Catastrophic Failures of Carbon Bikes
08-19-18, 01:06 PM
#76
☢
I would never imagine to tell others what they should ride, I just know carbon fiber doesn’t bring anything I need into the equation for my riding.
Any benefit that anyone may ever claim from the use of carbon fiber in cycling has never, not once, been something I’m concerned with. Weight, vibration, compliance, or any other supposed benefit are entirely non-issues for me. All of those supposed benefits are already achieved to my satisfaction with steel or aluminum. Adding to the equation the failure mode of carbon fiber and the risk/benefit ratio becomes unilateral; I simply don’t need it or want it.
My bikes are light enough. My bikes are strong enough. My bikes are stiff enough. My bikes are compliant enough. My bikes are plenty enough (for me) in every way without a speck of carbon fiber needed. Why would I possibly need to introduce any level of risk (beyond that which occurs when I throw my leg over the top tube) for a “benefit” I’m unable to perceive or appreciate?
It comes down to failure mode vs benefit, and the choice is clear and easy for me. As always, YMMV.
-Kedosto
Any benefit that anyone may ever claim from the use of carbon fiber in cycling has never, not once, been something I’m concerned with. Weight, vibration, compliance, or any other supposed benefit are entirely non-issues for me. All of those supposed benefits are already achieved to my satisfaction with steel or aluminum. Adding to the equation the failure mode of carbon fiber and the risk/benefit ratio becomes unilateral; I simply don’t need it or want it.
My bikes are light enough. My bikes are strong enough. My bikes are stiff enough. My bikes are compliant enough. My bikes are plenty enough (for me) in every way without a speck of carbon fiber needed. Why would I possibly need to introduce any level of risk (beyond that which occurs when I throw my leg over the top tube) for a “benefit” I’m unable to perceive or appreciate?
It comes down to failure mode vs benefit, and the choice is clear and easy for me. As always, YMMV.
-Kedosto
08-19-18, 01:13 PM
#77
Occam's Rotor
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 7,248
Mentioned: 61 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2366 Post(s)
Liked 2,331 Times
in
1,164 Posts
I would never imagine to tell others what they should ride, I just know carbon fiber doesn’t bring anything I need into the equation for my riding.
Any benefit that anyone may ever claim from the use of carbon fiber in cycling has never, not once, been something I’m concerned with. Weight, vibration, compliance, or any other supposed benefit are entirely non-issues for me. All of those supposed benefits are already achieved to my satisfaction with steel or aluminum. Adding to the equation the failure mode of carbon fiber and the risk/benefit ratio becomes unilateral; I simply don’t need it or want it.
My bikes are light enough. My bikes are strong enough. My bikes are stiff enough. My bikes are compliant enough. My bikes are plenty enough (for me) in every way without a speck of carbon fiber needed. Why would I possibly need to introduce any level of risk (beyond that which occurs when I throw my leg over the top tube) for a “benefit” I’m unable to perceive or appreciate?
It comes down to failure mode vs benefit, and the choice is clear and easy for me. As always, YMMV.
-Kedosto
Any benefit that anyone may ever claim from the use of carbon fiber in cycling has never, not once, been something I’m concerned with. Weight, vibration, compliance, or any other supposed benefit are entirely non-issues for me. All of those supposed benefits are already achieved to my satisfaction with steel or aluminum. Adding to the equation the failure mode of carbon fiber and the risk/benefit ratio becomes unilateral; I simply don’t need it or want it.
My bikes are light enough. My bikes are strong enough. My bikes are stiff enough. My bikes are compliant enough. My bikes are plenty enough (for me) in every way without a speck of carbon fiber needed. Why would I possibly need to introduce any level of risk (beyond that which occurs when I throw my leg over the top tube) for a “benefit” I’m unable to perceive or appreciate?
It comes down to failure mode vs benefit, and the choice is clear and easy for me. As always, YMMV.
-Kedosto
Also, notice how much easier it is on the eye simply to colorize the text, without changing the font size? Another approach, which is more elegant in its simplicity and therefore much easier on the eyes of the hapless readership, is to simply do this:
Last edited by Cyclist0108; 08-19-18 at 01:26 PM.
08-19-18, 01:24 PM
#78
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Mississauga/Toronto, Ontario canada
Posts: 8,721
Bikes: I have 3 singlespeed/fixed gear bikes
Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4227 Post(s)
Liked 2,488 Times
in
1,286 Posts
Maybe in lab tests it proves superior, but not in the real world, the real world has too many hazards which makes CF risky to use on daily basis...What is the lifespan of a CF frame vs a steel frame when used in real world conditions ??.
08-19-18, 01:35 PM
#79
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Mississauga/Toronto, Ontario canada
Posts: 8,721
Bikes: I have 3 singlespeed/fixed gear bikes
Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4227 Post(s)
Liked 2,488 Times
in
1,286 Posts
08-19-18, 02:02 PM
#80
☢
What is the lifespan of a CF frame vs a steel frame when used in real world conditions ??.
08-19-18, 02:08 PM
#81
Callipygian Connoisseur
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,373
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 564 Post(s)
Liked 350 Times
in
190 Posts
You’ve missed the entire point of my post; I’m not capable of perceiving, and by extension, able to appreciate any benefit anyone has ever made about CF. Therefore, CF is only able to bring another level of risk for (to me) no benefit.
There is no quality, no beneficial characteristic, that anyone has ever ascribed to CF that hasn’t already been met perfectly for my needs by metal bike frames. I am completely and entirely satisfied with bike frames of metal construction. Any claim of added strength, reduced weight, greater compliance, (I could go on) are irrelevant to me as the metal frames that currently exist already exceed any demand I could ever place upon them.
The one, single, solitary element CF brings to my riding - that I could ever possibly experience - is a unique failure mode. That’s it. This has nothing to do with fear or irrationality, but everything to do with actual hands-on experience. Your reference to added strength is laughable, as the metal framed bikes I’ve owned or ridden over the entirety of my lifetime have already so vastly exceeded my needs. As a lifelong Clyde, weight claims of CF are just as useless to me. If I wanna save that kind of weight, I’ll change my shoes.
I’m happy to add that if anyone either now or any time in the future can articulate a real, actual benefit that I could appreciate, I’ll be happy to listen (and possibly reconsider).
-Kedosto
08-19-18, 03:10 PM
#82
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Mississauga/Toronto, Ontario canada
Posts: 8,721
Bikes: I have 3 singlespeed/fixed gear bikes
Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4227 Post(s)
Liked 2,488 Times
in
1,286 Posts
Carbon fiber needs to be treated with more care. You need to be more careful in how you handle it, I just don't like to baby my bikes.. Simple things like: bike falling on the ground, crashes, dings, scratches in the material, hitting potholes etc are much more likely to damage CF then steel or aluminium. Then there is an issue of having to use a torque wrench for tightening bolts, it's something I don't want to deal with. And like one of the other posters said: Steel and aluminium has met all my needs in a bike and I just don't see any advantages to carbon fibre.
I have both steel and aluminium bikes...My aluminium framed MTB with steel fork is 11 years old and has been beaten to death on the trails and through many years of winter commuting and recreational riding, it has tons of dings and scratches all over but no cracks as yet, I am surprised that it hasn't corroded from all the road salt that it has been exposed to over the years.
08-19-18, 03:28 PM
#83
☢
Carbon fiber needs to be treated with more care. You need to be more careful in how you handle it, I just don't like to baby my bikes.. Simple things like: bike falling on the ground, crashes, dings, scratches in the material, hitting potholes etc are much more likely to damage CF then steel or aluminium. Then there is an issue of having to use a torque wrench for tightening bolts, it's something I don't want to deal with. And like one of the other posters said: Steel and aluminium has met all my needs in a bike and I just don't see any advantages to carbon fibre.
I have both steel and aluminium bikes...My aluminium framed MTB with steel fork is 11 years old and has been beaten to death on the trails and through many years of winter commuting and recreational riding, it has tons of dings and scratches all over but no cracks as yet, I am surprised that it hasn't corroded from all the road salt that it has been exposed to over the years.
I have both steel and aluminium bikes...My aluminium framed MTB with steel fork is 11 years old and has been beaten to death on the trails and through many years of winter commuting and recreational riding, it has tons of dings and scratches all over but no cracks as yet, I am surprised that it hasn't corroded from all the road salt that it has been exposed to over the years.
08-19-18, 03:53 PM
#84
Tortoise Wins by a Hare!
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Looney Tunes, IL
Posts: 7,398
Bikes: Wabi Special FG, Raleigh Roper, Nashbar AL-1, Miyata One Hundred, '70 Schwinn Lemonator and More!!
Mentioned: 22 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1549 Post(s)
Liked 941 Times
in
504 Posts
You do realize the new commercial airliners like the Boeing 787 are more than 50% CF composite by weight and have 30+ year lifespans with millions of miles. If containing composites made aircraft less safe than almost all recent aircraft would be grounded.
On many helicopters, the main rotor hub (the part that connects the rotors to the main drive shaft) is composite.
If engineers can do that with composites I don't think making a simple bike frame should pose any difficulty.
On many helicopters, the main rotor hub (the part that connects the rotors to the main drive shaft) is composite.
If engineers can do that with composites I don't think making a simple bike frame should pose any difficulty.
From the Cervelo testing I posted above:
And the sort of damage Cervelo saw is not as rare as one would imagine. “You can damage [the steerer] as easily as dropping it off the top of your car, or if you put the bike in a soft airline bag and the baggage guy drops it,” White said. “If you drop it, and it falls on the steerer, that’s enough on a lightweight fork to damage it. And you won’t see it, because nobody ever takes their fork out of their bike to inspect the steerer.”
We saw a little micro crack, and then we put it on the test machine to see how long it would last. It failed really quickly.”
Safety first.It's the MANNER in which they fail... Read the thread title again. Did your metal frame failures send you crashing to the ground while riding?
08-19-18, 04:10 PM
#85
Super Modest
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Central Illinois
Posts: 23,466
Bikes: Trek Emonda, Giant Propel, Colnago V3, Co-Motion Supremo, ICE VTX WC
Mentioned: 107 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10963 Post(s)
Liked 4,620 Times
in
2,123 Posts
I’ve seen three carbon failures and none was catastrophic. They were more like “green stick” breaks.
The last one was just a month ago when my wife’s FSA seat post broke. It just sort of squashed.
The last one was just a month ago when my wife’s FSA seat post broke. It just sort of squashed.
__________________
Keep the chain tight!
Last edited by Trsnrtr; 08-19-18 at 07:36 PM.
08-19-18, 04:32 PM
#86
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 12,902
Bikes: (2) ti TiCycles, 2007 w/ triple and 2011 fixed, 1979 Peter Mooney, ~1983 Trek 420 now fixed and ~1973 Raleigh Carlton Competition gravel grinder
Mentioned: 129 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4802 Post(s)
Liked 3,923 Times
in
2,552 Posts
A bigger reason to be riding steel or titanium (and to a lesser degree aluminum) is that when I have crashed - and I've had my hard ones - the steel has bent a lot before it broke. (Usually not breaking at all.) Bending is energy absorbed. Energy my bones, internal organs and brain don't have to absorb. The energy absorbed in a crash by say a frame is the force with which it resists X the distance it gives before it breaks. Yes, CF resists with a much higher force. But that CF fork will fail before the dropouts yield an inch. With steel, that will be a distance will be more like 8-10", That can make a big difference to the outcome for the rider. When steel bikes ride at speed into a car, the fork dropouts come back a foot and the top and down tubes both bend down behind the headtube, The steerer may also bend. That's a lot of energy absorbed. The CF frame will be in 3 or more pieces, but nothing bent. (The good thing is that the rider is made up of soft material and bending/shattering bones, so the energy not absorbed by the CF bike has a place to go.
)Ben
08-19-18, 06:27 PM
#89
Senior Member
I got my avatar bike as a cracked frame and a known-defective fork. I repaired the cracks and did a quick-fix for the fork, which is one-of-a-kind for which a replacement would have to be custom-made. The cracks in the frame haven't returned in almost 10 years' of riding. The fork finally developed several cracks in the crown about 3 years ago, so I took the time to repair it right and have ridden it since with no further carbon issues. At no time did anything 'asplode.' Of course, the fact that it has a layer of kevlar on the inside helps in that respect, at the expense of a little weight. My take is that carbon could be made indestructible if everyone didn't expect it to weigh less than a feather.
08-19-18, 06:49 PM
#90
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Fresno, CA
Posts: 355
Bikes: 2017 Ribble CX5
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 704 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
Everyone makes their own decisions. That's how it should be
As someone who has spent several years in the composite industry, I just get irritated when myths get perpetuated and people speak when they obviously are ignorant of the technology.
As someone who has spent several years in the composite industry, I just get irritated when myths get perpetuated and people speak when they obviously are ignorant of the technology.
08-19-18, 07:37 PM
#91
faster downhill
you are exponentially more likely to be killed by a falling coconut than by a shark--fear the coconut
08-19-18, 10:44 PM
#92
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Fresno, CA
Posts: 355
Bikes: 2017 Ribble CX5
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 704 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
I got my avatar bike as a cracked frame and a known-defective fork. I repaired the cracks and did a quick-fix for the fork, which is one-of-a-kind for which a replacement would have to be custom-made. The cracks in the frame haven't returned in almost 10 years' of riding. The fork finally developed several cracks in the crown about 3 years ago, so I took the time to repair it right and have ridden it since with no further carbon issues. At no time did anything 'asplode.' Of course, the fact that it has a layer of kevlar on the inside helps in that respect, at the expense of a little weight. My take is that carbon could be made indestructible if everyone didn't expect it to weigh less than a feather.
08-20-18, 12:17 PM
#93
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: West Orange County, CA
Posts: 1,112
Bikes: '84 Peugeot PH10LE
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 397 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 55 Times
in
39 Posts
I too, will never suffer CF catastrophic failure because my one and only ride is a vintage steel bike. I see no reason to replace it.
Jon
Jon
08-20-18, 12:24 PM
#94
Banned.
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: France
Posts: 1,030
Bikes: Brompton, Time, Bianchi, Jan Janssen, Peugeot
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 598 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 5 Times
in
5 Posts
I have a CF, a steel and an aluminium bike. The CF is easily the best ride. I'm not going to change in a hurry.
08-20-18, 12:57 PM
#95
Often on Fritz
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Austin
Posts: 536
Bikes: Franken-Fritz, Horse-Feathers, Junker
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 117 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
I got my avatar bike as a cracked frame and a known-defective fork. I repaired the cracks and did a quick-fix for the fork, which is one-of-a-kind for which a replacement would have to be custom-made. The cracks in the frame haven't returned in almost 10 years' of riding. The fork finally developed several cracks in the crown about 3 years ago, so I took the time to repair it right and have ridden it since with no further carbon issues. At no time did anything 'asplode.' Of course, the fact that it has a layer of kevlar on the inside helps in that respect, at the expense of a little weight. My take is that carbon could be made indestructible if everyone didn't expect it to weigh less than a feather.
Well I learned something today!
It's funny but I'm reading this meat grinder of a thread and I begin thinking "I'd be willing to sacrifice weight for some reinforcement inside MY carbon frame". I hadn't considered Kevlar (which sounds optimal) but was imagining some non-reactive metal support imbedded in the carbon body in case there was a catastrophe. I suppose the issue with a metal framework would be how the carbon might flex AROUND embedded the elements and cause failure, not to mention carbon fiber's reactivity with some metals.
Would this be a worthwhile avenue of research in the future for subsequent CF bikes? Because I'm feeling like WHEN not IF Horsefeathers bites the dust I might go for a metal frame because I hate spending +$1000 on what basically sounds like a carton of milk...
Now back to your regularly scheduled hate-off!
08-20-18, 02:36 PM
#96
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 252
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 100 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times
in
2 Posts
You're all correct. Please assume your CF bikes will fail. So ship them to me and I will take care of the problem. You will not be compensated in any way other than the peace of mind you'll receive knowing those horrible carbon failure-prone bicycles are safely in my responsible care. Seriously I've never witnessed one fail and I definitely don't fear it occurring. When I do have one fail or witness a true use (not abuse) failure of a CF bicycle I'll rethink my position.
08-21-18, 10:02 AM
#99
Banned
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Lincoln Ne
Posts: 9,924
Bikes: RANS Stratus TerraTrike Tour II
Mentioned: 46 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3352 Post(s)
Liked 1,056 Times
in
635 Posts
Except-----------------------all the strength test are done IN LINE with vertical loads the bike is supposed to hold. There is never any side ways tests or any unusual loads applied.
08-21-18, 10:11 AM
#100
Banned
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Lincoln Ne
Posts: 9,924
Bikes: RANS Stratus TerraTrike Tour II
Mentioned: 46 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3352 Post(s)
Liked 1,056 Times
in
635 Posts
Lets look at this situation logically. If CF bikes were as rugged at steel bikes, this thread would not exist.