Sunday, 22 July 2007

Finally banned from

Took your time didn't you boys? Here's the reason they gave.

"You have been banned for the following reason:
Bike Forums will not allow Almax or their employees or affiliates to use this forum to promote their product in any way."

A shameful response from a forum which was a leading light and major player in exposing the radial key farce a few years ago, I thought you'd be up for exposing Sold Secure for what they are, obviously not, I wonder what's changed.

Obviously this rule will apply to the numerous Kryptonite devotees that attack with a venomous bile, anyone who dares to suggest that all Kryptonite locks are anything other than the saviour of humanity? No, thought not.

I'm not entirely sure what the problem is here, maybe it was the publicising of the ITV programme Tuesday 24th July at 7:30pm on ITV1 and Sky 993 in which an independently bought Kryptonite Faggydaboodit was cropped in a couple of seconds that upset them, or maybe it was the post where I pasted the Bikesure Insurance press release? Who knows? Who cares?


Richard Thomas said...

Hi CaptainCropper,

My thread about this topic at was also trashed yesterday. I wanted to see what everyone thought about bike locks, particularly the Kryptonite Fahgettaboutit. I see now why my thread was trashed, and you were banned. Sorry to hear.

However, I also wanted to know whether you have tested the NY Fahgettaboutit U-lock, the one with the dimensions of a 3.25" width, 6" length, and 18mm steel shackle.

I saw the YouTube video showing the Fahgettaboutit chain lock being quickly broken, but now I'm wondering about the Fahgettaboutit U-lock. Is it any harder to be defeated? I do know that the NY 3000 U-lock HAS been defeated due to a real-life account on, but the NY 3000 is longer (for more leverage potential) and has a smaller shackle.

Please respond to this post or e-mail me at I need to get a new lock after my bike was stolen from my Kryptonite Evolution LS (disc-style cylinder) being defeated. Too bad I can't buy Almax products from here in the U.S.!


Captain Cropper said...

Richard, thanks for your comments, they are appreciated.
With regards to the 18mm U lock you mention, any chance of some pictures? In ale likelihood it will be similar to the 3000 in that it has a plastic/metal locking mechanism inside and as such, isn't overly secure. Being 18mm (or even 16mm) discounts cropper attacks so that's one plus point, if you can fill the U with wheel or seat or anything really, it will deter jack attacks. One thing I'm really not that keen on is the barrel, it doesn't have a hardened base plate and can be drilled right through. I'll be doing this to a 3000 soon so will put something on the blog once it's done. It's a pretty expensive hobby buying stuff and then breaking it :o)
If you can get an Abus Granit 59 (16mm shackle) then I would recommend that, it's a VERY good U lock, the square shackle really does help because you have to totally break the U before you can get it off the bike. I feel a little sad that I trashed it now but that's the way it goes I guess.

Almax will actually ship their stuff to the US, given the exchange rate you might want to sell one of the kids first! Worth calling them though, they might do you a deal on a 0.7m.
Anything else you need to know, please don't hesitate to ask.

Captain Cropper said...

Richard, ok I've had a look at the lock you mention and it looks like it's going in the right direction, big everything, that's good. However, I'd still want to confirm that the inside isn't full of plastic that would melt if someone parked a blowtorch on it for a couple of minutes.
How much they after for that U lock?
This one right?

Richard Thomas said...

hey CC,

I have a ~$400 bike so having a lock that is a good deterrent is key. The only problem with the Kryptonite Fahgettaboudit is that you can only lock your frame to a bike rack because it is so small - there's no room for locking wheels, so you'd have to get a separate lock for them. ARGH!

The link for the lock is

The key thing about this lock is that it has dual locking bolts - the shackle is not going to open unless BOTH legs are cut. With power tools, and new cutting discs, cutting both legs might be a very time consuming task.

That would be fine by me if it can't take a blowtorch for more than a few minutes, though. What material would be able to withstand that? A ceramic lock? But ceramic is brittle...

Thanks CC! Keep up the good work! The truth deserves it!


Richard Thomas said...

just have to say - rereading your post and seeing "looks like it's going in the right direction, big everything, that's good."

...'big everything, that's good'
what a funny, yet classic statement right there - sometimes technical language isn't necessary ;)

Captain Cropper said...

Ruchard, I'll try to explain the internal mechanism of the 3000 (I suspect the Onguard is the same from what I've seen and there seems to be a more than familiar relationship between Kryptonite and Onguard) anyhow, you are correct, there are two locking pins either side, actuated by a cam that pushed both pins out when you turn the key. Problem is that the locking pins are about 3mm thick and maybe 5mm wide, and mounted on a plastic tube that holds it all in place. Not only that, the locking pins are rounded at the ends, they only really need to be rounded one side to ease fitment of the lock, I guess it's rounded the other side to ease removal. A compromise between security and convenience and a reasonable compromise at that. The 3000 body is double skinned and a pretty clever design with the exception of the portion where the locking cam is pressed onto the bottom of the barrel and all the plastic inside, like I said before, it's brass and not at all drill resistant. I shall stop short of making any comment until I have actually drilled one and also hammered one to check the locking pins aren't a little bit TOO rounded.

Richard Thomas said...

Okay, I see - you're going to test the longer NY 3000, rather than the Fahgettaboudit (mini) U-lock. The 3000 has a slightly smaller shackle (16 mm vs. 18mm) and is slightly wider.

But, have you read the bikeforums thread about a real-life defeat of the NY 3000? That version is the 26-cm long version. The thread has video of the actual theft and pictures. But, the authenticity of the original poster has been challenged, since it seems only one side of the lock was cut and the thief was somehow able to maneuver the bike out of that slit...all in less than a minute.


Captain Cropper said...

I think I've seen the picture of the 3000 you're talking about. I very strongly suspect that it's been cut with a grinder, the internals will allow the body to spin easily so that the bike can be removed. A thief will often put everything back in it's place to buy him a few more seconds if the owner returns as the thief is cycling off. If there's a broken lock on the floor then you know immediately that you bike has been stolen, if there's what LOOKS like an intact lock on the locking post, then the first thought is that you must have parked somwhere else and forgot, the second thought is that some turd has stolen your bike. This is why I like the Abus, the square shackle fits in a square hole in the body and it can't be spun round, you have to jack it twice to get to the stage where you can remove the bike. I have methods that will destroy ANY U lock given a little space but am not willing to divulge that yet, UK police suggest that I am very slightly ahead of the game in this respect so I'm keeping quiet about it.

Richard Thomas said...

And another question CC, do you recommend
1. placing a U-lock around the seat tube, the rear wheel and a physical object OR
2. placing it around the rear wheel AND the physical object?

With #1, the bike itself could be used as leverage to break the lock, but in that case, the frame (esp. for my road bike) might be severely damaged. (keyword: might)

With #2, the thief would have to ruin the rear wheel and thus immobilize the bike, though s/he might still fetch a pretty price for the intact bike at a pawn shop.

Captain Cropper said...

Richard, think like a thief, the answer will come.

Richard Thomas said...

Thanks for the insight about the bike able to be removed with a cut lock. That's ridiculous.

I wish I could afford to buy that Abus Granit 59 lock, but bollocks! It's over 150 pounds - imagine converting that price to dollars and having it shipped to the U.S.!


Captain Cropper said...

Yep, it's a bit steep for sure. Maybe a 3000 for the wheels and a NY Faggydaboodit 18mm for the frame?

Richard Thomas said...

Two u-locks? That's ingenious! I hadn't even thought of that! That sounds like a good deterrent - I'd just need to remove my front wheel and place it in the back.

Thanks CC, at least it might double the amount of time it would take to take my whole bike.

And thanks for all the quick responses. A slow Sunday, huh?


IndustryOutsider said...

If your sole purpose on the forums is to sell a product by means other than paid advertising, you are not welcome.

Captain Cropper said...

IndustryOutsider, quite right too.
However, there was no reason to delete the posts showing the time of the ITV programme in which a Kryptonite was destroyed in 11 seconds was there? It's very obvious that Bikeforums is Kryptonite's pet forum, nothing wrong with that at all, good luck with the joint venture. Also good luck to Kryptonite when people start asking why their Faggydaboodit chain only lasted 11 seconds with 42" croppers when Sold Secure (using the same croppers according to the Sold Secure tool list) couldn't even manage it in 5 minutes, Kryptonite take Sold Secure's word as gospel or do they replicate their testing just to make sure the public aren't buying cheese instead of chain?

Richard Thomas said...


Information is POWER, and that's all Captain Cropper's trying to provide, so please kindly f**k off. Oh, hold on, that would be censorship, which is what you're trying to do.

I found out about Captain Cropper from Googling on MY OWN. Try Googling "fahgettaboudit test." You'll find that the fourth link down is to a blog entry in Kryptonite's OWN 'Unbreakable Bonds' blog. The link is

See first blog comment:
Even Kryptonite doesn't censor blogger 'fritz' from posting a link to a LiveJournal entry, containing the video showing many chains, not just Kryptonite's, able to be quickly defeated. After clicking on the YouTube video on that LiveJournal site, I found about Captain Cropper, who commented on the video at YouTube.

I believe Captain Cropper is doing everyone a valuable service by revealing the naked truth about these locks. He has every right to recommend other locks if Kryptonite, etc. is not being completely honest. People don't have to listen to him - they have the right to choose or ask him more questions.

The moderators at trashed a thread I created on whether Kryptonite and other chain locks can be quickly defeated, asking for other people's experiences. They apparently do not want any discussion to occur about bike locks, especially one that might be critical of the manufacturers of these locks.

Chain Chick said...

industryoutsider - allow unpaid advertising, just as long as it is Kryptonite being bigged up.

There was a chap whose bicycle was stolen with a Kryptonite 3000 lock on it. The usual suspects. (You know who you are ABH, Z & R) all cropped up (pardon the pun) and accused the poor guy, of lying. So not only had he lost his bike, the vultures ripped him to pieces.

So you may be better asking WHY allow this to go on. Where you are allowed an opion as long as it is THEIRS.

Ziemas said...


Chain Chick,

I will assume that by 'Z' as a usual suspect in the above post you are referring to me. If you actually took the time to read the thread on Bike Forums which you are posting about you will notice that I have not posted a single comment in the whole thread. Nor has anyone else who's user name starts with a 'Z'.

I will also assume that you are the female half of Almax, Maxine Simpson, is that correct? Is so, I'll tell you that the issue I have with your firm's posting is the way you do it, not the content. You don't seem to realize that chains being cropped with massive bolt cutters isn't a real issue for the bicycling community. You see hell bent on creating a scandal where none exists via methods of personal destruction. Why is that? Does you product not stand the test on it's own merits?

Why does Almax refuse to comment on the test in MCN that showed the Almax chain could be broken in 37 seconds with hand tools? Instead Almax lodged a complaint with the Press Complaints Commission that the methods used to break the chain were not disclosed. Yet I've never heard anyone from Almax actually deny that their chains can't be broken with an anvil and hammer as was done in 37 seconds by MCN.

Lastly, Almax chains used to be Sold Secure Gold, yet now they are unrated by any agency; did they ever fail the Sold Secure Gold test?

Captain Cropper said...

Is a 95kg anvil and a 14lb sledgehammer a "hand tool"? According to MCN's definition it is. MCN also think it's fair to repeatedly batter the same link using various tests until it's distorted beyond recognition (yes the link is in safe hands now) and then finally when they begin an attack on the same link with their 95kg hand tool, the start the timer from zero and then start willy waving when it goes in 37 seconds.

I have put many chains on the anvil and none have survived (including the Almax)but you have to ask yourself this, as a thief, would you happily drag 95kg of steel out of your van, plave is under the chain (assuming the user left you enough to play with), then repeatedly smack the crap out of it? A teensy bit suspicious wouldn't you say?
The whole ethos behind good quality security is to force the theif into a corner, used correctly, an Almax and plenty of other 16mm chains will be totally immune to sledgehammer attacks. In fact, I don't believe thay have EVER lost a bike to this method because they give top advice to the people who buy their chains and make sure they know how to get the best out of their products, in addition to that, my police sources say that the numero uno theif attack is bolt croppers, silent, cheap, effective.
Put it this way, given a choice between swinging a 14lb sledgehammer in public and getting a pair of tin snips on a cable lock, or using a 24" pair of croppers on a chain, I know which one I'd go for.

So there you have it kiddies, leave any chain draped on the floor and a 95kg anvil and sledgehammer wielding thug might be able to steal it, cure? Don't leave your chain on the floor, simple as that.

Oh and Ziemas, just for the record, I don't work for Almax, I just admire their product and conviction, they are good people too.

Chain Chick said...

Ziemas - Thank you for giving me a chance to reply
Yes, I am indeed Maxine the female part of Almax. What is your real name? and whom do you work for?

Yes our chains were Sold Secure GOLD for Cars, caravans, motorcycles, motor scooters, ATV's and Commercial & Industrial Vehicles (see any chains in that Comm/Ind catagory now?) It is now Thatcham approved. Cat 3. Which in the UK is an insurance approved standard. check out
Category MC3
Series IV & Lock TMC3-286/0507
Series III & Lock TMC3-285/0507


I would happily have replied to the MCN slur on your forum. Except they banned me. Quite difficult to post up then ah! Captain cropper has replied so I will not repeat it. However, I will say that our chains Cannot be bolt cropped by hand, and we have NEVER lost a bike to a sledge attack, with or without an anvil!!!
Oh by the way, you neglected to mention the actual winner of the MCN test was the ALMAX Series IV!!

So, Ziemas I agree, you did not post in that actual thread, however, when I mentioned the usual suspects. You knew who you were!! As you have made comments such as the one's above, in other threads on that forum.

Which you have now been made aware are untrue, so are you going to go back on to and post up the true facts? Will you mention the ITV1 programme (24.07.07 7:30pm) Sky channel 993, which exonerates us, or will you just go back and perpetuate the same stance that you have taken so far.

Ziemas said...

It seems just as probable as a bicycle thief jumping out of a van with four foot bolt cutters to steal a bike with a high end lock. It would be much easier for the thief to steal one of the many bicycles locked with flimsy locks, just like in your example.

Ziemas said...

Chain Chick-

Just what have I said which is untrue?

Captain Cropper said...

Ziemas, that's the conclusion I came to as well but the the ITV programme in question included chains that are also used on motorcycles so the 4 foot croppers do have a degree of relevance, but I do agree with your comment. Bicycle thieves are unlikely to use such large tools, motorcycle theives on the other hand would and do use such tools.
If I had a little more time to get clued up on things then there would have been far more devastating tools used on the programme, as it stands I didn't so we resorted to what Sold Secure claim to use when they test these things, I don't think that's unfair.
Whatever way this whole thing is coming across as, I can guarantee it is NOT a direct attack on Kryptonite but if their PR Manager insists on suggesting that the video is a fake then Almax and I have a duty to ourselves to fend off such unfounded accusations. The root of the problem lies with the test bodies, if they did their job properly rather than amassing the biggest list of approved products in the universe rather than upping the standards and failing crap like cable locks, <13mm chains and <13mm D locks. They have been warned repeatedly by us and the press over the past two years or more that this would come to a head, hopefully now it will.
There's a cracking clip on Youtube of a young ex-bike theif doing a test on 8 locks for a Dutch TV station, that even opened my eyes, the ease with which he got through some of those locks with very basic tools was worrying to say the least.