Considering a used Trek?
12-18-09, 09:23 AM
#451
Burning Matches.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 9,714
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4077 Post(s)
Liked 1,002 Times
in
676 Posts
Speak for yourself.
__________________
ElJamoquio didn't hate the world, per se; he was just constantly disappointed by humanity.
12-18-09, 09:45 AM
#453
Acquiring new target....
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 1,276
Bikes: Trek XO-1, Gary Fisher Rig
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
While I'm not making a statement one way or another about the quality of Madone bottom bracket shells, I am making a statement that we have an unquestionable warranty-type failure here. Trek clearly dropped the ball with this frame, and they're getting off on a technicality.
1) When you bought the bike (2nd hand) where you not aware of Trek's warranty process? Even non-Trek fans are aware that the lifetime warranty is only for the original owner.
2) How is Trek getting off on a "technicality?" There is no fine print or confusing legalese to get lost in, Trek plainly states there warranty guidelines. If Trek goes ahead and sends you a new frame (which is what they'll do, you'll get a brand spanking new 6 series) where will they draw the line? You are a very vocal cyclist (in online circles) and when word gets out that Trek is warrantying non-original owner frames every Joe Blow with a Trek bought second hand is gonna want a warranty replacement.
Yes, this is a really unfortunate situation for you to be in, but at least you had a back-up bike to ride and it sounds like you've found a local solution to your problem.
I couldn't even get through the entire thread but I suspect most of it is general Trek bashing (BF favorite pasttime?) and a circling of the wagons around waterrockets.
12-18-09, 10:06 AM
#454
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Syracuse, NY
Posts: 1,018
Bikes: 2018 Lynskey R 260 Disc; 2008 Trek 4.7 Madone; 2017 Framed Minnesota 3.0 Fat Bike; 1984 Nishiki International
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 111 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
12-18-09, 10:09 AM
#455
Senior Member
No, it's just a broken frame. This is a used frame, which means that it's unlikely you really know if damage was caused by the original owner or not. I'm still going with the story that he got a bottom bracket stuck in there and weakened the interface trying to get it out. You don't really know if it's defective or simply mistreated. You assume it's defective, but you don't really know. There is a difference.
__________________
Cat 2 Track, Cat 3 Road.
"If you’re new enough [to racing] that you would ask such question, then i would hazard a guess that if you just made up a workout that sounded hard to do, and did it, you’d probably get faster." --the tiniest sprinter
Cat 2 Track, Cat 3 Road.
"If you’re new enough [to racing] that you would ask such question, then i would hazard a guess that if you just made up a workout that sounded hard to do, and did it, you’d probably get faster." --the tiniest sprinter
12-18-09, 10:21 AM
#456
Herasmus B Draggin
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 106
Bikes: Many, often
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
This is on behalf of Grumpy McTrumpy and all the other little obtuse pieces of flotsam that still insist on being irrational:
Warranty=defects fixed for free! Yaay!
To get one, you gotta be the original owner, mmmmkay?
No warranty=you're on your own, kiddo. Regardless of why it broke. Awwwww, too bad!
Why is that sooooo hard for you boys to grasp? Why do you feel like you are entitled to something you have no claim to?
I'll bet some of you guys never did a load of your own laundry 'til you were in college!
Warranty=defects fixed for free! Yaay!
To get one, you gotta be the original owner, mmmmkay?No warranty=you're on your own, kiddo. Regardless of why it broke. Awwwww, too bad!
Why is that sooooo hard for you boys to grasp? Why do you feel like you are entitled to something you have no claim to?
I'll bet some of you guys never did a load of your own laundry 'til you were in college!
__________________
Working on your own stuff is either a labor of love, or a love of labor...
Working on your own stuff is either a labor of love, or a love of labor...
12-18-09, 10:22 AM
#457
Making a kilometer blurry
Thread Starter
Exactly, and Trek didn't ask why.
A BB shell that can be busted out of the frame with a BB wrench would be a defective frame. Think about the bikes you've had in the past and what chance in hell you have of twisting the BB shell with a wrench.
Then think about the force going through it with a 1750W sprint. Pedaling killed this frame.
No, it's just a broken frame. This is a used frame, which means that it's unlikely you really know if damage was caused by the original owner or not. I'm still going with the story that he got a bottom bracket stuck in there and weakened the interface trying to get it out. You don't really know if it's defective or simply mistreated. You assume it's defective, but you don't really know. There is a difference.
Then think about the force going through it with a 1750W sprint. Pedaling killed this frame.
12-18-09, 10:23 AM
#458
FBoD Member at Large
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Woodbury, MN
Posts: 6,094
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 30 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 7 Times
in
7 Posts
The fact that this thread is still alive and so many people side with WR tell me one thing (that I already knew): People make decisions (buying a used frame) that don't work out for them (frame broke) and expect others to pay (Trek) for the results of that decision.
So here's the Trek warranty, let's bold the parts that WR didn't meet or doesn't know were met. Seems pretty clear and available for examination. Someone please point out the "technicality" here:
TREK LIMITED WARRANTY
All Trek bikes are sold exclusively through our network of Authorized Dealers who we entrust with professional assembly and service of your bicycle. Trek Bicycle Corporation warrants each new Trek frame, rigid fork, or original component part of the bicycle against defects in workmanship and materials:
* The bicycle frame, except the fork and the Session model, for the lifetime of original owner
* Rigid forks
* All Bontrager components and accessories, except consumables such as tires and inner tubes
* The Session model frame
* Paint and decals
* All original parts, excluding suspension forks, and rear shock absorbers
* All original parts, excluding Shimano parts, suspension forks, and rear shock absorbers
* All Shimano parts, suspension forks, and rear shock absorbers shall be covered by the stated warranty of the original manufacturer
This warranty does not cover:
* Normal wear and tear We don't know the frame's real history.
* Improper assembly
* Improper follow-up maintenance
* Installation of parts or accessories not originally intended for, or compatible with, the bicycle as sold
* Damage or failure due to accident, misuse, abuse, or neglect Nobody knows if the previous owner did anything.
* Labor charges for part replacement or changeover
This warranty is void in its entirety by any modification of the frame, fork, or components. This warranty is expressly limited to the repair or replacement of a defective item and is the sole remedy of the warranty. This warranty extends from the date of purchase, applies only to the original owner, and is not transferable. Duh. Trek Bicycle Corporation is not responsible for incidental or consequential damages. Some states do not allow the exclusion of incidental or consequential damages, so the above exclusion may not apply to you. Claims under this warranty must be made through an authorized Trek dealer. Proof of purchase is required. Moot since WR isn't the original owner.The subject item must be registered with Trek Bicycle Corporation, either through on-line registration or by the receipt of a warranty registration card by Trek Bicycle Corporation, before a warranty claim may be processed. Warranty duration and detail may differ by frame type and/or by country. This warranty gives the consumer specific legal rights, and those rights may vary from place to place. This warranty does not affect the statutory rights of the consumer.
Carbon Crash Replacement Policy:
Assessing any damage done to a carbon fiber part requires more experience than is needed to inspect metal parts. If you crash or impact your bike and the force of the impact is absorbed by a carbon part, we strongly encourage you to replace the part, even if there are no indications of damage. If such a crash or impact occurs, Trek offers a crash replacement program for carbon parts, substantially reducing any replacement cost. To take advantage of this program, contact us using the information listed above and ask for the Warranty department.
So here's the Trek warranty, let's bold the parts that WR didn't meet or doesn't know were met. Seems pretty clear and available for examination. Someone please point out the "technicality" here:
TREK LIMITED WARRANTY
All Trek bikes are sold exclusively through our network of Authorized Dealers who we entrust with professional assembly and service of your bicycle. Trek Bicycle Corporation warrants each new Trek frame, rigid fork, or original component part of the bicycle against defects in workmanship and materials:
* The bicycle frame, except the fork and the Session model, for the lifetime of original owner
* Rigid forks
* All Bontrager components and accessories, except consumables such as tires and inner tubes
* The Session model frame
* Paint and decals
* All original parts, excluding suspension forks, and rear shock absorbers
* All original parts, excluding Shimano parts, suspension forks, and rear shock absorbers
* All Shimano parts, suspension forks, and rear shock absorbers shall be covered by the stated warranty of the original manufacturer
This warranty does not cover:
* Normal wear and tear We don't know the frame's real history.
* Improper assembly
* Improper follow-up maintenance
* Installation of parts or accessories not originally intended for, or compatible with, the bicycle as sold
* Damage or failure due to accident, misuse, abuse, or neglect Nobody knows if the previous owner did anything.
* Labor charges for part replacement or changeover
This warranty is void in its entirety by any modification of the frame, fork, or components. This warranty is expressly limited to the repair or replacement of a defective item and is the sole remedy of the warranty. This warranty extends from the date of purchase, applies only to the original owner, and is not transferable. Duh. Trek Bicycle Corporation is not responsible for incidental or consequential damages. Some states do not allow the exclusion of incidental or consequential damages, so the above exclusion may not apply to you. Claims under this warranty must be made through an authorized Trek dealer. Proof of purchase is required. Moot since WR isn't the original owner.The subject item must be registered with Trek Bicycle Corporation, either through on-line registration or by the receipt of a warranty registration card by Trek Bicycle Corporation, before a warranty claim may be processed. Warranty duration and detail may differ by frame type and/or by country. This warranty gives the consumer specific legal rights, and those rights may vary from place to place. This warranty does not affect the statutory rights of the consumer.
Carbon Crash Replacement Policy:
Assessing any damage done to a carbon fiber part requires more experience than is needed to inspect metal parts. If you crash or impact your bike and the force of the impact is absorbed by a carbon part, we strongly encourage you to replace the part, even if there are no indications of damage. If such a crash or impact occurs, Trek offers a crash replacement program for carbon parts, substantially reducing any replacement cost. To take advantage of this program, contact us using the information listed above and ask for the Warranty department.
12-18-09, 10:30 AM
#459
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Someplace trying to figure it out
Posts: 10,664
Bikes: Cannondale EVO, CAAD9, Giant cross bike.
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 67 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 7 Times
in
6 Posts
BTW...racing is prohibited from the original owner warranty.
12-18-09, 10:31 AM
#460
FBoD Member at Large
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Woodbury, MN
Posts: 6,094
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 30 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 7 Times
in
7 Posts
A BB shell that can be busted out of the frame with a BB wrench would be a defective frame. Think about the bikes you've had in the past and what chance in hell you have of twisting the BB shell with a wrench.
Then think about the force going through it with a 1750W sprint. Pedaling killed this frame.
Then think about the force going through it with a 1750W sprint. Pedaling killed this frame.
If the BB bearings were "perfect" there'd be NO torsion force on the BB shell. The force in your 1750W sprint is applied to the crank and through the drivetrain, not the BB shell. It's much more likely you'd twist the shell overwrenching than through normal use. It might be compressed along with the chain stays but there's negligible torsional forces on the BB shell.
Using your logic, a carbon steerer that can be crushed by over tightening the stem bolts would be defective.
Try again.
12-18-09, 10:33 AM
#461
Burning Matches.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 9,714
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4077 Post(s)
Liked 1,002 Times
in
676 Posts
Please, enlighten me with more of your wisdom.
__________________
ElJamoquio didn't hate the world, per se; he was just constantly disappointed by humanity.
12-18-09, 10:34 AM
#462
Burning Matches.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 9,714
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4077 Post(s)
Liked 1,002 Times
in
676 Posts
Oh for God's sake.
If the BB bearings were "perfect" there'd be NO torsion force on the BB shell. The force in your 1750W sprint is applied to the crank and through the drivetrain, not the BB shell. It's much more likely you'd twist the shell overwrenching than through normal use. It might be compressed along with the chain stays but there's negligible torsional forces on the BB shell.
Using your logic, a carbon steerer that can be crushed by over tightening the stem bolts would be defective.
Try again.
If the BB bearings were "perfect" there'd be NO torsion force on the BB shell. The force in your 1750W sprint is applied to the crank and through the drivetrain, not the BB shell. It's much more likely you'd twist the shell overwrenching than through normal use. It might be compressed along with the chain stays but there's negligible torsional forces on the BB shell.
Using your logic, a carbon steerer that can be crushed by over tightening the stem bolts would be defective.
Try again.
__________________
ElJamoquio didn't hate the world, per se; he was just constantly disappointed by humanity.
12-18-09, 10:37 AM
#463
Batüwü Creakcreak
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: The illadelph
Posts: 20,790
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 229 Post(s)
Liked 288 Times
in
160 Posts
You don't not know that either. Wait, what?
Shipping damage produces different damage from internal problems.
You trying to say the frame was soooo strong that it took a year of pounding in a compromised state by a guy who puts out 800+ watts to break it?
That's one tough frame!
The obvious question that is impossible to answer is what if Cypress had raced on the Look frame for a year before it broke?
You trying to say the frame was soooo strong that it took a year of pounding in a compromised state by a guy who puts out 800+ watts to break it?
That's one tough frame! The obvious question that is impossible to answer is what if Cypress had raced on the Look frame for a year before it broke?
In any event, this just shows that trek has silly service. I'm pretty sure this one thread cost them more than the 200 bucks that the frame had cost to build.
12-18-09, 10:38 AM
#464
Making a kilometer blurry
Thread Starter
Oh for God's sake.
If the BB bearings were "perfect" there'd be NO torsion force on the BB shell. The force in your 1750W sprint is applied to the crank and through the drivetrain, not the BB shell. It's much more likely you'd twist the shell overwrenching than through normal use. It might be compressed along with the chain stays but there's negligible torsional forces on the BB shell.
Using your logic, a carbon steerer that can be crushed by over tightening the stem bolts would be defective.
Try again.
If the BB bearings were "perfect" there'd be NO torsion force on the BB shell. The force in your 1750W sprint is applied to the crank and through the drivetrain, not the BB shell. It's much more likely you'd twist the shell overwrenching than through normal use. It might be compressed along with the chain stays but there's negligible torsional forces on the BB shell.
Using your logic, a carbon steerer that can be crushed by over tightening the stem bolts would be defective.
Try again.
My point is that a skinny cyclist going crazy on a BB wrench is not going to hurt a BB shell that's properly built into the frame. If he did, then the frame was defective.
Yes, 1750W goes through the drivetrain, but the drivetrain didn't break. The frame that supports the drivetrain broke, and it broke because of pedaling forces. I don't know if it's from a year of riding around at 330W in SST training, 1700+W sprints, or 800+W 1' intervals, but the pedaling broke the supporting surfaces around the shell.
12-18-09, 10:41 AM
#465
Making a kilometer blurry
Thread Starter
By now they probably have employees wasting time eating popcorn watching the tail of this thread. Hey guys!
12-18-09, 10:42 AM
#466
Should Be More Popular
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Malvern, PA (20 miles West of Philly)
Posts: 43,038
Bikes: 1986 Alpine (steel road bike), 2009 Ti Habenero, 2013 Specialized Roubaix
Mentioned: 560 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Quoted: 22583 Post(s)
Liked 8,923 Times
in
4,156 Posts
12-18-09, 10:47 AM
#467
FBoD Member at Large
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Woodbury, MN
Posts: 6,094
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 30 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 7 Times
in
7 Posts
Don't get me wrong, I feel bad for the guy. It sucks. I wish it hadn't happened to him and I hope the proposed repair goes well and the frame gives him many more years of service.
But I buy used parts too...CL, eBay, local. I don't expect a warranty of any sort with any of them. I choose to buy used because I'm cheap...and my being cheap comes with certain risks which I choose to accept. WR made the same choice, took the same risk, and came up on the short side.
12-18-09, 10:52 AM
#468
gmt
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Binghamton, NY
Posts: 12,509
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 45 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times
in
3 Posts
This is on behalf of Grumpy McTrumpy and all the other little obtuse pieces of flotsam that still insist on being irrational:
Warranty=defects fixed for free! Yaay! To get one, you gotta be the original owner, mmmmkay?
No warranty=you're on your own, kiddo. Regardless of why it broke. Awwwww, too bad!
Why is that sooooo hard for you boys to grasp? Why do you feel like you are entitled to something you have no claim to?
I'll bet some of you guys never did a load of your own laundry 'til you were in college!
Warranty=defects fixed for free! Yaay!
To get one, you gotta be the original owner, mmmmkay?No warranty=you're on your own, kiddo. Regardless of why it broke. Awwwww, too bad!
Why is that sooooo hard for you boys to grasp? Why do you feel like you are entitled to something you have no claim to?
I'll bet some of you guys never did a load of your own laundry 'til you were in college!
"directed at" would be more appropriate.
12-18-09, 10:55 AM
#469
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Fairbanks, AK
Posts: 549
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
As reported the failure appears to be a manufacturing defect. Which IMO warrants handling a little differently than a typical JRA. they didn't, for whatever reason and so it goes.
Happily it birthed this thread, which continues to keep us all warm on cold winter days.
Happily it birthed this thread, which continues to keep us all warm on cold winter days.
12-18-09, 10:58 AM
#470
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 9,201
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1186 Post(s)
Liked 289 Times
in
177 Posts
Setting aside the warranty legal issues, which clearly favor Trek, I don't see how this could be classed as a manufacturers defect. The frame lasted for 4 years of racing before wearing out. I would venture that more than meets the design specs that Trek (or any other manufacturer) started with.
They can afford to offer a lifetime warranty only because they know that 90% of their customers are not gonig to be racing and doing 1750W sprints every week. It doesn't make economic sense that they design their bikes to survive a lifetime of racing; that's not their business.
They can afford to offer a lifetime warranty only because they know that 90% of their customers are not gonig to be racing and doing 1750W sprints every week. It doesn't make economic sense that they design their bikes to survive a lifetime of racing; that's not their business.
12-18-09, 11:01 AM
#472
FBoD Member at Large
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Woodbury, MN
Posts: 6,094
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 30 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 7 Times
in
7 Posts
A BB shell that can be busted out of the frame with a BB wrench would be a defective frame. Think about the bikes you've had in the past and what chance in hell you have of twisting the BB shell with a wrench. Then think about the force going through it with a 1750W sprint. Pedaling killed this frame.
My point wasn't that pedaling applied torque to the shell. I can't believe you connected those dots. <sigh> But really, thanks for pointing out that we pedal through bearings
My point is that a skinny cyclist going crazy on a BB wrench is not going to hurt a BB shell that's properly built into the frame. If he did, then the frame was defective.
Yes, 1750W goes through the drivetrain, but the drivetrain didn't break. The frame that supports the drivetrain broke, and it broke because of pedaling forces. I don't know if it's from a year of riding around at 330W in SST training, 1700+W sprints, or 800+W 1' intervals, but the pedaling broke the supporting surfaces around the shell.
My point is that a skinny cyclist going crazy on a BB wrench is not going to hurt a BB shell that's properly built into the frame. If he did, then the frame was defective.
Yes, 1750W goes through the drivetrain, but the drivetrain didn't break. The frame that supports the drivetrain broke, and it broke because of pedaling forces. I don't know if it's from a year of riding around at 330W in SST training, 1700+W sprints, or 800+W 1' intervals, but the pedaling broke the supporting surfaces around the shell.
You made reference to busting out the shell with a wrench and then asked us to "think about" the forces form a 1750W sprint. 1750W sprint > BB wrench. You can only make that comparison if you believe that the types of loads are the same. It really sounds like you're asking us to believe you twisted the shell out of the frame with all the mega wattage, by pedaling. And if you did <bows down>
I didn't go through the other 18 pages to look....have you posted a pic of the busted BB? I'd love to see it.
And seriously, I really feel bad for you, I really do...it completely sucks. It's just not a warranty issue for you unfortunately.
12-18-09, 11:04 AM
#473
FBoD Member at Large
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Woodbury, MN
Posts: 6,094
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 30 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 7 Times
in
7 Posts
A few pages in, three weeks after the repair, it failed. No supporting structure under the BB shell. Details here.
12-18-09, 11:08 AM
#474
Making a kilometer blurry
Thread Starter
Uh, IMHO you're connecting the dots dude, at least subconsciously.
You made reference to busting out the shell with a wrench and then asked us to "think about" the forces form a 1750W sprint. 1750W sprint > BB wrench. You can only make that comparison if you believe that the types of loads are the same. It really sounds like you're asking us to believe you twisted the shell out of the frame with all the mega wattage, by pedaling. And if you did <bows down>
I didn't go through the other 18 pages to look....have you posted a pic of the busted BB? I'd love to see it.
And seriously, I really feel bad for you, I really do...it completely sucks. It's just not a warranty issue for you unfortunately.
You made reference to busting out the shell with a wrench and then asked us to "think about" the forces form a 1750W sprint. 1750W sprint > BB wrench. You can only make that comparison if you believe that the types of loads are the same. It really sounds like you're asking us to believe you twisted the shell out of the frame with all the mega wattage, by pedaling. And if you did <bows down>
I didn't go through the other 18 pages to look....have you posted a pic of the busted BB? I'd love to see it.
And seriously, I really feel bad for you, I really do...it completely sucks. It's just not a warranty issue for you unfortunately.
Here are the pics.
12-18-09, 11:17 AM
#475
FBoD Member at Large
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Woodbury, MN
Posts: 6,094
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 30 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 7 Times
in
7 Posts
Yeah, you didn't have enough thread history to see where I was coming from with the failure mode. After the failure, I could move the shell up/down/forward/back about 1.5mm, but could only twist it back and forth maybe 1/2 a degree.
Here are the pics.
Here are the pics.
Looking at this pic though:
Those cups look like they've been wrenched hard and often...dang. That's some munged metal.
Look on the bright side....the frame could have had a catastrophic failure on a hard ride or effort...at least you're ok...