Stone Chips that crack your frame,who is responsible?

fat and old
Posts: 3606
Joined: Sat Aug 30, 2014 12:06 pm
Location: Mill Park

Re: Stone Chips that crack your frame,who is responsible?

Postby fat and old » Wed Nov 22, 2017 7:49 am

human909 wrote:A bicycle frame with a lifetime of only 3 years!?



Aside from the warranty question (which would be a curly one depending on how it was worded) I'm not really shocked when I think about it. I know there's been a long running thread on this and I'm not sure that the common perception of "It's a bike. It should last forever" has been dispensed with.

User avatar
Comedian
Posts: 5489
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2010 7:35 pm
Location: Brisbane

Re: Stone Chips that crack your frame,who is responsible?

Postby Comedian » Wed Nov 22, 2017 8:20 am

Lukeyboy wrote:Oh look human909 is off on another triad about how he knows everything. Kudos for you mate. Go buy and leave some Zipp 404s outside for a year and see what happens. Or leave a carbon frame out in the elements and see what happens. Then see how your accc rights will fair.

So the problem is the bicycle industry is selling less durable products than they ever have before. Products that are very susceptible to all types of damage that was never the case in the past.

The problem is - when the customer is there with his/her wallet hand twitching they are afraid to say

"Mate... just so you know - if you let this bike fall over at a cafe and it lands on something badly it will break.. if it gets a decent hit from a rock while riding... if you clamp it incorrectly putting it on your car, and if you have any type of crash at all it will very likely be damaged or will require an inspection that is more expensive than it's worth. Mount your bike in a trainer and it cracks that's not a warranty item. If you over torque a bolt by a smidge..or god forbid you leave the bike outside for any time at all... These are not warrantable incidents and you'll need to get insurance or be prepared to pay for repairs or buy a new bike when it happens to you."


The problem is they don't want them going to the next guy who definitely won't mention any of this.. And the marketing says if it's good for the pro's it's very good for you. The problem is if the pro's break one they just grab one off the rack..

fat and old
Posts: 3606
Joined: Sat Aug 30, 2014 12:06 pm
Location: Mill Park

Re: Stone Chips that crack your frame,who is responsible?

Postby fat and old » Wed Nov 22, 2017 9:38 am

I'm limiting my comments to high end carbon bikes...say 5-6k and over.

Comedian et al....do you really think that the people who buy these bikes are stupid and/or uninformed? I'd think that people spending that much and more have a real good idea of what they're buying tbh. We are buying (in many of these cases) the same thing as the "pros" use, straight off the rack. We are doing that for a reason...whether it's posing, a genuine need for speed/lightness or just because we like nice things and we can. All good reasons afaic. In my case, I'm well aware that the R5 is going to handle a 65kg climber's stress a lot better than a fat me at 90kg (less now 8) :lol: ). Because I'm not a total idiot. No, I wouldn't expect it to break riding down the road anytime soon. But yes, I believe that with wall thicknesses measured in millimeters or less it's not as robust as a steel bike. Mate, I can squash the tubes in my hand! And yes, after looking around the WWW I realise that HP carbon bikes (and many parts as well) have a shelf life that's nothing like my old steel Colnago. Or for that matter my old steel Roadstar from K-Mart! :lol:. If I decide to go the lightweight route on it....maybe some of those nice Xentis or new Mavic wheels at sub 1250 grams, with 16 spokes I'm asking for trouble. I ain't G-Boaf or Mubbabman. I'm fat. :lol: One day I'll buy that Baum or Passoni and spec it to last forever. In the meantime I like a nice carbon bike and buy it eyes wide open. If I wanted to carry a heap of stuff commuting or touring I'd buy something more robust that's "fit for purpose". HiPo carbon bikes are not meant to do that :shock: Which brings me to my next point....

When are cyclists going to crawl out of the 50's, 60's or 70's and acknowledge that there has been change? When are cyclists going to accept that you can't have your cake and eat it always just because you're saving the environment, the public health system or anything else you care to mention? Time and time again I see people demanding that cycles/cycling enjoy the benefits of a bygone era whether it be less traffic, longer lasting frames or groupsets, more cyclists on the road...whatever. Mate, you can keep your 1970 era brakes and D/T shifters! I like the aesthetic just like most, but I like being able to stop quicker and have the gears on the brakes too. Further....when are cyclists going to see that being a cyclist does not excuse you from the realities of that change.

People buy a Nissan GTR with the expectation of servicing the car more than they'll drive it. Who buys a Ferrari, Lambo, M series or AMG....indeed an HSV or Tickford without expecting upkeep and wear? They know that the nice Cayenne or RR sports or E500 in the driveway will cost them at service time, and that some of the ancillaries are going to wear much faster than on that Mazda 2 or Yaris. They know that these things are not as robust as a Patrol or Cruiser and accept it. That's what we are buying. Rail against it all you like, but it's the truth. But because it's "a bike" it's supposed to last as long as our first steel k-mart jobbie did? Why?

human909
Posts: 8949
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:48 am

Re: Stone Chips that crack your frame,who is responsible?

Postby human909 » Wed Nov 22, 2017 11:40 am

Comedian wrote:So the problem is the bicycle industry is selling less durable products than they ever have before. Products that are very susceptible to all types of damage that was never the case in the past.

The problem is - when the customer is there with his/her wallet hand twitching they are afraid to say

"Mate... just so you know - if you let this bike fall over at a cafe and it lands on something badly it will break.. if it gets a decent hit from a rock while riding... if you clamp it incorrectly putting it on your car, and if you have any type of crash at all it will very likely be damaged or will require an inspection that is more expensive than it's worth. Mount your bike in a trainer and it cracks that's not a warranty item. If you over torque a bolt by a smidge..or god forbid you leave the bike outside for any time at all... These are not warrantable incidents and you'll need to get insurance or be prepared to pay for repairs or buy a new bike when it happens to you."


The problem is they don't want them going to the next guy who definitely won't mention any of this.. And the marketing says if it's good for the pro's it's very good for you. The problem is if the pro's break one they just grab one off the rack..


Precisely. And I do recognise that it is hardly the fault of retail bicycle stores. But the fact remains that consumer right to return or replace a product not fit for purpose falls on the retailer not on the brand. There would be certainly a very large number if not a majority of people out there who would be surprised to here their expensive bicycle's frame has only a "lifetime" of 3 years.

On one hand people are saying carbon is stronger tougher and better than older technology. Now on the other hand it is being claim that it has a lifetime that can be counted on one hand. :?: :?: :?: Which is it?

(For what I understand carbon frames has a much longer lifespan than this. But it doesn't fill you with confidence when manufacturers are making such low claims.)

User avatar
Comedian
Posts: 5489
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2010 7:35 pm
Location: Brisbane

Re: Stone Chips that crack your frame,who is responsible?

Postby Comedian » Wed Nov 22, 2017 12:28 pm

human909 wrote:
Comedian wrote:So the problem is the bicycle industry is selling less durable products than they ever have before. Products that are very susceptible to all types of damage that was never the case in the past.

The problem is - when the customer is there with his/her wallet hand twitching they are afraid to say

"Mate... just so you know - if you let this bike fall over at a cafe and it lands on something badly it will break.. if it gets a decent hit from a rock while riding... if you clamp it incorrectly putting it on your car, and if you have any type of crash at all it will very likely be damaged or will require an inspection that is more expensive than it's worth. Mount your bike in a trainer and it cracks that's not a warranty item. If you over torque a bolt by a smidge..or god forbid you leave the bike outside for any time at all... These are not warrantable incidents and you'll need to get insurance or be prepared to pay for repairs or buy a new bike when it happens to you."


The problem is they don't want them going to the next guy who definitely won't mention any of this.. And the marketing says if it's good for the pro's it's very good for you. The problem is if the pro's break one they just grab one off the rack..


Precisely. And I do recognise that it is hardly the fault of retail bicycle stores. But the fact remains that consumer right to return or replace a product not fit for purpose falls on the retailer not on the brand. There would be certainly a very large number if not a majority of people out there who would be surprised to here their expensive bicycle's frame has only a "lifetime" of 3 years.

On one hand people are saying carbon is stronger tougher and better than older technology. Now on the other hand it is being claim that it has a lifetime that can be counted on one hand. :?: :?: :?: Which is it?

(For what I understand carbon frames has a much longer lifespan than this. But it doesn't fill you with confidence when manufacturers are making such low claims.)

We've been down this road. I think you'll struggle to find any carbon bikes that are ridden a lot that are much older than 2-3 years. Either they fail through their own devices or something "unexpected" happens to them.

There are certainly the odd outliers.. CF frames with high miles. And there are old CF frames that haven't been ridden much. But there aren't many high milers with much age on them.

User avatar
silentC
Posts: 2406
Joined: Mon May 05, 2014 5:24 pm
Location: Far South Coast NSW

Re: Stone Chips that crack your frame,who is responsible?

Postby silentC » Wed Nov 22, 2017 12:43 pm

Jeez I must remember to tell some of the guys I ride with who do 250km plus per week that they're all riding time bombs!
"If your next bike does not have disc brakes, the bike after that certainly will"
- Me

User avatar
MichaelB
Posts: 9167
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 9:29 am
Location: Adelaide, South Australia

Re: Stone Chips that crack your frame,who is responsible?

Postby MichaelB » Wed Nov 22, 2017 1:07 pm

So if mine is close to 5 years, been in a stack, am I an outlier ? Especially since I'm a bigger guy to boot.
What a load of tosh.

CF is strong in the right plane. If a force (and type of force) is applied in the plane it's NOT designed for, then it's not so good.

Crikey, this is getting to be like the MHL thread.

Is it a CWT instead ?

User avatar
Comedian
Posts: 5489
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2010 7:35 pm
Location: Brisbane

Re: Stone Chips that crack your frame,who is responsible?

Postby Comedian » Wed Nov 22, 2017 1:25 pm

silentC wrote:Jeez I must remember to tell some of the guys I ride with who do 250km plus per week that they're all riding time bombs!

OK sure. How many of these people who ride 12k a year are riding bikes older than three years? How many of them are on the original frame?

MichaelB wrote:So if mine is close to 5 years, been in a stack, am I an outlier ? Especially since I'm a bigger guy to boot.
What a load of tosh.

CF is strong in the right plane. If a force (and type of force) is applied in the plane it's NOT designed for, then it's not so good.

Crikey, this is getting to be like the MHL thread.

Is it a CWT instead ?

Yes you are. Good for you! How many k's does your carbon roadbike have on it?

fat and old
Posts: 3606
Joined: Sat Aug 30, 2014 12:06 pm
Location: Mill Park

Re: Stone Chips that crack your frame,who is responsible?

Postby fat and old » Wed Nov 22, 2017 1:47 pm

Exactly which manufacturer has stated that their frames have a 3 year life? :lol: Sheesh, take one off the cuff comment from somebody that was being made out to be uninformed and turn it into the truth! It is the MHL, all over again :lol:

fat and old
Posts: 3606
Joined: Sat Aug 30, 2014 12:06 pm
Location: Mill Park

Re: Stone Chips that crack your frame,who is responsible?

Postby fat and old » Wed Nov 22, 2017 1:55 pm

And as for manufacturers hiding the truth because we can't handle it...here,

Cervelo:

D. Intended Use
Cervélo produces bicycles designed and built for road racing, time
trailing and triathlon. They are intended to be used for long, fast types of
rides on smooth surfaces such as paved roads, and are not designed for
use on rough or loose, off-road surfaces. Small changes to components
such as wheels or tires will not render the bicycle suitable for use in such
harsh conditions. Please consult your Cervélo dealer to ensure you are
properly equipped to meet your unique requirements & specific goals.
E. Competition
By engaging in racing or aggressive riding you voluntarily assume an
increased risk of injury or death.
Not all bicycles are designed for these types of riding, and those that
are may not be suitable for all types of aggressive riding. Check with
your dealer or the bicycle’s manufacturer about the suitability of your
bicycle before engaging in competition.
WARNING: Although many catalogs, advertisements and
articles about bicycling depict riders engaged in various
forms of racing, this activity can be extremely dangerous,
increases your risk of injury or death, and increases the
severity of any injury. Remember that the action depicted
is being performed by professionals with many years of
training and experience. Know your limits and always
wear a helmet and other appropriate safety gear. Even
with state-of-the-art protective safety gear, you could be
seriously injured or killed when riding downhill at speed or
in competition.

CAUTION: Bicycles and bicycle parts have limitations with
regard to strength and integrity, and this type of riding can
increase the likelihood of exceeding those limitations.

APPENDIX A: THE LIFESPAN OF YOUR BIKE AND ITS
COMPONENTS
1. Nothing Lasts Forever, Including Your Bike.
When the useful life of your bike or its components is over, continued
use is hazardous.
Every bicycle and its component parts have a finite, limited useful life.
The length of that life will vary with the construction and materials used
in the frame and components; the maintenance and care the frame and
components receive over their life; and the type and amount of use
to which the frame and components are subjected. Use in competitive
events, trick riding, ramp riding, jumping, aggressive riding, riding on
severe terrain, riding in severe climates, riding with heavy loads, commercial
activities and other types of non-standard use can dramatically
shorten the life of the frame and components. Any one or a combination
of these conditions may result in an unpredictable failure.
All aspects of use being identical, lightweight bicycles and their
components will usually have a shorter life than heavier bicycles and
their components. In selecting a lightweight bicycle or components
you are making a tradeoff, favoring the higher performance that comes
with lighter weight over longevity.




Specialized has a whole manual on iot's bikes and reality...

https://media.specialized.com/support/c ... 093943.pdf

On the new fancy Tarmac..

CONDITION 1
Bikes designed for riding on a paved surface where the tires do not lose ground contact.
INTENDED
To be ridden on paved roads only.
NOT INTENDED
For off-road, cyclocross, or touring with racks or panniers.
TRADE OFF
Material use is optimized to deliver both light weight and specific performance. You must understand that (1) these types of bikes are intended to
give an aggressive racer or competitive cyclist a performance advantage over a relatively short product life, (2) a less aggressive rider will enjoy
longer frame life, (3) you are choosing light weight (shorter frame life) over more frame weight and a longer frame life, (4) you are choosing light
weight over more dent resistant or rugged frames that weigh more. All frames that are very light need frequent inspection. These frames are
likely to be damaged or broken in a crash. They are not designed to take abuse or be a rugged workhorse. See also Appendix B


Giant...

same as Spec.

https://www.giant-bicycles.com/_upload_ ... -%20AU.pdf

Word for word.

Colnago

http://www.colnago.com/downloads/COLNAGOwarranty.pdf

95kg limit. 95!!!! And street use only.

Pinarello

INTENDED USE. This product has been designed solely for road or track use on smooth surfaces. There are risks inherent in bike riding and factors such as poor maintenance, lack of frequent inspections, poor visibility, darkness or rain greatly increase these risks


I'm not seeing anyone hiding there?

User avatar
g-boaf
Posts: 9825
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2011 6:11 pm

Re: Stone Chips that crack your frame,who is responsible?

Postby g-boaf » Wed Nov 22, 2017 2:06 pm

Comedian wrote:
silentC wrote:Jeez I must remember to tell some of the guys I ride with who do 250km plus per week that they're all riding time bombs!

OK sure. How many of these people who ride 12k a year are riding bikes older than three years? How many of them are on the original frame?


Me. Three of my bikes are 3 years or older.

Over 13k this year.

User avatar
Comedian
Posts: 5489
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2010 7:35 pm
Location: Brisbane

Re: Stone Chips that crack your frame,who is responsible?

Postby Comedian » Wed Nov 22, 2017 2:28 pm

g-boaf wrote:
Comedian wrote:
silentC wrote:Jeez I must remember to tell some of the guys I ride with who do 250km plus per week that they're all riding time bombs!

OK sure. How many of these people who ride 12k a year are riding bikes older than three years? How many of them are on the original frame?


Me. Three of my bikes are 3 years or older.

Over 13k this year.


So that's about 4k on each one. So they have 12k each on them? That's hardly high mileage... I suspect your bikes will last a while with that usage..

I've known a few carbon frames that have lasted more than 20, but only one that has more than 30... (verifiable mileage..).

User avatar
g-boaf
Posts: 9825
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2011 6:11 pm

Re: Stone Chips that crack your frame,who is responsible?

Postby g-boaf » Wed Nov 22, 2017 2:35 pm

Where are you getting 4k on each of them from? :?:

I said 13k just this year. You are conveniently forgetting the amount of kms I did in previous years which was much higher.

1 of them has a bit less use than the other 2, but those other two get used a lot.

User avatar
silentC
Posts: 2406
Joined: Mon May 05, 2014 5:24 pm
Location: Far South Coast NSW

Re: Stone Chips that crack your frame,who is responsible?

Postby silentC » Wed Nov 22, 2017 2:42 pm

Had a quick look on Strava. 30k plus is not uncommon. A few of the guys own more than one bike that is ridden regularly but they generally buy a new one to upgrade - to Di2 for example - not because the frame has failed. Can't think of one actually. Does a broken front derailleur stand-off count?
"If your next bike does not have disc brakes, the bike after that certainly will"
- Me

User avatar
silentC
Posts: 2406
Joined: Mon May 05, 2014 5:24 pm
Location: Far South Coast NSW

Re: Stone Chips that crack your frame,who is responsible?

Postby silentC » Wed Nov 22, 2017 3:02 pm

Hang on a minute, is this another "I don't usually troll but I am this time" or are you serious? :)
"If your next bike does not have disc brakes, the bike after that certainly will"
- Me

warthog1
Posts: 7125
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 4:40 pm

Re: Stone Chips that crack your frame,who is responsible?

Postby warthog1 » Wed Nov 22, 2017 3:19 pm

fat and old wrote:
human909 wrote:A bicycle frame with a lifetime of only 3 years!?



Aside from the warranty question (which would be a curly one depending on how it was worded) I'm not really shocked when I think about it. I know there's been a long running thread on this and I'm not sure that the common perception of "It's a bike. It should last forever" has been dispensed with.


I think that perception amongst the roadie crowd has long since been dispensed with.
The industry has been successful with their marketing around improved stiffness, aerodynamics and reduced weight. The advantages at a pro level are marginal at best. We have long since reached the point where the prescriptive UCI regulations have placed a cap on performance (a good thing IMO cost wise) any frame technology gains year on year are very small.
The gains at mug punter level are non existent.
People are now prepared to drop $5k + every few years for the next marketing incremental gain.
Be it a lighter more aero frame, 2mm wider tyres, electronic shifting or disc brakes.
The manufacturers have successfully orchestrated their marketing to make this counterintuitive situation accepted practice.
Disposable bikes with a life cycle less than a new car.
A good situation I guess if you are in the business of selling bikes.
If you are in the situation of riding them and have a limited disposable income the scenario is less appealing.

warthog1
Posts: 7125
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 4:40 pm

Re: Stone Chips that crack your frame,who is responsible?

Postby warthog1 » Wed Nov 22, 2017 3:31 pm

g-boaf wrote:Where are you getting 4k on each of them from? :?:

I said 13k just this year. You are conveniently forgetting the amount of kms I did in previous years which was much higher.

1 of them has a bit less use than the other 2, but those other two get used a lot.


My S5 has 25k on it. Still rideable, still stiff, still reponsive.
Can't get a good rear tune on the derailleur as the drive side droput has been compressed by the interface of the rear hub and inner face of the dropout. When you do the quick release up it pulls the hanger in toward the wheel.The hanger needs a significant bend to counteract this.
It is the holy mantra of stiff, light and aero.
I have a ribble alloy that is a 250- dollar frame.
It is just as nice to ride.
Put the Zipps in it and it is faster than the Cervelo with normal alloy wheels.
Yes I am riding fast (no I'm not bragging, I'm no gun), there are numerous pro riders here who don't mind who tags along as long as you are safe and don't get in the way.
It is all marketing garbage for the average punter.

User avatar
silentC
Posts: 2406
Joined: Mon May 05, 2014 5:24 pm
Location: Far South Coast NSW

Re: Stone Chips that crack your frame,who is responsible?

Postby silentC » Wed Nov 22, 2017 3:38 pm

Seems to me it's similar to mobile phones. A new one comes out, people want it, so they buy it. Nothing wrong with the old one. This creates a good secondhand market. I know a few blokes who have bought nice second hand bikes. We had one this morning, a 2016 Bianchi Infinito. Spotless condition. It complements his 2012 Inifinito - still going strong despite rumours of it's demise, and his 2012 Trek Domayne - currently with 22k on the clock.

My Merida is a 2016. I expect it to last me quite a long time. But I only manage about 5 or 6k a year.
"If your next bike does not have disc brakes, the bike after that certainly will"
- Me

warthog1
Posts: 7125
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 4:40 pm

Re: Stone Chips that crack your frame,who is responsible?

Postby warthog1 » Wed Nov 22, 2017 3:43 pm

I will be on the ribble for a while yet.
If/when I upgrade the cervelo it will be to a metal frame.
Plastic is done for me. Those dropouts have really p1ssed me off.
What a stupid material to use for an area subject to compressive force.

User avatar
silentC
Posts: 2406
Joined: Mon May 05, 2014 5:24 pm
Location: Far South Coast NSW

Re: Stone Chips that crack your frame,who is responsible?

Postby silentC » Wed Nov 22, 2017 3:46 pm

Couple of the guys have nice Lynskeys. Worth a look!
"If your next bike does not have disc brakes, the bike after that certainly will"
- Me

warthog1
Posts: 7125
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 4:40 pm

Re: Stone Chips that crack your frame,who is responsible?

Postby warthog1 » Wed Nov 22, 2017 3:49 pm

silentC wrote:Couple of the guys have nice Lynskeys. Worth a look!


That is what I'm leaning toward, thanks :)
Single income with 2 kids in yr 11 next year and uni to come.
It is a pipe dream at the moment even though CRC have them at a reasonable price.

User avatar
silentC
Posts: 2406
Joined: Mon May 05, 2014 5:24 pm
Location: Far South Coast NSW

Re: Stone Chips that crack your frame,who is responsible?

Postby silentC » Wed Nov 22, 2017 3:51 pm

I hear ya...
"If your next bike does not have disc brakes, the bike after that certainly will"
- Me

User avatar
10speedsemiracer
Posts: 1198
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2017 7:38 pm
Location: Melbourne, in the suburbs, near some hills

Re: Stone Chips that crack your frame,who is responsible?

Postby 10speedsemiracer » Wed Nov 22, 2017 4:34 pm

warthog1 wrote:


I'm with warthog1 on this, and we've seen it in other fields as well (consumer IT etc), where the marketing is so skewed towards early adoption, and then mainstream adoption of tech that is superfluous to need.

Also think this thread needs the OP to post a photo so we can finally put this thing to bed.
Mmm, SunTour

User avatar
P!N20
Posts: 903
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2010 6:50 pm

Re: Stone Chips that crack your frame,who is responsible?

Postby P!N20 » Wed Nov 22, 2017 4:46 pm

10speedsemiracer wrote:Also think this thread needs the OP to post a photo so we can finally put this thing to bed.


There's a photo here.

NASHIE
Posts: 638
Joined: Tue Jun 04, 2013 9:16 pm
Location: Perth, WA

Re: Stone Chips that crack your frame,who is responsible?

Postby NASHIE » Wed Nov 22, 2017 4:55 pm

P!N20 wrote:
10speedsemiracer wrote:Also think this thread needs the OP to post a photo so we can finally put this thing to bed.


There's a photo here.


LOL.....lick of paint

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: InTheWoods, Mnmbees