3 ms·

I don't want to imagine anything about this situation, and my day has been made worse reading up on it. Sucks enough that this family lost a child, but the oth

by taeric 3y ago

I don't want to imagine anything about this situation, and my day has been made worse reading up on it. Sucks enough that this family lost a child, but the other child on the bike not only gets to live through an accident that killed a friend, but also is the reason their family got sued for over a million dollars? And the rhetoric of "nobody has considered kids on these things" is ridiculous. Of course they have. ATVs have been a thing for a long long time. And it has been known for a long time that those are dangerous. Do we even allow three wheelers anymore? I remember we had motorcycles at that age growing up. I'm sympathetic to the idea that too many kids are getting on these bikes without training or proper headgear and such. I'm not clear on what this story is asserting to be done about it. Some vague assertions about bad designs, but no design points actually called out. They reference an older design that was problematic, but specifically do not accuse the current bikes of using that. I didn't get to what the current status of this lawsuit is. Is that known?

stefan_ 3y ago
It's long form, don't expect a bullet point news release. The other family settled, presumably for whatever their insurance would pay. The suit vs RadPower is ongoing as far as I can tell. There are two design problems. The first is quick releases, which no serious bike manufacturer would spec with disc brakes anymore; the actual industry had long moved on to through-axles at a time when RadRunner was still selling these bikes. They particularly don't make sense to spec when you are selling bikes to people who are expected to have no understanding of how they work. The other design problem is that manufacturers like RadPower will install the most garbage flexy throwaway shit for components in places where they assume the customer can't tell the difference. That's how you end up with mechanical disc brakes; sure, they have plenty of stopping power when adjusted correctly. But they need to be adjusted for pad wear and a million other things, and when they were made out of sheet metal, that can be hard to do. But we shouldn't lose track of the most likely cause - they were two kids on a very heavy bike with a very relaxed position (read: difficult to control) going down a 14% incline. They probably picked up much more speed than they were expecting to, panicked and binned it. 99% of the time, they walk away with scrapes, and very rarely, they hit their head in just the wrong way to cause massive damage.
- taeric 3y ago
  I know the points with regards to the brakes and the components. I even get the point that hydraulic would have better stopping power. I further get the point that you need regular maintenance on these bikes more than you do on the old beater bikes most kids used to use. (Indeed, my road bike is mechanical disk brakes. And we own some of these RAD bikes.) None of that really enters here, though? The "wheel could have come off due to design" is irrelevant in a case where the wheel didn't come off. That it didn't have enough stopping power could be relevant? But even that wasn't asserted here, instead it was that the operator lost control and they crashed. Which sucks in every sense of the word. Your gripe that they use cheap components would matter if you can show that this crash was a component failure. That isn't claimed. This entire comments section is too filled with people grinding their axe to the tune of a dead kid excusing any logic to their claim.

by taeric 3y ago

stefan_ 3y ago

It's long form, don't expect a bullet point news release. The other family settled, presumably for whatever their insurance would pay. The suit vs RadPower is ongoing as far as I can tell. There are two design problems. The first is quick releases, which no serious bike manufacturer would spec with disc brakes anymore; the actual industry had long moved on to through-axles at a time when RadRunner was still selling these bikes. They particularly don't make sense to spec when you are selling bikes to people who are expected to have no understanding of how they work. The other design problem is that manufacturers like RadPower will install the most garbage flexy throwaway shit for components in places where they assume the customer can't tell the difference. That's how you end up with mechanical disc brakes; sure, they have plenty of stopping power when adjusted correctly. But they need to be adjusted for pad wear and a million other things, and when they were made out of sheet metal, that can be hard to do. But we shouldn't lose track of the most likely cause - they were two kids on a very heavy bike with a very relaxed position (read: difficult to control) going down a 14% incline. They probably picked up much more speed than they were expecting to, panicked and binned it. 99% of the time, they walk away with scrapes, and very rarely, they hit their head in just the wrong way to cause massive damage.

taeric 3y ago
I know the points with regards to the brakes and the components. I even get the point that hydraulic would have better stopping power. I further get the point that you need regular maintenance on these bikes more than you do on the old beater bikes most kids used to use. (Indeed, my road bike is mechanical disk brakes. And we own some of these RAD bikes.) None of that really enters here, though? The "wheel could have come off due to design" is irrelevant in a case where the wheel didn't come off. That it didn't have enough stopping power could be relevant? But even that wasn't asserted here, instead it was that the operator lost control and they crashed. Which sucks in every sense of the word. Your gripe that they use cheap components would matter if you can show that this crash was a component failure. That isn't claimed. This entire comments section is too filled with people grinding their axe to the tune of a dead kid excusing any logic to their claim.