Banebots Return policy

Teams be aware that Banebots does not accept returns on parts.

We could not find this policy clearly stated on their site.

Team 353

They will let you return defective parts though.
Basically just run one of their gearboxes for a minute, wait for it to break, return it.

The funny thing is that this is what they said to us. They were so confident that they will not break that they told us if (when) they fail we can return them… Lets say there may be some “stress testing” with an arbor press involved… :stuck_out_tongue:

edit: that was a joke… but their return policy frustrated us the other day, the more people that call them and outline the problems we have with their products the sooner they will take action. We called them, explained the design flaw being discussed here and linked them to the discussion about their transmissions. Hopefully they will take all this into consideration and allow for returns.

I don’t think we want to put a company out of business here guys. There are people working on a solution. Let’s see what they come up with before we go returning them all.

I’d hold off on jumping off the Banebots ship and trying to return your “defective” parts just yet. FIRST and Banebots are currently working on a fix for the 56mm gearboxes, and I’d wait to see what they can come up with. Besides that, it is not yet clear (as Dr. Joe has pointed out) how widespread this problem is, and whether we can expect these transmissions to fail in the field, and under what conditions they will.
As for the 36mm and 42mm transmissions, they are still usable given certain tolerances in your design.

FIRST is large enough now that suppliership is a big deal for companies like BaneBots, and I think they are taking the problem seriously and will do all in their power to rectify it, fast. It seems that the only widespread problem is with the carrier plates, and the troubleshooting/fixing process is moving forward on many fronts with the help of many teams.

Maybe it’s an opportunity to pursue new avenues of engineering that aren’t always explored in FIRST - teach and learn about different types of carbon steel, FEA, heat treatment, EDM, etc. Teams with these resources can share information and parts. Teams without can pioneer simpler, low-tech solutions. And in the process, a product line will be improved by its customers - I can’t think of a better way. Maybe this is the real challenge…that stuff with the tubes and rack is just for show.


I don’t understand why everybody on CD is so quick to defend FIRST/Banebots. We all payed for these gearboxes (whether or not you are using them is irrelevant) and we got ripped off. This is a downgrade from last year.

It looks to me like Mr.Banebots has some friends inside FIRST (Canadian sponsorship scandal anybody?) and is trying to make a quick buck. I hope the people at Banebots are reading these threads and seeing these pictures, good job guys :slight_smile:

Before anybody starts tearing into FIRST and Banebots, let’s make sure that we have all the information first. If you’ve been listening to Dr. Joe, you already know this:

I’m not going to blindly defend FIRST or Banebots, but I think it’s pretty unreasonable to start making claims about the integrity of the parts and the people who provided them when we still have such a minimal amount of data available. In the mean time, grind your axe somewhere else.

Let’s slow down here for a bit Carl. I, as well as many others on the forum have used these banebot gearboxes for other projects and they worked great. When you get a chance, sit down and read through all the posts Dr. Joe has been making about these gearboxes and the data he is sharing with us. You will learn something new that you may be able to use in one of your future projects.

Ok I have heard of this problem numerous times I was wondering if anyone was running the two motor conversion kit on their gearboxes.

First of all, YES, some, if not all, of the gearboxes WILL fail in the field.

One of ours already has, with just one CIM, and less than 30 minutes of driving time.

Second of all, there is a big difference between “defending” someone, and saying “Hey, give them a chance.”

While I would not wish to be judged by the mistakes that I have made, I think I would be proud to be judged by how I have responded to them. While this is inconvenient and stressful, I have faith that the problem will be dealt with graciously and professionally… but not instantaneously.


[remark=“smart”]Well, not everybody–obviously, you’re not defending them at all! ;)[/remark]

There are efforts underway to get these gearboxes tested under particularly rigorous controlled conditions. Details are coming; in the meantime, as Dave was quoted as saying, play smart.

We ordered 3 additional gearboxes, for 5 total, because we knew that we needed 4.

One of the 3 sent to us was defective out of the box. Something inside was binding, and never worked properly.

As far as our other 4, they seem to be OK for the moment. We did some no-load tests and those seemed to be OK… Our wheels should be mounted today so we can do some more testing.