Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > General Cycling Discussion
Reload this Page >

Danger From Carbon Fiber Bikes

Search
Notices
General Cycling Discussion Have a cycling related question or comment that doesn't fit in one of the other specialty forums? Drop on in and post in here! When possible, please select the forum above that most fits your post!

Danger From Carbon Fiber Bikes

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 07-26-16, 08:52 AM
  #226  
PepeM
Senior Member
 
PepeM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 6,861
Mentioned: 180 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2739 Post(s)
Liked 119 Times in 59 Posts
Oof, good point. Never even thought of that one. Might have to pass by the LBS on the way home to grab a few bottles, no way I'm using my old bottles anymore.
PepeM is offline  
Old 07-26-16, 09:39 AM
  #227  
indyfabz
Senior Member
 
indyfabz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 39,249
Mentioned: 211 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18421 Post(s)
Liked 15,569 Times in 7,335 Posts
Originally Posted by PepeM
Oof, good point. Never even thought of that one. Might have to pass by the LBS on the way home to grab a few bottles, no way I'm using my old bottles anymore.

I completely deflate my tires after every ride and then re-inflate them before I go out again. Riding on used air is dangerous. The air molecules can become severely depressed, resulting in catastrophic failure or worse: a nuclear asplosion.
indyfabz is offline  
Old 07-26-16, 10:05 AM
  #228  
ZIPP2001
Life Is Good
 
ZIPP2001's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Central Massachusetts
Posts: 1,695

Bikes: Zipp2001 Carbon Belt Drive SS, Kestrel RT900SL, Kestrel KM40 Airfoil 1x10, Orbea Occam H30, Trek Stache 5 29 Plus, Giant Yukon 2 Fat Bike

Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 277 Post(s)
Liked 870 Times in 443 Posts
This same guy posted the same stuff on another forum, with pretty much the same results.

I have 3 carbon bikes that I now have to get rid of because they are to old and dangerous for me to ride. Anyone looking for a Zipp2001 TT Bike, or Zipp2001 SS bike, or how about a Kestrel SLK900 road bike. I guess it's back to steel I go.
ZIPP2001 is offline  
Old 07-26-16, 10:12 AM
  #229  
rekmeyata
Senior Member
 
rekmeyata's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: NE Indiana
Posts: 8,687

Bikes: 2020 Masi Giramondo 700c; 2013 Lynskey Peloton; 1992 Giant Rincon; 1989 Dawes needs parts; 1985 Trek 660; 1985 Fuji Club; 1984 Schwinn Voyager; 1984 Miyata 612; 1977 Raleigh Competition GS

Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1126 Post(s)
Liked 253 Times in 204 Posts
Originally Posted by indyfabz
I completely deflate my tires after every ride and then re-inflate them before I go out again. Riding on used air is dangerous. The air molecules can become severely depressed, resulting in catastrophic failure or worse: a nuclear asplosion.
If you're using CO2 you may have to do that, the nuclear explosion thing is a rare event...about one in 100,000 chance, so you're probably good for awhile yet.
rekmeyata is offline  
Old 07-26-16, 10:15 AM
  #230  
rekmeyata
Senior Member
 
rekmeyata's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: NE Indiana
Posts: 8,687

Bikes: 2020 Masi Giramondo 700c; 2013 Lynskey Peloton; 1992 Giant Rincon; 1989 Dawes needs parts; 1985 Trek 660; 1985 Fuji Club; 1984 Schwinn Voyager; 1984 Miyata 612; 1977 Raleigh Competition GS

Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1126 Post(s)
Liked 253 Times in 204 Posts
Originally Posted by Maelochs
Rekmyata----why don't you actually ask the question you want to ask: Ask the guys at Canyon if their bikes are unsafe to be ridden after the end of the season. See what they say then.
Yes, I can see a manufacture of carbon bikes admitting that the bikes are unsafe to ride after a season. But I'll try to ask in a roundabout way and see what the response is.
rekmeyata is offline  
Old 07-26-16, 10:27 AM
  #231  
CliffordK
Senior Member
 
CliffordK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Eugene, Oregon, USA
Posts: 27,547
Mentioned: 217 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18378 Post(s)
Liked 4,512 Times in 3,354 Posts
Originally Posted by indyfabz
I completely deflate my tires after every ride and then re-inflate them before I go out again. Riding on used air is dangerous. The air molecules can become severely depressed, resulting in catastrophic failure or worse: a nuclear asplosion.
That used to be the recommendation, at least from some riders.

I was generally a bit lazy. If I was planning on riding the next day, I'd just leave them inflated, but deflate if not going out for a few days.
CliffordK is online now  
Old 07-26-16, 10:47 AM
  #232  
jefnvk
Senior Member
 
jefnvk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Metro Detroit/AA
Posts: 8,207

Bikes: 2016 Novara Mazama

Mentioned: 63 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3640 Post(s)
Liked 81 Times in 51 Posts
Originally Posted by ZIPP2001
I have 3 carbon bikes that I now have to get rid of because they are to old and dangerous for me to ride. Anyone looking for a Zipp2001 TT Bike, or Zipp2001 SS bike, or how about a Kestrel SLK900 road bike. I guess it's back to steel I go.
I'm such a good guy, I'll take all three off your hands AND let you have anything in my signature line in return!

EDIT: holy cow, never seen one of those Zipps before. Crazy bike!
jefnvk is offline  
Old 07-26-16, 10:51 AM
  #233  
mconlonx
Senior Member
 
mconlonx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 7,558
Mentioned: 47 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7148 Post(s)
Liked 134 Times in 92 Posts
Originally Posted by cyclintom
I was pointing out that IF the factory recommends that the racing teams destroy these bikes after only one or two seasons of use it is because they are concerned about personal injury. And Mama knows best don't you know?
Factory car and motorcycle race teams regularly rebuild engines after every race, with mere hours on engines run for less than 1000 mi. However, the warranty on drivetrains in the vehicles they sell to the public, through dealerships, is measured in years and tens of thousands of miles.

What does manufacturer advice to racing teams have to do with product sold to the public...? Factories aren't concerned about personal injury, they're concerned about bad publicity...
mconlonx is offline  
Old 07-26-16, 11:44 AM
  #234  
Jarrett2
Senior Member
 
Jarrett2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: DFW
Posts: 4,126

Bikes: Steel 1x's

Mentioned: 20 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 632 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Originally Posted by mconlonx
What does manufacturer advice to racing teams have to do with product sold to the public...?
You made a good point... in the wrong direction

Auto racing teams don't sell race cars to the public. In fact, I would be willing to bet that only a handful of car owners base their purchase decisions on the success of auto racing teams, if any. The marketing to consumers has nothing to do with race results.

The road bike industry is different. The whole carbon road bike line up is driven by racing. They build a bike for their pro racers to use, then turn around and market the same bike to the consumer saying this is a winning race bike. And people eat it up. Just look at the number of people in this thread that are non racers riding pro carbon road race bikes.

And those same companies turn around and post a blurb in subtext 39 of appendix B in the owner's manual about how carbon road bikes are built strictly for racing for in one or maybe two seasons, use light components that have a known shorter use life and weight limits that rarely see the light of day.

Most people don't read that stuff. They just want the fastest bike on the floor and expect it to be as durable as steel and last for years without issue. And they are surprised when its not that way for them.
Jarrett2 is offline  
Old 07-26-16, 11:49 AM
  #235  
Maelochs
Senior Member
 
Maelochs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 15,491

Bikes: 2015 Workswell 066, 2017 Workswell 093, 2014 Dawes Sheila, 1983 Cannondale 500, 1984 Raleigh Olympian, 2007 Cannondale Rize 4, 2017 Fuji Sportif 1 LE

Mentioned: 144 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7652 Post(s)
Liked 3,479 Times in 1,836 Posts
Originally Posted by Jarrett2
And those same companies turn around and post a blurb in subtext 39 of appendix B in the owner's manual about how carbon road bikes are built strictly for racing for in one or maybe two seasons, use light components that have a known shorter use life and weight limits that rarely see the light of day.
Care to show three or four actual quotes from bike manufacturers saying this?

No?

Oh, because it is just more wholly fabricated BS. Gotcha.
Maelochs is offline  
Old 07-26-16, 11:55 AM
  #236  
Jarrett2
Senior Member
 
Jarrett2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: DFW
Posts: 4,126

Bikes: Steel 1x's

Mentioned: 20 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 632 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Originally Posted by Maelochs
Care to show three or four actual quotes from bike manufacturers saying this?

No?

Oh, because it is just more wholly fabricated BS. Gotcha.
Well... here's one from Specialized

HIGH-PERFORMANCE ROAD
• CONDITION 1: Bikes designed for riding on a paved surface where the tires do not lose ground contact.
• INTENDED: To be ridden on paved roads only.
• NOT INTENDED: For off-road, cyclocross, or touring with racks or panniers.
• TRADE OFF: Material use is optimized to deliver both light weight and specific performance.

You must understand
that:
(1) these types of bikes are intended to give an aggressive racer or competitive cyclist a performance advantage
over a relatively short product life,
(2) a less aggressive rider will enjoy longer frame life,
(3) you are choosing light weight
(shorter frame life) over more frame weight and a longer frame life,
(4) you are choosing light weight over more dent
resistant or rugged frames that weigh more.
All frames that are very light need frequent inspection
. These frames are
likely to be damaged or broken in a crash.
They are not designed to take abuse or be a rugged workhorse
Jarrett2 is offline  
Old 07-26-16, 11:59 AM
  #237  
Jarrett2
Senior Member
 
Jarrett2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: DFW
Posts: 4,126

Bikes: Steel 1x's

Mentioned: 20 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 632 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times in 3 Posts
The letter in the OP appears to say roughly the same thing from Colnago...

Don't you hate when you call BS on someone and they make you look silly for doing so?
Jarrett2 is offline  
Old 07-26-16, 12:02 PM
  #238  
Wilfred Laurier
Señor Member
 
Wilfred Laurier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 5,066
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 649 Post(s)
Liked 292 Times in 215 Posts
Originally Posted by Jarrett2
You made a good point... in the wrong direction

Auto racing teams don't sell race cars to the public. In fact, I would be willing to bet that only a handful of car owners base their purchase decisions on the success of auto racing teams, if any. The marketing to consumers has nothing to do with race results.

The road bike industry is different. The whole carbon road bike line up is driven by racing. They build a bike for their pro racers to use, then turn around and market the same bike to the consumer saying this is a winning race bike. And people eat it up. Just look at the number of people in this thread that are non racers riding pro carbon road race bikes.

And those same companies turn around and post a blurb in subtext 39 of appendix B in the owner's manual about how carbon road bikes are built strictly for racing for in one or maybe two seasons, use light components that have a known shorter use life and weight limits that rarely see the light of day.

Most people don't read that stuff. They just want the fastest bike on the floor and expect it to be as durable as steel and last for years without issue. And they are surprised when its not that way for them.
Certainly there is a wannabe racer phenomena and people going for the 'stupid light' and not being logical when they select a bike, but you and cyclintroll... er cyclintom seem to be suggesting proof that it is a problem with the material.
Wilfred Laurier is offline  
Old 07-26-16, 12:03 PM
  #239  
Maelochs
Senior Member
 
Maelochs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 15,491

Bikes: 2015 Workswell 066, 2017 Workswell 093, 2014 Dawes Sheila, 1983 Cannondale 500, 1984 Raleigh Olympian, 2007 Cannondale Rize 4, 2017 Fuji Sportif 1 LE

Mentioned: 144 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7652 Post(s)
Liked 3,479 Times in 1,836 Posts
Link to a source please so we can see the context. Also ... I see no mention of a time frame there. What i do see is a manufacturer saying, "The harder you use it the faster you use it up" which is true for any and all products.

You invented the "one or two seasons" bit just to strengthen your claim ... but it is a lie, not a fact, and your own "proof" proves you made it up.

Source, please.
Maelochs is offline  
Old 07-26-16, 12:03 PM
  #240  
Wilfred Laurier
Señor Member
 
Wilfred Laurier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 5,066
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 649 Post(s)
Liked 292 Times in 215 Posts
Originally Posted by Jarrett2
Well... here's one from Specialized

HIGH-PERFORMANCE ROAD
• CONDITION 1: Bikes designed for riding on a paved surface where the tires do not lose ground contact.
• INTENDED: To be ridden on paved roads only.
• NOT INTENDED: For off-road, cyclocross, or touring with racks or panniers.
• TRADE OFF: Material use is optimized to deliver both light weight and specific performance.

You must understand
that:
(1) these types of bikes are intended to give an aggressive racer or competitive cyclist a performance advantage
over a relatively short product life,
(2) a less aggressive rider will enjoy longer frame life,
(3) you are choosing light weight
(shorter frame life) over more frame weight and a longer frame life,
(4) you are choosing light weight over more dent
resistant or rugged frames that weigh more.
All frames that are very light need frequent inspection
. These frames are
likely to be damaged or broken in a crash.
They are not designed to take abuse or be a rugged workhorse
That actually does not refer strictly to carbon bikes. They had steel bikes to which the same category applied just a couple years ago.
Wilfred Laurier is offline  
Old 07-26-16, 12:04 PM
  #241  
SkyDog75
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Upstate NY
Posts: 3,783

Bikes: Bianchi San Mateo and a few others

Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 634 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 13 Times in 9 Posts
Originally Posted by jefnvk
I'm such a good guy, I'll take all three off your hands AND let you have anything in my signature line in return!
You might want to take "Me" out of your signature line.
SkyDog75 is offline  
Old 07-26-16, 12:06 PM
  #242  
Jarrett2
Senior Member
 
Jarrett2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: DFW
Posts: 4,126

Bikes: Steel 1x's

Mentioned: 20 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 632 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Originally Posted by Wilfred Laurier
Certainly there is a wannabe racer phenomena and people going for the 'stupid light' and not being logical when they select a bike, but you and cyclintroll... er cyclintom seem to be suggesting proof that it is a problem with the material.
There's no problem with the material. These manufacturers have repeatedly said that they use carbon fiber to build a road race bike that safely lasts for one or two race seasons for lightweight racers. That was the goal and they achieved it with the material. The issue comes when that purpose built bike is used in a manner it wasn't designed for.
Jarrett2 is offline  
Old 07-26-16, 12:08 PM
  #243  
PepeM
Senior Member
 
PepeM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 6,861
Mentioned: 180 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2739 Post(s)
Liked 119 Times in 59 Posts
Originally Posted by Jarrett2
Well... here's one from Specialized

HIGH-PERFORMANCE ROAD
• CONDITION 1: Bikes designed for riding on a paved surface where the tires do not lose ground contact.
• INTENDED: To be ridden on paved roads only.
• NOT INTENDED: For off-road, cyclocross, or touring with racks or panniers.
• TRADE OFF: Material use is optimized to deliver both light weight and specific performance.

You must understand
that:
(1) these types of bikes are intended to give an aggressive racer or competitive cyclist a performance advantage
over a relatively short product life,
(2) a less aggressive rider will enjoy longer frame life,
(3) you are choosing light weight
(shorter frame life) over more frame weight and a longer frame life,
(4) you are choosing light weight over more dent
resistant or rugged frames that weigh more.
All frames that are very light need frequent inspection
. These frames are
likely to be damaged or broken in a crash.
They are not designed to take abuse or be a rugged workhorse
You love that one, don't you? Lets do this again: 'relatively short product life' doesn't mean anything. What is 'relatively short?' 1 month? 1 year? 10 years? Open to interpretation. 'A less aggressive rider will enjoy longer frame life.' Less aggressive than who? How longer? 'Not designed to take abuse.' What counts as abuse? Jumping a curb? Throwing it down a cliff? Over-tightening a bolt?

What it does say is that high performance (weight, mainly) is inversely proportional to durability. That is independent of material and I am sure most people understand that.

Most people don't read that stuff. They just want the fastest bike on the floor and expect it to be as durable as steel and last for years without issue. And they are surprised when its not that way for them.
Who are this 'most people?' The only one I can think of is the OP. But yes, talking about 'people' to make whatever point you're trying to make is always easy.
PepeM is offline  
Old 07-26-16, 12:10 PM
  #244  
Jarrett2
Senior Member
 
Jarrett2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: DFW
Posts: 4,126

Bikes: Steel 1x's

Mentioned: 20 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 632 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Originally Posted by Maelochs
Source, please.
I've educated you all I wish to for today. Google it yourself if you have more questions. It's easy to find.

Originally Posted by Wilfred Laurier
That actually does not refer strictly to carbon bikes. They had steel bikes to which the same category applied just a couple years ago.
It certainly does pertain to carbon bikes now as they are the only ones that fall under that category in the referenced appendix. I'll have to take your world that steel was incorporated in there in years past.
Jarrett2 is offline  
Old 07-26-16, 12:11 PM
  #245  
Wilfred Laurier
Señor Member
 
Wilfred Laurier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 5,066
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 649 Post(s)
Liked 292 Times in 215 Posts
Originally Posted by Jarrett2
There's no problem with the material. These manufacturers have repeatedly said that they use carbon fiber to build a road race bike that safely lasts for one or two race seasons for lightweight racers. That was the goal and they achieved it with the material. The issue comes when that purpose built bike is used in a manner it wasn't designed for.
You are taking a misinterpretation of the OP - that 'our team uses it for two years' = 'only good for two years of use', then attributing it to a manual from another manufacturer that also doesn't say what you are claiming it does. Where in your Specialized quote does it say 'only lightweight riders' or 'only good for two years'? You are letting cylintom's expert trolling drag you to a ridiculous conclusion.
Wilfred Laurier is offline  
Old 07-26-16, 12:15 PM
  #246  
Jarrett2
Senior Member
 
Jarrett2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: DFW
Posts: 4,126

Bikes: Steel 1x's

Mentioned: 20 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 632 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Originally Posted by Wilfred Laurier
Where in your Specialized quote does it say 'only lightweight riders' or 'only good for two years'? You are letting cylintom's expert trolling drag you to a ridiculous conclusion.
The weight limits are a little deeper in the same document. It is open to interpretation what "relatively short life product life" means. The fact that they have even mentioned it speaks volumes, imo. I don't want to bet my safety on their intentional legalese ambiguity, personally. If you do, that's up to you.
Jarrett2 is offline  
Old 07-26-16, 12:19 PM
  #247  
PepeM
Senior Member
 
PepeM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 6,861
Mentioned: 180 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2739 Post(s)
Liked 119 Times in 59 Posts
Originally Posted by Jarrett2
It certainly does pertain to carbon bikes now as they are the only ones that fall under that category in the referenced appendix. I'll have to take your world that steel was incorporated in there in years past.
That's not true. Their 'High-Performance Road' category includes the Allez, Langster, and Dolce, all aluminum bikes.

Are you also afraid of aluminum bikes?

Btw, that category also does NOT include the Diverge, which comes in carbon.
PepeM is offline  
Old 07-26-16, 12:20 PM
  #248  
Wilfred Laurier
Señor Member
 
Wilfred Laurier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 5,066
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 649 Post(s)
Liked 292 Times in 215 Posts
Originally Posted by Jarrett2
It certainly does pertain to carbon bikes now as they are the only ones that fall under that category in the referenced appendix. I'll have to take your world that steel was incorporated in there in years past.
Nope. Multiple aluminum and carbon bikes listed as 'category 1'. They also have carbon bikes listed under all the other categories.
Wilfred Laurier is offline  
Old 07-26-16, 12:21 PM
  #249  
Jarrett2
Senior Member
 
Jarrett2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: DFW
Posts: 4,126

Bikes: Steel 1x's

Mentioned: 20 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 632 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Originally Posted by PepeM
That's not true. Their 'High-Performance Road' category includes the Allez, Langster, and Dolce, all aluminum bikes.
My mistake. I'd avoid them as well in that case. I don't want a bike with a relatively short product life, personally.
Jarrett2 is offline  
Old 07-26-16, 12:22 PM
  #250  
Wilfred Laurier
Señor Member
 
Wilfred Laurier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 5,066
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 649 Post(s)
Liked 292 Times in 215 Posts
Originally Posted by Jarrett2
The weight limits are a little deeper in the same document. It is open to interpretation what "relatively short life product life" means. The fact that they have even mentioned it speaks volumes, imo. I don't want to bet my safety on their intentional legalese ambiguity, personally. If you do, that's up to you.
They don't talk about it in reference to solely carbon bikes. Lightweight parts and frames have a limited lifespan, regardless of the material they are made from.
Wilfred Laurier is offline  


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.