It’s no secret that the 1-meter (3.3 feet) Pax wardrobes are not exactly well-liked. This topic comes up in various places online. The quality has definitely declined over the past five years. I bought a Pax unit more than five years ago, and this three-piece set has already handled two moves without any issues. Encouraged by that experience, I recently bought an additional two 0.50-meter (1.6 feet) and two 1-meter (3.3 feet) Pax units the week before last. Unfortunately, I hadn’t read any recent reviews about Pax beforehand, or I might have reconsidered the purchase.
The result: what a difference compared to before! The fronts (Birkeland) are still good, but the carcasses leave much to be desired:
The reasons: the bottom panels are not durable. Even with the slightest careful pressure on the adjustable feet screws, the panel immediately tears around the cam fittings. By the way, this is not clearly indicated in the assembly instructions, although anyone familiar with furniture construction would expect this. The instructions make it look like these screws allow for proper adjustment, but the entire weight actually rests on the side panels. The adjustment only changes the height by one or two millimeters.
Another design flaw:
The chipboard quality has become borderline. If you compare a standard chipboard panel from a hardware store with IKEA’s, you’ll notice there’s too little chip material, too much air, and excessive glue. Additionally, the 1-meter (3.3 feet) bottom panels are only 18 mm (0.7 inches) thick, which is clearly too thin. Even unloaded, they already sag. The long side panels only gain support once the bottom panels are inserted. But what happens if you want to install a clothes rail? Without connector screws between the panels, stability across multiple cabinets lined up is impossible. This becomes obvious when the units are aligned side by side—you can feel the side panels wobble with the doors’ movement. Only with connector screws does any stability develop, and only then can the doors be properly adjusted. The door fittings themselves are excellent, by the way!
The foil coating on the chipboard is so thin and fragile that even with careful assembly on carpeted floors, damage quickly becomes visible.
The 1-meter (3.3 feet) Pax back panel is simply a taped-together double of the 50 cm (1.6 feet) version. It’s unbelievably thin and primitive.
My question is: does it have to be this way? Getting cheaper and cheaper, more and more low-quality products, all in the name of being “affordable.”
Would it not be a better approach to charge a few euros more and guarantee an acceptable standard? This will be my last Pax for the time being!
The result: what a difference compared to before! The fronts (Birkeland) are still good, but the carcasses leave much to be desired:
The reasons: the bottom panels are not durable. Even with the slightest careful pressure on the adjustable feet screws, the panel immediately tears around the cam fittings. By the way, this is not clearly indicated in the assembly instructions, although anyone familiar with furniture construction would expect this. The instructions make it look like these screws allow for proper adjustment, but the entire weight actually rests on the side panels. The adjustment only changes the height by one or two millimeters.
Another design flaw:
The chipboard quality has become borderline. If you compare a standard chipboard panel from a hardware store with IKEA’s, you’ll notice there’s too little chip material, too much air, and excessive glue. Additionally, the 1-meter (3.3 feet) bottom panels are only 18 mm (0.7 inches) thick, which is clearly too thin. Even unloaded, they already sag. The long side panels only gain support once the bottom panels are inserted. But what happens if you want to install a clothes rail? Without connector screws between the panels, stability across multiple cabinets lined up is impossible. This becomes obvious when the units are aligned side by side—you can feel the side panels wobble with the doors’ movement. Only with connector screws does any stability develop, and only then can the doors be properly adjusted. The door fittings themselves are excellent, by the way!
The foil coating on the chipboard is so thin and fragile that even with careful assembly on carpeted floors, damage quickly becomes visible.
The 1-meter (3.3 feet) Pax back panel is simply a taped-together double of the 50 cm (1.6 feet) version. It’s unbelievably thin and primitive.
My question is: does it have to be this way? Getting cheaper and cheaper, more and more low-quality products, all in the name of being “affordable.”
Would it not be a better approach to charge a few euros more and guarantee an acceptable standard? This will be my last Pax for the time being!
I
IKEA-Profi13 Apr 2014 07:19Always the same discussion.
Apart from the fact that I definitely don’t share your unfortunate experience with PAX, we live in a “thrift is cool” society with an “everything as cheap as possible” mentality.
If IKEA were to move towards “higher quality for more money,” that would certainly be economic suicide.
Try going to POCO or ROLLER, where you can buy real junk.
Apart from the fact that I definitely don’t share your unfortunate experience with PAX, we live in a “thrift is cool” society with an “everything as cheap as possible” mentality.
If IKEA were to move towards “higher quality for more money,” that would certainly be economic suicide.
Try going to POCO or ROLLER, where you can buy real junk.
The material cost for one 0.58-meter (1.9 feet) bottom panel from IKEA is around 1.00 to 1.50 euros, which is sufficient to produce a quality product. This information comes from an experienced professional. There is no need to compare with Roller or other low-quality stores, which are irrelevant here since I am comparing the old Pax with the new Pax. Why don’t you mention the even cheaper options, like building your own furniture from orange crates or scavenging from bulky waste? Do you really think IKEA gives anything away for free and is the furniture benefactor of this so-called “penny-pinching” world?
2. Once again: I am complaining about the noticeably poorer quality of the new Pax compared to my five-year-old cabinets. I would be willing to pay an additional ten euros per cabinet or even an inflation-adjusted increase for better quality. Therefore, I don’t find your contribution helpful.
2. Once again: I am complaining about the noticeably poorer quality of the new Pax compared to my five-year-old cabinets. I would be willing to pay an additional ten euros per cabinet or even an inflation-adjusted increase for better quality. Therefore, I don’t find your contribution helpful.
I
IKEA-Profi13 Apr 2014 19:25The material cost for Ikea per single 0.58-meter (1.9 feet) base panel is around 1.00 to 1.50 euros (approximately 1.00 to 1.50 USD), according to an experienced professional. This is sufficient to produce a quality product. There is no need to compare it with low-quality alternatives like Roller or others, which are irrelevant here since I am comparing the older Pax system with the new one. Why don’t you mention the even cheaper option of building yourself using orange crates or picking up handles from bulky waste? Do you really think Ikea gives anything away for free and is some kind of furniture benefactor in this so-called “penny-pinching cool” world?
Secondly, I am specifically complaining about the significantly lower quality of the new Pax units compared to my five-year-old wardrobes. I would gladly pay an extra ten euros (about 10 USD) per wardrobe or even the usual inflation adjustment to get better quality. That is why I find your comment unhelpful.And you are talking about things you clearly don’t understand...
IF the material cost is really as you state (which I doubt, apart from the fact that material cost is NOT the only issue here), then how many 100,000 produced carcasses does that add up to, and how many would IKEA need to sell?
Try to look beyond the immediate picture.
Just buy your wardrobes elsewhere if you think everything is so bad and so great at the same time.
By the way, in our household, with about 400 carcasses sold per week over the last nine months, there have been exactly zero (!) complaints.
I think this is quite telling and meaningful enough.
H
Herr rossi13 Apr 2014 19:43Hello Napp,
I can only agree with Ikeaner. I don’t understand the sentence; the floorboards are not load-bearing because there is still the base frame beneath the floor. The reason the surface coating of the parts is more sensitive than with the old Pax wardrobes is that the new coating is made of paper instead of melamine foil. This change was made not for cost reasons but for environmental protection. The assembly instructions state that you should use the cardboard as an underlay, not a carpet, because small stones and other particles can be present in the carpet. The wardrobe gains its proper stability by being anchored to the wall to prevent it from tipping forward, which is also mentioned in the assembly instructions. The feet are only for leveling; for the 1–2 mm (0.04–0.08 inches) unevenness, you should place something underneath. If you ever want to ask a "professional," ask me—we manufacture Pax, Faktum, and Metod at our company, and not just a few, but a lot. One tip regarding sagging shelves: simply use one more shelf.
Best regards, Herr rossi
I can only agree with Ikeaner. I don’t understand the sentence; the floorboards are not load-bearing because there is still the base frame beneath the floor. The reason the surface coating of the parts is more sensitive than with the old Pax wardrobes is that the new coating is made of paper instead of melamine foil. This change was made not for cost reasons but for environmental protection. The assembly instructions state that you should use the cardboard as an underlay, not a carpet, because small stones and other particles can be present in the carpet. The wardrobe gains its proper stability by being anchored to the wall to prevent it from tipping forward, which is also mentioned in the assembly instructions. The feet are only for leveling; for the 1–2 mm (0.04–0.08 inches) unevenness, you should place something underneath. If you ever want to ask a "professional," ask me—we manufacture Pax, Faktum, and Metod at our company, and not just a few, but a lot. One tip regarding sagging shelves: simply use one more shelf.
Best regards, Herr rossi
I
IKEA-Experte13 Apr 2014 21:43The problem is that the floor breaks when the cabinet stands on its feet. The assembly instructions do not indicate that side panels should be shimmed if there are significant floor unevenness. Wall mounting is mentioned in the manual only as a safety measure to prevent possible tipping. In addition, IKEA also shows the option of creating a walk-in closet using PAX by employing PAX as a room divider. In this case, wall mounting is not possible.
Similar topics