputation amongst cyclists with its wheels proving popular and a good customer service track record. "

 

The love-in continues.  Even in an article about a product recall road.cc manages to give Hunt a blow job.

Product recalls are a good thing.  I had one on a wheel for my Arkose (Evans just sent a new wheel, also had the option to take it to the shop for them to swap it over), and I've had a couple of recalls for my car.  This is a lot better than a company that shirks its responsibilities and doesn't recall a product with a fault. 

Obviously a product that never needs a recall is the ideal.

You're kind of missing the point. There's no getting around the fact that a recall is bad publicity, and it's an editorial decision to attempt to soften this by inserting a sentence that belongs to an opinion piece into a news article. 

I'm glad I'm not the only one that thinks road.cc is biased toward Hunt. Mason too, in my opinion. 

And if there was a recall from a customer with a notorious reputation for bad customer service and they happened to mention this in the article you'd be querying it as well?

Yes they do seem very pro-Hunt, Mason and a few other brands, but usually because these brands have provided reasons to be very positive, openness, great customer service, a product they stand by etc.

It's a shame that they've had to issue a recall, but as others have said, I'd rather a company did this than looked at the numbers, went 'it's very unlikely to happen to most riders' and just set aside a provision to cover the occasional cost of damaged wheels, which is what a lot of companies do when they identify a potential fault.

I thought it was a strange sentence to add to the end of the recall article too. Taking a quick look at some other articles regarding recalls, road.cc haven't mentioned a company's popularity or level of customer service in those. Definitely a tad biased.

RobD wrote:

And if there was a recall from a customer with a notorious reputation for bad customer service and they happened to mention this in the article you'd be querying it as well?

I don't see what your fictional scenario has to do with what we're talking about here. But yes, if road.cc were to put a negative vague and unprovable opinion at the end of a product recall article, I would question both its validity and the motives behind putting it. 

Mathemagician wrote:

RobD wrote:

And if there was a recall from a customer with a notorious reputation for bad customer service and they happened to mention this in the article you'd be querying it as well?

I don't see what your fictional scenario has to do with what we're talking about here. But yes, if road.cc were to put a negative vague and unprovable opinion at the end of a product recall article, I would question both its validity and the motives behind putting it. 

I'm not convinced that a recall is bad publicity.  I'd happily buy another toyota for example, knowing that recalls have been dealt with quickly and efficently before.  I've got a set of Hunt wheels (aluminium ones) and I would buy from them again.

I do agree that the opinion comment isn't needed in the last sentance of this news item.

Nick T wrote:

https://www.singletracks.com/blog/mtb-videos/watch-danny-macaskill-try-d...

Wow - those are impressively strong rims.