Hambini. An utter tool?

FreddieVonRost

I have just "discovered" this chap Hambini on YouTube. Is it just me or is he an utter tool who has nothing positive to say about frames, companies or for that matter anything to do with with cycling?

tonysj

Only watched odd videos of his as he goes on a bit. He is qualified, apparently, to address the faults of frames and like everything else on YT read into it what you will!! Interesting that he rates Look frames for being good for close tolerances for BB etc.

joe_totale-2

He's a smart guy who knows his stuff.
However, he also knows that controversy equals publicity.
It's a shame as he speaks a lot of sense regarding the poor quality of many bike frames but I find it pretty impossible to watch due to him being a sweary idiot. Prior to his persona change places like GCN used to get him in as a technical expert.

I'm clearly in the minority though as he's only picking up more and more views, even after all that unsavoury business with Cycling Weekly.

shortfall

I think he's pretty good with the engineering side of things tbh.

FreddieVonRost

Unsavoury business? Do tell.

joe_totale-2

freddievonrost said:

Unsavoury business? Do tell.

https://road.cc/content/news/shockjock-vid-seeks-refute-sexism-claim-reinforces-it-272869

I imagine the videos were he said this stuff have long been taken down.

lettingthedaysgoby

I'm kinda torn - on one hand he's a refreshingly honest voice when it comes to how poor the engineering is on a lot of supposedly "premium" products, and has the technical knowledge to back it up. But he's constantly treading over what is a pretty thin line with his whole "shock jock" persona.

I don't mind the swearing and general no nonsense approach, but there have been times when he really could have done with just backing it off a bit.

spatt77

freddievonrost said:

I have just "discovered" this chap Hambini on YouTube. Is it just me or is he an utter tool who has nothing positive to say about frames, companies or for that matter anything to do with with cycling?

To be fair, hes been very complimentary about Time, Look and even Cannondale, which he generally doesn't rate! His style may not suit everyone but his honesty about the BS in the bike trade should be applauded!

Ben6899

He had an Open Upper in the garage, in his latest video. Poor BB tolerances which he worked around, but his mate who does the ND testing says he would not ride the frame because of the degree of voiding in the carbon fibre, including a critical one near the BB shell.

That's quite a statement, given we see lots of ND testing on this channel and on Raul Luescher's and, despite varying comments on frame "quality", we never see the comment that the frame in question is dangerous!

He's overzealous with the language sometimes, but I appreciate him calling out companies (Cervelo springs to mind: re-writing the tolerances in their own QC specs - beyond the figures recommended by bearing manufacturers - is a bit of a sh1te trick).

carl_p

I quite like him tbh. Certainly knows his stuff and a refreshing change from the scripted marketing tripe on some cycling sites, ahem. The language is a bit borderline but if I'm honest I probably come out with worse! I'd love one of his BB's but crikey they're a price.

First.Aspect

He's a nob. He suffers from the fatal flaw of overestimating himself and underestimating everyone else. When threatened, he attacks, usually with an accusation of racism (rather than nob-ism). He's an engineer who dazzles with engineering speak, to create something of a "white coat" effect - I don't understand it so it must be right. But he's just an engineer.

Whilst it is not correct to say he doesn't occasionally make a good point, he completely lacks context and can't accept that product marketing will necessitate hyperbole. He works within a duopoly so there's not much marketing in his industry.

He also seems prone to ranting about bicycles because they aren't as well made as aeroplanes. True, but they are cheaper.

shortfall

First.Aspect said:

He's a nob. He suffers from the fatal flaw of overestimating himself and underestimating everyone else. When threatened, he attacks, usually with an accusation of racism (rather than nob-ism). He's an engineer who dazzles with engineering speak, to create something of a "white coat" effect - I don't understand it so it must be right. But he's just an engineer.

Whilst it is not correct to say he doesn't occasionally make a good point, he completely lacks context and can't accept that product marketing will necessitate hyperbole. He works within a duopoly so there's not much marketing in his industry.

He also seems prone to ranting about bicycles because they aren't as well made as aeroplanes. True, but they are cheaper.

It's a disgrace that companies like Cannondale knowingly punt out bikes that will develop creaking bottom brackets. Whatever else Hambini may be it's to his credit that he calls firms out for this sort of shithousery.

bondurant

Unwatchable. Tried a few of his videos as he seems like he is well qualified, but they're not for me.

On the plus side he's less of a c0ck than Durianrider, but only by about 3%.

spatt77

First.Aspect said:

He's a nob. He suffers from the fatal flaw of overestimating himself and underestimating everyone else. When threatened, he attacks, usually with an accusation of racism (rather than nob-ism). He's an engineer who dazzles with engineering speak, to create something of a "white coat" effect - I don't understand it so it must be right. But he's just an engineer.

Whilst it is not correct to say he doesn't occasionally make a good point, he completely lacks context and can't accept that product marketing will necessitate hyperbole. He works within a duopoly so there's not much marketing in his industry.

He also seems prone to ranting about bicycles because they aren't as well made as aeroplanes. True, but they are cheaper.

Think hes ranting about bikes not being made to the bike companies own standards, never mind aeronautical standards!

First.Aspect

shortfall said:

First.Aspect said:

He's a nob. He suffers from the fatal flaw of overestimating himself and underestimating everyone else. When threatened, he attacks, usually with an accusation of racism (rather than nob-ism). He's an engineer who dazzles with engineering speak, to create something of a "white coat" effect - I don't understand it so it must be right. But he's just an engineer.

Whilst it is not correct to say he doesn't occasionally make a good point, he completely lacks context and can't accept that product marketing will necessitate hyperbole. He works within a duopoly so there's not much marketing in his industry.

He also seems prone to ranting about bicycles because they aren't as well made as aeroplanes. True, but they are cheaper.

It's a disgrace that companies like Cannondale knowingly punt out bikes that will develop creaking bottom brackets. Whatever else Hambini may be it's to his credit that he calls firms out for this sort of shithousery.

Yeah we didn't need him to tell us that press fit bb's were a disimprovement. Actually you don't need an engineer at all because it's so fucking obvious.

shortfall

First.Aspect said:

shortfall said:

First.Aspect said:

He's a nob. He suffers from the fatal flaw of overestimating himself and underestimating everyone else. When threatened, he attacks, usually with an accusation of racism (rather than nob-ism). He's an engineer who dazzles with engineering speak, to create something of a "white coat" effect - I don't understand it so it must be right. But he's just an engineer.

Whilst it is not correct to say he doesn't occasionally make a good point, he completely lacks context and can't accept that product marketing will necessitate hyperbole. He works within a duopoly so there's not much marketing in his industry.

He also seems prone to ranting about bicycles because they aren't as well made as aeroplanes. True, but they are cheaper.

It's a disgrace that companies like Cannondale knowingly punt out bikes that will develop creaking bottom brackets. Whatever else Hambini may be it's to his credit that he calls firms out for this sort of shithousery.

Yeah we didn't need him to tell us that press fit bb's were a disimprovement. Actually you don't need an engineer at all because it's so censored obvious.

I think the idea of them is sound, it's the execution that's bad, or more to the point, they're going to creak in frames made with poor tolerances.

First.Aspect

bondurant said:

Unwatchable. Tried a few of his videos as he seems like he is well qualified, but they're not for me.

On the plus side he's less of a c0ck than Durianrider, but only by about 3%.

Brilliant. The only vid of that guy I watched was of him drafting a group up a 4-5% climb then he sprinted at the end and crossed "the line" first. He narrated it as though he was narrating the Lance Armstrong stage with "the look". Honestly it was better than an episode of The Office.

pblakeney

He is a complete and utter bar steward, as is the OP for drawing my attention to him.
I now want to buy a Time frame.

First.Aspect

shortfall said:

First.Aspect said:

shortfall said:

First.Aspect said:

He's a nob. He suffers from the fatal flaw of overestimating himself and underestimating everyone else. When threatened, he attacks, usually with an accusation of racism (rather than nob-ism). He's an engineer who dazzles with engineering speak, to create something of a "white coat" effect - I don't understand it so it must be right. But he's just an engineer.

Whilst it is not correct to say he doesn't occasionally make a good point, he completely lacks context and can't accept that product marketing will necessitate hyperbole. He works within a duopoly so there's not much marketing in his industry.

He also seems prone to ranting about bicycles because they aren't as well made as aeroplanes. True, but they are cheaper.

It's a disgrace that companies like Cannondale knowingly punt out bikes that will develop creaking bottom brackets. Whatever else Hambini may be it's to his credit that he calls firms out for this sort of shithousery.

Yeah we didn't need him to tell us that press fit bb's were a disimprovement. Actually you don't need an engineer at all because it's so censored obvious.

I think the idea of them is sound, it's the execution that's bad, or more to the point, they're going to creak in frames made with poor tolerances.

No, they are a bad idea full stop. Carbon frames are plastic, basically. Trying to create an interference fit between plastic and metal is daft. That's why the solution is a threaded shell, which is what we started off from 5 years earlier.

thegreatdivide

First.Aspect said:

He's a nob. He suffers from the fatal flaw of overestimating himself and underestimating everyone else. When threatened, he attacks, usually with an accusation of racism (rather than nob-ism). He's an engineer who dazzles with engineering speak, to create something of a "white coat" effect - I don't understand it so it must be right. But he's just an engineer.

Whilst it is not correct to say he doesn't occasionally make a good point, he completely lacks context and can't accept that product marketing will necessitate hyperbole. He works within a duopoly so there's not much marketing in his industry.

He also seems prone to ranting about bicycles because they aren't as well made as aeroplanes. True, but they are cheaper.

All of this.

The guy’s a fud.

First.Aspect

oxoman said:

Get use to plastic pal, your bodies full of micro plastics. The next none metal bikes will be graphene. Don't care what you think of him, he called out the so called quality big brands that we all know build rubbish at time. Luckily most of us aren't affected by it or notice it. As to his competitive style he's no different to the pro,s who are dragged up the climbs for the Sprint finish.

God this forum cheers me up sometimes!!

The fascination with graphene is funny. It's new so it must be better. Only it isn't. It's in soot.

The bike industry really missed a trick when Bucky balls first came out. Or Bucky tubes. Tubes must be better, surely.

Either way it is all in soot.

joe2019

I like him, and for what it's worth he's got himself 20k more subs than Durianrider, well done!

lettingthedaysgoby

Ummm, don't want to break this to any of you but if you watch his videos he will actually tell you that press fit is a better solution than threaded, and he's right - if only the bike manufactures actually made things properly.

Press fit bearing are everywhere in all sorts of high tech/stress/critical applications. And they work perfectly, because the engineering is done well and within defined tolerances.

The argument that a bike frame isn't as costly as an aeroplane so we should just accept this rubbish is, well... rubbish. If a brand is asking for several thousand pounds for a frame then we have every right to expect that it is made well, and within the tolerances defined by the bits we put in it.

First.Aspect

lettingthedaysgoby said:

Ummm, don't want to break this to any of you but if you watch his videos he will actually tell you that press fit is a better solution than threaded, and he's right - if only the bike manufactures actually made things properly.

Press fit bearing are everywhere in all sorts of high tech/stress/critical applications. And they work perfectly, because the engineering is done well and within defined tolerances.

The argument that a bike frame isn't as costly as an aeroplane so we should just accept this rubbish is, well... rubbish. If a brand is asking for several thousand pounds for a frame then we have every right to expect that it is made well, and within the tolerances defined by the bits we put in it.

Nah. There are voids in all CF and it is just a case of how bad they are.

If the tolerances required to make something work are uneconomic to mass produce, it's a bad idea.

Given that the performance gains are immesurably small, if they exist at all, it's a bad idea.

First.Aspect

oxoman said:

Lettingthedaysgoby. Your not wrong, would hate to think what would happen if one of our 150kw motors let go of the pressfit fluid coupling their fitted with.

Okay, so are the intended to be replaced? And are there any acoustic considerations? Because for the most part a creak is neither here nor there, except that we find it annoying on a bicycle.

I imagine my washing machine has press fit bearings. It makes a hell of a noise but I don't know whether or not it creaks.

lettingthedaysgoby

First.Aspect said:

Nah. There are voids in all CF and it is just a case of how bad they are.

If the tolerances required to make something work are uneconomic to mass produce, it's a bad idea.

Given that the performance gains are immesurably small, if they exist at all, it's a bad idea.

Except there are some manufactures who can manage to make them right, to the standard you'd expect for the price.

Hambini's main point always seem to be calling out brands who make bogus engineering claims. For that he is to be applauded. From nonsense aero gains to materials science, the bike industry is full of utter cowcrap from top to bottom. It can, and should, be better for objects we're paying several thousand pounds for.

lettingthedaysgoby

Oh, and the whole issue is that some of these standards are those defined by the very people making them. If you can't make a BB to the tolerances you yourself have specified, what's the bloody point?

First.Aspect

Why did you but a bike with a press fit BB? It wasn't compulsory.

And objecting to marketing spraff? Do you only watch BBC or something? It kinda happens a lot.

lettingthedaysgoby

First.Aspect said:

Why did you but a bike with a press fit BB? It wasn't compulsory.

And objecting to marketing spraff? Do you only watch BBC or something? It kinda happens a lot.

Marketing spaff is one thing, but simply being able to build something to the tolerance required to attach the components you're fitting to it is quite another.

As for a press fit BB - again, if done correctly it is a superior way of doing things than threaded, in spite of what the ancient and knowedable cycling gods will tell you.

First.Aspect

lettingthedaysgoby said:

First.Aspect said:

Nah. There are voids in all CF and it is just a case of how bad they are.

If the tolerances required to make something work are uneconomic to mass produce, it's a bad idea.

Given that the performance gains are immesurably small, if they exist at all, it's a bad idea.

Except there are some manufactures who can manage to make them right, to the standard you'd expect for the price.

Hambini's main point always seem to be calling out brands who make bogus engineering claims. For that he is to be applauded. From nonsense aero gains to materials science, the bike industry is full of utter cowcrap from top to bottom. It can, and should, be better for objects we're paying several thousand pounds for.

Why does this command respect? Bears. Woods.

Would you admire a nob getting shouty about outrageous L'Oréal adverts? Or someone objecting to Colgate adverts with miraculous self guided bubbles? What about ariel washing powder and it's psychic molecules that can tell the difference between white and red?

What he is doing is laughably easy. Or his subscribers are laughably naive. Hard to say.

Either way, do you think his aerospace engineer colleagues respect him? I doubt it.

Ben6899

lettingthedaysgoby said:

Oh, and the whole issue is that some of these standards are those defined by the very people making them. If you can't make a BB to the tolerances you yourself have specified, what's the bloody point?

Even worse, Cervelo widened their tolerances to make them easier to hit... beyond those recommended by bearing manufacturers. I mean, that is pretty poor form.