Maelochs

A rare straightforward remark from Mr. M, but as usual, right to the point.

rekmeyata

Actually there has been more fork failures than frame failures, as there is more CF seatpost breaking than there are frames, some of those breakages may be result of incorrect torque being used on the CF part and weakening it, but therein lies a huge problem just in itself, not all torque wrenches are 100 percent accurate, so if you buy one trusting that it's accurate but it's off by 5 inch pounds that could be enough to crush the CF a bit and weaken it which down the road could cause a failure.

Here is one report of issues with CF forks: Steered wrong? Racers concerned about broken carbon steerer tubes | VeloNews.com Note what Trek blames the issue on, of course like any good manufacture they'll past the blame on to something else. There are two pages to the above site so read both, because later on the 2nd page Trek "fixes" the issue but to prevent lawsuits they say that even though they added more carbon to make forks stronger it's still passes the blame onto the consumer. Then at the bottom of the page 2 read Vaughans statement. I don't think a bike should be so sensitive in regards to torque values make it so complicated that the average home mechanic could easily make a mistake that could lead to catastrophic failure, this wasn't ever the case back prior to CF parts coming along, we never measure torque values, if something was over tightened no big deal, if something was not tightened enough it would come loose and we would know it and tighten it further. But alas everyone wants the lightest stuff they can buy so we have these issues.

Here is another VeloNews article on forks requesting a industry wide fork steerer test: Cervelo founder calls for industry-wide fork steerer test | VeloNews.com but all the testing in the world won't do much good if it's not torqued correctly due to operator or mechanical error.

And here is a story relating a statement made by a chartered CF engineer to view CF forks as consumable; see: Carbon fibre fork failure

Again, as I've said in other posts, that is as we make and buy lighter and lighter CF bikes we expose ourselves to greater and greater potential for a major problem to occur. I think that for areas that are currently needing correct torque values, like steerers, handlebar, seat posts etc, that these things be made out of a material that can't be compromised due to a minor incorrect torque settings that a home mechanic may fail at paying attention to or an incorrect factory adjusted torque wrench. This not something that should be left in the hands of a home mechanic nor should we be forced to take it to an LBS every time we need to make an adjustment. Just my opinion as always of course. Our bikes are not being raced, we are not getting new components during a ride or immediately after a race, or new frames every 4 months to 5 months.

PepeM

Defending reason, more like.

PepeM

Remove CF from the sentence. Does the point still stand? Well, there you go.

Jarrett2

I didn't realize that was what was at stake here

Jarrett2

Let's go a different route with this.

Aside from racers, who are carbon fiber road racing bikes suitable for?

What type of rider would you recommend one to?

Who would you try and dissuade from buying one?

jefnvk

I don't think you'll find many who say that CF racing bikes are a good choice for anyone besides competitive racers, just that if a recreational rider chooses to spend their money on one, it is not going to wear anywhere near as fast as a guy putting 20000 miles a year on a bike is going to wear it.

rekmeyata

Hmm, not entirely since Rodriguez makes the lightest steel bike in the world called the Outlaw at 13.5 pounds and there isn't one report of a frame failure. So no, I can't just add any material in there but usually lighter stuff will fail sooner that's true.

DaveWC

Ftfy

PepeM

Is this a joke?

Maelochs

PepeM is hitting every pitch out of the park, today.

I woulsd recommend a CF bike to myself.And to any rider who wanted a lightweight frame which abosrbed a lot of road vibration ... and to anyone who thought they looked cool, for that matter.

Almost every road mile driven in a Ferrari or Lamborghini is done at a pace which could be achieved by a Ford Fiesta or a Honda Civic. Why do people buy Porsches, Ferraris, Lamborghinis?

They Want to.

Face it, the hysteria over the supposedly "deadly' nature of CF is stupid and wholly unfounded.

As PepeM notes, as we choose to buy lighter parts, of any material, we are approaching the limits of durability/failure. (I have heard a lot that unless you race seriously, Ultegra is better than Dura-Acre because Dura-Ace is made for guys planing to replace much of the drivetrain every season or more frequently ... they are lighter but less durable.)

On the other hand, bikes built of CF, forks built of CF, CF seat posts, bars, stems ... have all been around a long, long time. So take off your tinfoil hats and face the fact that there is no world-wide industry-wide cover-up of the massive death toll attributable to CF parts. it simply isn't real.

As I said earlier, this exact same thread comes up every so often---aimed at Aluminum frames, because the "Steel is Real" crown points out that steel has a much longer service life and Al frames a Guaranteed to crack and break everywhere all the time.

It is hard to imagine that threads like these gain any traction at all ... and then I remember that I live in a country where Donald Trump and Hilary Clinton are deemed most fit to lead the nation.

Jarrett2

wtf is he talking about?

CliffordK

Perhaps one should argue that most Pro Racers simply don't get the full use out of their bikes. Ride it a year and throw it away? It is the casual users that really get the full use out of the bikes.

My old Colnago was purchased at about 14 years old, and ridden pretty regularly for over 3 decades. And it shows the years of use. Perhaps it doesn't count though, as I think it may actually be from the 60's.




Not so many miles lately as I now have a newer Carbon Fiber Colnago. But, it is still one of my favorite bikes.

But, I'll be happy enough if I get another 5 to 10 years out of my current C-40.
And I'd be very happy if I'm still riding at all in another 30 years.

PepeM

Ouch.

PepeM

That much is clear. They also change the bartape after every race. Doge has talked plenty about buying tubulars from race teams that still have plenty of life on them. There is also the aforementioned water bottles which get thrown away after a single use. None of those are replaced/thrown away due to fear of asplosion. It's just the way things work at the World Tour stage.

Nice bike btw.

CliffordK

One of my best cycling purchases was a pile of flat tires.

I patched them up and put many miles on them. Of course, that was before any kind of armor protection to the tires, and racing tires aren't necessarily designed for commuting and touring. But, they still were good.

American Euchre

There is plenty of anecdotal data on CF frame failure. The problem with CF is that when it fails, it doesn't bend, it breaks. Steel, alu and ti frames show signs of fatigue prior to catastrophic failure. CF, not so much.

Jarrett2

The majority of people I know with frame cracks are all CF. I know one aluminum frame that cracked after years of use. No steel frames. I've seen a 10 year old titanium frame crack at the seatpost clamp area as well.

I get limping along on a cracked metal frame for a bit, but knowing what I know about the nature of CF failure, I can't imagine throwing a leg over a carbon bike with a visible crack anywhere. But I have riding acquaintances that do it every week.

CliffordK

The wear attributable to a casual rider and a racer is different.

The racer may subject their bikes to 30 MPH crashes with broken pieces flying every direction.
The casual rider might subject their bikes to 10 MPH crashes with a bike that looks unscathed.

The racer may put in 50K miles in 2 years.
The casual rider may put in 50K miles in a lifetime.

Torque? Mashing? Standing?

My guess the biggest differences have to do with age, heat, and sunlight.

There are likely a few bikes that live their lives in the basement, and will endure for decades. Others that get pounded on for years and chained up in the sun.

Thinking about the old Colnago Super. Something has destroyed the paint. The top tube wear is mainly pants abrasion. Maybe slicker pants are the worst??? But it is mostly paint deep, and not that big of a concern. However, the rest of the paint has started just flaking off. I think it may be due to heat, sun, & UV (and maybe salt in Missouri). If a CF bike had gotten that bad, I'd certainly be concerned with what was under the paint.

The new(er) Colnago C-40 has a lot of plastic on it. I do worry that the plastic bits and pieces may not wear as long as my old steel and aluminum. But, we'll see. Plastic "bushings" are good. A lot has changed. I've had cables and cable housing last for decades. People now are talking about changing it out annually.

But, perhaps I don't need another "forever" bike either.

DaveWC

I didn't realize anything was at stake here. But given that you think that there is, what is at stake for you if I continue riding a carbon bike? Is it necessary that I agree with you? As a carbon bike rider I have a dog in the fight when someone is dumb enough to suggest that all carbon bikes should be thrown away after 2 years because his 10 year old bike showed a seam on the fork after he ran it into a wall. Why is this discussion relevant for you?

American Euchre

That's very strange. Why don't they just take it in to the dealer to inspect for safety? I'm assuming many of those damaged frames are still under warranty?

rekmeyata

The lightest custom racing bicycles | Lighter than carbon fiber | The Steel Rodriguez Outlaw Nope

rekmeyata

He's talking about the same world wide cover up due to rim brakes failing for decades sending thousands of people to their deaths and thus now we need disk brakes to prevent those thousands of deaths.

Maelochs

As well as the world-wide conspiracy to cover up the fact that disc brakes are responsible for so many amputations that the pro peleton is afraid to adopt them.

CF frames are not deadly, generally last more than a couple years, are not as resilient as steel or aluminum, and are perfectly worthwhile for any riders who want them. Deal with it.

People who are afraid of CF should ride metal--or bamboo. people who have a driving need to tell the world that CF frames are deadly, and manufacturers are selling them knowing they are deadly, should take their meds.

Jarrett2

I guess because I ride road bikes. And every time I walk into a bike shop to look at new bikes, they tell me why the latest and greatest carbon fiber race bike is exactly the bike that I need. It's important to me to stay up to speed on the current bike build trends so I will be an educated buyer when the time comes again.

If I would have been shown that "Condition 1" statement that I posted earlier in the thread at my LBS, where I should have seen it, that information would have certainly changed some of my decisions. I can only hope that passing that knowledge on to others might help them in the future.

I can only assume they did and were told it was fine and not covered by warranty. Which has to suck to hear.