DaveWC

Did it help you once it was pointed out to you that there were aluminum bikes that were included on that list and carbon bikes excluded from the list? Because it sounds like you've made your mind up & now you're only considering new information that fits your narrative.

Jarrett2

I do have a fairly informed opinion at this point, if that's what you mean.

rekmeyata

Bike Shops tell you this because that is mostly what they carry and since they tend to be in the middle to high end pricing they make more profit than selling some "cheap" aluminum bike. They're only after your money. That sort of thing has been the history of LBS's, when aluminum was the big thing they bragged on those too, when steel was the only thing you didn't have much bragging room except for lugs vs fillet brazing, then the argument was more about components and weight...like today.

cyclintom

Well, let's get something straight - the engines and the entire rest of the cars ARE NOT what are used in racing. And while many basic components such as the engine blocks may be the same they are never operated in even a close manner to what a race car undergoes. "Rebuilding" a race car engine usually consists of pulling the old motor and inserting a new because for one thing - these engines are hogged out to the last CC allowed for their classes so you cannot "bore" them to get a smooth surface for the new rings to run on.

With these bicycles you are in a completely different world. The C40 was EXACTLY the same as used in the Tour de France or the other grand tours. It also held the record for the number of classic wins.

The reason that the lawyer stated that these bikes were supposed to be destroyed at the end of a season was because if the teams sold these bikes they assumed personal liability. Even though in Europe this is sharply limited it can still bankrupt a team and give their sponsors a bad name.

What are the bikes that are sold? The one's I got were the team bikes that were never used. With no marks on the brake mounts or the drop-outs they're pretty easy to recognize. Sponsors will buy and entire group of framesets and at the end of a year there are leftovers that were never even painted. These are usually stolen by the mechanics who sell them for what they can get since they are paid a pittance to work for the teams. That is usually a given.

So the advice given to the teams varies from what Joe Citizen Purchaser should have ONLY in the level of riding. A one year lifespan on a bike used in the spring classics is about 10 years in normal use but that is only in general. Any particular bike could very well fall apart in the three year US warranty period if ridden as roughly as those in professional racing. And this doesn't mean fast, it means hitting road bumps hard at a high enough speed to generate the high frequency waves that will dissolve the resin that holds the carbon fiber together.

BUT, if Mike takes Colnago to court over that failure of his it wouldn't matter if that frame was 100 years old - catastrophic failures of that sort are NEVER supposed to happen on any goods sold in America. Most especially since the working life of the frame is not mentioned anywhere in the manual.

joejack951

Plenty of anecdotal data all of which is meaningless in terms of determining how frequently carbon fiber fails. As to 'catastrophic failure' so many of the broken carbon fiber frame pictures have an attached story about a prior crash that the owner thought nothing of that it is hard to take anyone seriously who claims their frame failed while just riding along.

CliffordK

Colnago's (and most bike manufacturer's) warranty covers the original purchaser, with perhaps the exception of extending recalls to all bikes.

Bike manufacturers seem to accept "Grey Market" bikes not intended for importing into the USA. But, if the bike was originally a team bike, then one may argue that it was never intended to be sold to the general public, and thus limit liability. Also, no matter the skills of a home mechanic, was it "professionally built"?

So far I haven't had a critical carbon failure. My Chinese Seat failure (earlier in the thread) was more or less an incidental finding (JRA). Once I discovered it, I rode the 10 miles home and took it out of service, at least until I'm satisfied I've repaired it.

I have a Canadian CF seat that I'm still using. My only complaint is that it squeaks. And, may try to fix the squeak so it doesn't obscure some other more important noises from the frame. But, the goal is to pay attention to the bike, and hopefully discover any faults before they become critical.

FrozenK

Uh... pros actually sell their used bikes at the end of the season. The ones from the famous guys usually sell for big bucks, but you can some times get a good deal on bikes from lesser known people.

Wilfred Laurier

The carbon fanboys show up just as quick as the naysayers, most of which are only interested in justifying paying waa-aay too much for much heavier, but only marginally less less fragile, 'boutique' steel frames. Their reasoning is along the lines of "I couldn't have spent so much money on a worse bike, so there must be something wrong with what other people are buying!"

Their desperate grasping at any out-of-context remarks or web pages that could possibly support their illogical view on the topic gets pretty sad, honestly. I guess most of them haven't been around the industry long enough to remember that, when steel frames racing frames were common, so were broken steel frames. I know because I have broken several myself, and seen many more broken.

As for you, Jarret2, you must know that the 'racing bikes are fragile' statements does not exclusively refer to carbon... well, you should know, as long as there is no reason you have to deny this reality.

Happy riding!

PepeM

Yup, the local race team gets new bikes every year and they sell the old ones. Haven't heard of any asplosions.

PepeM

Not that part. The part that is a joke is that because not a single one of those has failed (allegedly) that somehow means that steel is excluded from 'as we make and buy lighter and lighter bikes we expose ourselves to greater and greater potential for a major problem to occur.' Curiously, you later agree that 'usually lighter stuff will fail sooner.' So, do you think that last statement, which you made, not me, applies to steel or not?

rekmeyata

The pro road bikes, well at least Canyon does, but I heard others do to, are all put through a CT scanner before they are sold, so there are precautions taken so as not to sell a bike that could endanger a rider.

PepeM

Have any reference? Sounds like a reasonable precaution. If the price was right I would buy an old 'pro' bike without thinking twice. If I could afford it that is, I don't see myself moving away from aluminum any time soon.

rekmeyata

What I said was that there wasn't one report that a Rodriguez bike frame ever failed, not including crashes of course. I think that a lightweight steel bike if made properly like the Rodriguez appears to be made, the failure rate will be lower than with a carbon fiber bike in the same weight range.

rekmeyata

Ever wanted to get your hands on a pro's bike? Here's how - Cycling Weekly About 2/3rds the way down it says this:

'However, Canyon still offers customers their normal six-year warranty with sales of the ex-pro team bikes, while Condor offer two.

“Every single frame and fork has to pass through our in-house CT scanner here in Koblenz so we can examine if there has been any damage to the integral carbon structure beyond what the naked eye can see,” said Leake. “If we find any evidence of damage then the parts are rejected. We want these bikes to be ridden, not placed on a pedestal just to be looked at. Anything unfit to ride is certainly unfit for us to sell.” "

PepeM

I honestly wouldn't know. It's actually an interesting topic: which material allows you to build the lightest with the least compromise in durability. I mean, at some point things will get too light to be workable regardless of material, I just wonder how quickly different materials reach their limit. Might look into it tomorrow.

Sweet, cheers.

I <3 Robots

Slipstream Sports would sell the team bikes at the end of the season when they were with Cervelo on their webstore. I remember seeing Thomas Dekker's and Andrew Talansky's bikes on there. They had frames and complete bikes with some base Mavic wheels. You can see scuffs and scratches on the components from the wear and tear.

Maelochs

So while we cannot speak for any other maker, Canyon at least expects its lightest carbon fiber bikes to withstand a full season of racing and at least six more years of use.

Good find, sir.

American Euchre

Would a CF frame owner benefit from regular or semi regular frame inspections, say, once a month or so?

Or can CF frames break down internally and fail suddenly even when there is no sign of fatigue externally?

rekmeyata

I know that steel won't have the crushing problem that CF has if things are not properly torqued unless you got the steel paper thin but then it would collapse as soon as a rider mounted it! I can tell by looking at the bike they did use thin tubing so they had to make the tubing larger in diameter to compensate so the bike wouldn't flex too much. However to get the weight down Rod bikes did use a carbon fork with a carbon steerer. The cool thing about the Rod bikes is that they don't use ANY proprietary components like other CF manufactures to get their weight down which makes it a huge pain to get replacement parts for; they even offer 20 production sizes while most CF manufactures have 5 to 7. Notice too that they also use a Enve 1.0 fork which could be upgraded (I call it an upgrade even though it's cheaper and heavier) to the 2.0 for about $100 less money but you would gain about 40 some odd grams but in return you gain a much sturdier fork able to handle up to a 350 pound rider instead of a 220 which would give even lighter riders more security in knowing the fork is more than strong enough. I actually wished before I got my Lynskey that I could afford one of those Outlaw bikes but $11,000 was just way too much for me to swallow without choking to death! They look really nice too with those old 70's style band decals.

Also note what they say about manufactures claimed weights on their bikes and how they get those figures, I often wondered this because I ran into a guy that bought a Trek (I can't recall the model but he paid $4,500 for it) CF bike that claimed it weighed 14.7 pounds but actually weighed a pound more which is a pretty hefty jump in weight, he was actually telling me he was pissed when he found out but couldn't do anything about it because he had the bike for a year.

Luke Jackson

Canyon only continues to offer the warranty after running the frames through a ct scanner.
Not a good sign and I wonder how many get rejected?

Maelochs

This is the perfect example of the kind of total, fact-warping bias that fuels this thread.

How is NOT a good sign that Canyon checks there Used racing bikes thoroughly before selling them? That shows care for safety and attention to detail.

The point you refuse to acknowledge is that Not only do they sell their used racing bikes---They warranty them for another five years!!

The question is a totally dishonest question. You do not "wonder" how many, if any, get rejected ... you are using this question to imply that most of the frames fail because, you know, CF is deadly and only lasts two years, or not even if raced.

If this is a regular program Canyon runs, it has to be profitable, which means the CT scan and the warranty service have to be covered by the cost of the sold bike. Since these bikes are sold to be ridden they cannot cost a Lot more than a New Canyon frame, or the buyer would buy a new frame with the full six-year warranty.

If you really cared, you would call Canyon, as apparently Rekmyata did.

In case you missed it here's the facts: Canyon Sells it used racing bikes To The Public and honors the same six-year warranty all their frames get.

Right there that shoots down the notion that CF frames are only good for two years or one season of racing---because ALL Canyon frames come with SIX-year warranty.

In case math is not yuor strong suit, Six is more than Two or One.

PepeM

If most were rejected they would just scrap the project entirely.

Digger6255 

Wrong! Go to a NHRA race and watch the 10,000 HP Top Fuel engines get rebuilt after every run in less than 45 minutes. My 190 mph Dragster engine gets "rebuilt" every 2 years. Please keep your comments to something you know about like Asploding CF bikes......

rydabent

It is quite apparent that there are two classes of posters here. Many of us are in one class that thinks CF bikes are not the ultimate bike for 98% of the riding public. The other class is the people that have drank the mfg koolaide that say CF bikes are the greatest thing since sex. They are the ones that have paid out huge bucks, and dont like anyone that says anything against there "baby".

To show you that it just comes down to money, on one of my bike forums a guy was bragging that he bought a $12,000 CF bike for $7500. It tells you that there are huge profits involved with CF bikes. You know that at $7500 the mfg and the bike shop still made money.

cyclintom

How do pros sell their bikes when they are property of the team?