View Single Post
Old 05-04-19, 11:29 AM
  #11  
The Golden Boy 
Extraordinary Magnitude
 
The Golden Boy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Waukesha WI
Posts: 13,646

Bikes: 1978 Trek TX700; 1978/79 Trek 736; 1984 Specialized Stumpjumper Sport; 1984 Schwinn Voyageur SP; 1985 Trek 620; 1985 Trek 720; 1986 Trek 400 Elance; 1987 Schwinn High Sierra; 1990 Miyata 1000LT

Mentioned: 84 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2607 Post(s)
Liked 1,699 Times in 935 Posts
Originally Posted by BikeWonder
Nothing to do with my previous threads. It was just a question that came up in my head and I wanted to ask those with more experience. I see a lot of carbon bike users retire their bikes every 2-4 years, mainly to do with just wanting to upgrade and keep up with what's new.

I know with steel bikes there are various types of tubing, so I wonder if the thinner tubes for racing frames are more subject to fatigue (due to sizing and weight specifications for a rider) to a lower cromo frame.
Sorry to infer something that wasn't there!

It's a logical thought process you have about it. And what I see you thinking about is what makes steel great- there's signs that a steel frame is going to give it up- catastrophic failure is outrageously extremely rare.

As you're aware there are different tubesets that comprise different metallurgy and different thicknesses. While I think there are very very special bikes that are made with absolute lightness as a primary consideration-(something like meant to be used for one race and discarded), the great great majority of bikes with most available tubing is designed with a robustness in a direct correlation with thickness and weight and strength.
__________________
*Recipient of the 2006 Time Magazine "Person Of The Year" Award*

Commence to jigglin’ huh?!?!

"But hey, always love to hear from opinionated amateurs." -says some guy to Mr. Marshall.
The Golden Boy is offline