Dented Seat Stay (Aluminum)
09-07-23, 01:39 PM
#26
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 7,887
Mentioned: 38 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6972 Post(s)
Liked 10,970 Times
in
4,692 Posts
A jerk from out of town joined our group ride. I am assuming he decided to go for a KOM during the ride. I was number 3 in the pace line. Number 1 peeled off, Number 2 had to slightly go around him, I followed number 2. This guy decided to go between the number 1 guy who was rotating to the back and the number 4 guy. He hits number 1 tire, doesn’t go down but loses control and catapults into number 4 and they both get thrown into me all at 28-30 mph.
At a minimum, this person should be informed that he is no longer welcome at your group ride.
Likes For Koyote:
09-07-23, 01:40 PM
#27
Habitual User
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: Altadena, CA
Posts: 7,997
Bikes: 2023 Niner RLT 9 RDO, 2018 Trek Procaliber 9.9 RSL, 2018 Storck Fascenario.3 Platinum, 2003 Time VX Special Pro, 2001 Colnago VIP, 1999 Trek 9900 singlespeed, 1977 Nishiki ONP
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4957 Post(s)
Liked 8,099 Times
in
3,833 Posts
Can you repost the link? I didn't take me to the paper which I'd love to check out.
I'll reserve final judgment until I see the paper but the stress analysis may not be relevant here. OP's problem isn't material stress, it's member capacity. And those two things can be quite different. Members that experience mostly tension or flexure will tend to achieve stresses close to their yield stress. Same goes for joints. A slender compression member like a seat stay, however, is likely to buckle long before it reaches it's yield stress.
However much of a rider's weight is assumed to rest on the rear wheel, the seat stays will wind up resisting a compression load larger than that. It's just truss math. And dynamic factors will only increase that load.
I'll reserve final judgment until I see the paper but the stress analysis may not be relevant here. OP's problem isn't material stress, it's member capacity. And those two things can be quite different. Members that experience mostly tension or flexure will tend to achieve stresses close to their yield stress. Same goes for joints. A slender compression member like a seat stay, however, is likely to buckle long before it reaches it's yield stress.
However much of a rider's weight is assumed to rest on the rear wheel, the seat stays will wind up resisting a compression load larger than that. It's just truss math. And dynamic factors will only increase that load.
__________________
"Swedish fish. They're protein shaped." - livedarklions
"Swedish fish. They're protein shaped." - livedarklions
Likes For Eric F:
09-07-23, 01:57 PM
#28
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2019
Location: 757
Posts: 11,255
Bikes: Madone, Emonda, 5500, Ritchey Breakaway
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10238 Post(s)
Liked 5,185 Times
in
2,226 Posts
09-07-23, 02:21 PM
#29
Senior Member
1) The portion of the rider's weight coming up from the wheel / dropout as a vertical load will tend to travel back to the rider through whatever frame member it finds at the joint that is stiffest vertically.
2) Since the seat stay is very stiff vertically at the dropout (axial resistance), and the chain stay is very flexible at the dropout (bending resistance), the overwhelming majority of he load comes up through the seat stays.
3) #1 & #2 are completely determined by what's going at the joint and will not be affected by the presence of the seat tube other than the fact that, if the seat tube were missing, it wouldn't be a truss at all and the whole thing would fall apart.
I think that most people intuitively feel that the seat post supports a significant portion of their weight in compression. Under simplified, static loading, it should only support about the same 30% of the rider's weight that comes up from the front wheel as shown in the the force diagram below. This assumes a vintage, flat top tube which simplifies some things.
Seat tubes don't work very hard as columns. I think that they are the relatively large diameter that they are for the following reasons:
1) Gotta fit a seat post in there.
2) The seat post imposes some bending on the seat tube.
3) The the bottom bracket imposes some bending on the seat tube as a result of the pedal crank forces that it contends with.
Last edited by Harold74; 09-07-23 at 02:27 PM.
09-07-23, 02:35 PM
#30
Habitual User
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: Altadena, CA
Posts: 7,997
Bikes: 2023 Niner RLT 9 RDO, 2018 Trek Procaliber 9.9 RSL, 2018 Storck Fascenario.3 Platinum, 2003 Time VX Special Pro, 2001 Colnago VIP, 1999 Trek 9900 singlespeed, 1977 Nishiki ONP
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4957 Post(s)
Liked 8,099 Times
in
3,833 Posts
I've learned much from contractors over the years. When they're dumb, they rarely survive. Too much risk that needs to be managed.
I believe that the seat tube is irrelevant to these calculations. I'll try for a half assed explanation:
1) The portion of the rider's weight coming up from the wheel / dropout as a vertical load will tend to travel back to the rider through whatever frame member it finds at the joint that is stiffest vertically.
2) Since the seat stay is very stiff vertically at the dropout (axial resistance), and the chain stay is very flexible at the dropout (bending resistance), the overwhelming majority of he load comes up through the seat stays.
3) #1 & #2 are completely determined by what's going at the joint and will not be affected by the presence of the seat tube other than the fact that, if the seat tube were missing, it wouldn't be a truss at all and the whole thing would fall apart.
I think that most people intuitively feel that the seat post supports a significant portion of their weight in compression. Under simplified, static loading, it should only support about the same 30% of the rider's weight that comes up from the front wheel as shown in the the force diagram below. This assumes a vintage, flat top tube which simplifies some things.
Seat tubes don't work very hard as columns. I think that they are the relatively large diameter that they are for the following reasons:
1) Gotta fit a seat post in there.
2) The seat post imposes some bending on the seat tube.
3) The the bottom bracket imposes some bending on the seat tube as a result of the pedal crank forces that it contends with.
I believe that the seat tube is irrelevant to these calculations. I'll try for a half assed explanation:
1) The portion of the rider's weight coming up from the wheel / dropout as a vertical load will tend to travel back to the rider through whatever frame member it finds at the joint that is stiffest vertically.
2) Since the seat stay is very stiff vertically at the dropout (axial resistance), and the chain stay is very flexible at the dropout (bending resistance), the overwhelming majority of he load comes up through the seat stays.
3) #1 & #2 are completely determined by what's going at the joint and will not be affected by the presence of the seat tube other than the fact that, if the seat tube were missing, it wouldn't be a truss at all and the whole thing would fall apart.
I think that most people intuitively feel that the seat post supports a significant portion of their weight in compression. Under simplified, static loading, it should only support about the same 30% of the rider's weight that comes up from the front wheel as shown in the the force diagram below. This assumes a vintage, flat top tube which simplifies some things.
Seat tubes don't work very hard as columns. I think that they are the relatively large diameter that they are for the following reasons:
1) Gotta fit a seat post in there.
2) The seat post imposes some bending on the seat tube.
3) The the bottom bracket imposes some bending on the seat tube as a result of the pedal crank forces that it contends with.
__________________
"Swedish fish. They're protein shaped." - livedarklions
"Swedish fish. They're protein shaped." - livedarklions
09-07-23, 03:03 PM
#31
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2019
Location: 757
Posts: 11,255
Bikes: Madone, Emonda, 5500, Ritchey Breakaway
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10238 Post(s)
Liked 5,185 Times
in
2,226 Posts
I’ll ride it if I have too. I am extremely stubborn and have zero patience. The fact that’s brand new and now looks like garbage, I really hope a new frame is possible.
09-07-23, 03:10 PM
#32
Senior Member
I'm doing a lot of research these days trying to figure out what the dominant stresses in frame members are and how that impacts their sizing. There's ridiculously little published information available on this stuff. I picked up the 1896 book shown below. Believe it or not, it appears to be one of the better references available this time.
This is utterly tentative but, when I'm in the shower thinking about this, this is what I come up with for what concern dominates the size of each frame member:
1) Seat stay. Not doing much other than supporting rider weight. Spindly.
2) Seat tube. Not doing much. Mostly bending imposed by seat post.
3) Chain stay. Transmitting lateral crank forces back to the rear wheel in lateral bending. This explains why chain stays are stockier than seat stays.
4) Downtube. Transmitting lateral crank forces back to the front wheel and rider hands in lateral bending. This explains why downtube are stockier than top tubes. They have a big impact on cranking lateral stiffness.
5) Top tube. Not doing much other completing the truss as a minor compression member. Also participates in frame torsional resistance along with pretty much every other member of the frame really.
6) Head tube. Not working too hard. Mostly just a joint to complete the truss and a place to put a headset.
Work in progress...
Likes For Harold74:
09-07-23, 03:17 PM
#33
Habitual User
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: Altadena, CA
Posts: 7,997
Bikes: 2023 Niner RLT 9 RDO, 2018 Trek Procaliber 9.9 RSL, 2018 Storck Fascenario.3 Platinum, 2003 Time VX Special Pro, 2001 Colnago VIP, 1999 Trek 9900 singlespeed, 1977 Nishiki ONP
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4957 Post(s)
Liked 8,099 Times
in
3,833 Posts
You're welcome. What I've shown thus far is grossly simplified in that it only considers static rider weight. As you can imagine, there's a ton of other stuff going on during riding.
I'm doing a lot of research these days trying to figure out what the dominant stresses in frame members are and how that impacts their sizing. There's ridiculously little published information available on this stuff. I picked up the 1896 book shown below. Believe it or not, it appears to be one of the better references available this time.
This is utterly tentative but, when I'm in the shower thinking about this, this is what I come up with for what concern dominates the size of each frame member:
1) Seat stay. Not doing much other than supporting rider weight. Spindly.
2) Seat tube. Not doing much. Mostly bending imposed by seat post.
3) Chain stay. Transmitting lateral crank forces back to the rear wheel in lateral bending. This explains why chain stays are stockier than seat stays.
4) Downtube. Transmitting lateral crank forces back to the front wheel and rider hands in lateral bending. This explains why downtube are stockier than top tubes. They have a big impact on cranking lateral stiffness.
5) Top tube. Not doing much other completing the truss as a minor compression member. Also participates in frame torsional resistance along with pretty much every other member of the frame really.
6) Head tube. Not working too hard. Mostly just a joint to complete the truss and a place to put a headset.
Work in progress...
I'm doing a lot of research these days trying to figure out what the dominant stresses in frame members are and how that impacts their sizing. There's ridiculously little published information available on this stuff. I picked up the 1896 book shown below. Believe it or not, it appears to be one of the better references available this time.
This is utterly tentative but, when I'm in the shower thinking about this, this is what I come up with for what concern dominates the size of each frame member:
1) Seat stay. Not doing much other than supporting rider weight. Spindly.
2) Seat tube. Not doing much. Mostly bending imposed by seat post.
3) Chain stay. Transmitting lateral crank forces back to the rear wheel in lateral bending. This explains why chain stays are stockier than seat stays.
4) Downtube. Transmitting lateral crank forces back to the front wheel and rider hands in lateral bending. This explains why downtube are stockier than top tubes. They have a big impact on cranking lateral stiffness.
5) Top tube. Not doing much other completing the truss as a minor compression member. Also participates in frame torsional resistance along with pretty much every other member of the frame really.
6) Head tube. Not working too hard. Mostly just a joint to complete the truss and a place to put a headset.
Work in progress...
__________________
"Swedish fish. They're protein shaped." - livedarklions
"Swedish fish. They're protein shaped." - livedarklions
09-07-23, 04:10 PM
#34
Senior Member
Firstly, the impact of rider weight on the system. Rider mass acts like a mass tuned damper in a skyscraper in that, for temporary, dynamic loads, it acts like a point of lateral restraint.
With that in mind, I currently envision the sketch below to be how things play out for lateral stiffness under hard pedaling. Were that model to be accurate, it would put the downtube and chain stays into significant, lateral bending but only tax the seat tube in compression or tension (I can't actually tell which).
The model shown below assumes that the rider is seated. When the rider stands, You'd mostly lose the lateral restraint at the saddle.
09-07-23, 04:19 PM
#35
Senior Member
I picked up the bike shown below a couple of months ago. 2002 Lemond Zurich.
An interesting feature of the bike is that both the downtube and seat tube ovalize over the last 6" or so as they come into the bottom bracket. I've considered two possible explanations for that:
1) The folks at Trek who designed the bike felt that the lower part of the seat tube contributed to lateral stiffness and/or;
2) This was just geometrically necessary in order to bring oversized tubing into the bottom bracket cleanly for welding.
An interesting feature of the bike is that both the downtube and seat tube ovalize over the last 6" or so as they come into the bottom bracket. I've considered two possible explanations for that:
1) The folks at Trek who designed the bike felt that the lower part of the seat tube contributed to lateral stiffness and/or;
2) This was just geometrically necessary in order to bring oversized tubing into the bottom bracket cleanly for welding.
09-07-23, 04:22 PM
#36
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2022
Location: Missoula MT
Posts: 1,767
Bikes: Handsome xoxo, Serotta atx, Canyon Endurace CF8
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 904 Post(s)
Liked 1,899 Times
in
849 Posts
hell sounds like he willfully or at least negligently caused the crash. make his home owner's insurance pay. similar thing happened to someone I know and the other person's home owners paid him.
09-07-23, 04:26 PM
#37
Habitual User
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: Altadena, CA
Posts: 7,997
Bikes: 2023 Niner RLT 9 RDO, 2018 Trek Procaliber 9.9 RSL, 2018 Storck Fascenario.3 Platinum, 2003 Time VX Special Pro, 2001 Colnago VIP, 1999 Trek 9900 singlespeed, 1977 Nishiki ONP
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4957 Post(s)
Liked 8,099 Times
in
3,833 Posts
That, right there, is the part hat I struggle with the most. I vacillate between sharing your opinion and not. Presently, I feel that the seat tube may not be a big part of lateral stiffness.
Firstly, the impact of rider weight on the system. Rider mass acts like a mass tuned damper in a skyscraper in that, for temporary, dynamic loads, it acts like a point of lateral restraint.
With that in mind, I currently envision the sketch below to be how things play out for lateral stiffness under hard pedaling. Were that model to be accurate, it would put the downtube and chain stays into significant, lateral bending but only tax the seat tube in compression or tension (I can't actually tell which).
The model shown below assumes that the rider is seated. When the rider stands, You'd mostly lose the lateral restraint at the saddle.
Firstly, the impact of rider weight on the system. Rider mass acts like a mass tuned damper in a skyscraper in that, for temporary, dynamic loads, it acts like a point of lateral restraint.
With that in mind, I currently envision the sketch below to be how things play out for lateral stiffness under hard pedaling. Were that model to be accurate, it would put the downtube and chain stays into significant, lateral bending but only tax the seat tube in compression or tension (I can't actually tell which).
The model shown below assumes that the rider is seated. When the rider stands, You'd mostly lose the lateral restraint at the saddle.
__________________
"Swedish fish. They're protein shaped." - livedarklions
"Swedish fish. They're protein shaped." - livedarklions
Last edited by Eric F; 09-07-23 at 04:44 PM.
09-07-23, 04:42 PM
#38
Senior Member
Likes For Harold74:
09-07-23, 04:56 PM
#39
Senior Member
a) Tough to prove without video and;
b) It's probably not cool for cyclists to sue other cyclists.
Still, you've been wronged here and it's probably cost you 1/3 the resale value of your bike.
Are you okay with the digressions here regarding frame stresses?
09-07-23, 05:40 PM
#40
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2019
Location: 757
Posts: 11,255
Bikes: Madone, Emonda, 5500, Ritchey Breakaway
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10238 Post(s)
Liked 5,185 Times
in
2,226 Posts
I can't imagine how annoying that must feel. In your shoes, I'd probably want to sue but wouldn't because:
a) Tough to prove without video and;
b) It's probably not cool for cyclists to sue other cyclists.
Still, you've been wronged here and it's probably cost you 1/3 the resale value of your bike.
Are you okay with the digressions here regarding frame stresses?
a) Tough to prove without video and;
b) It's probably not cool for cyclists to sue other cyclists.
Still, you've been wronged here and it's probably cost you 1/3 the resale value of your bike.
Are you okay with the digressions here regarding frame stresses?
Oh yea I don’t mind. up til now it’s been 50/50. 50 percent saying the bike is going to assplode, and 50 percent saying it’s Aye okay.
Ohhh how I wish I could sue. I have about 20 witnesses, I am sure I could get someone to testify. Unfortunately my varia camera was on low battery so I turned the camera off before the ride. Cost of suing to get a 1200.00 dollar frame? If this happened in Dallas I might be able to wing it.
Wife said IF the bike is determined unsafe, And IF my LBS can’t do anything for me, then she would allow me to buy a new one. As I said in another thread. I don’t want to have to pay for something again that I sold 2 bikes to purchase in the first place. I have a feeling the bike shop is going to deem it safe for now. Then it will be do I spend the money now or later.
09-07-23, 05:43 PM
#41
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2019
Location: 757
Posts: 11,255
Bikes: Madone, Emonda, 5500, Ritchey Breakaway
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10238 Post(s)
Liked 5,185 Times
in
2,226 Posts
All I have is his name from a lame apology on my strava. He is not in my state anymore nor does he live here. I am not sure how or what my home owners would do on this situation.
09-07-23, 06:23 PM
#42
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: UK
Posts: 1,404
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 682 Post(s)
Liked 453 Times
in
338 Posts
09-07-23, 06:36 PM
#43
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Eastern VA
Posts: 1,726
Bikes: 2022 Fuel EX 8, 2021 Domane SL6, Black Beta (Nashbar frame), 2004 Trek 1000C for the trainer
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 271 Post(s)
Liked 447 Times
in
266 Posts
A jerk from out of town joined our group ride. I am assuming he decided to go for a KOM during the ride. I was number 3 in the pace line. Number 1 peeled off, Number 2 had to slightly go around him, I followed number 2. This guy decided to go between the number 1 guy who was rotating to the back and the number 4 guy. He hits number 1 tire, doesn’t go down but loses control and catapults into number 4 and they both get thrown into me all at 28-30 mph.
So aware of my surroundings? Not really much I could do to avoid this. Completely unnecessary.
Took this right before the crash.
Along with the dent. It bent a chain ring, bent the hanger, broke the barrel adjuster off the RD. bent the rear wheel, slight wobble in the front wheel, and cracked my helmet.
Havnt looked to see if my home insurance policy would cover it, but that would just cause my rates to go up.
So aware of my surroundings? Not really much I could do to avoid this. Completely unnecessary.
Took this right before the crash.
Along with the dent. It bent a chain ring, bent the hanger, broke the barrel adjuster off the RD. bent the rear wheel, slight wobble in the front wheel, and cracked my helmet.
Havnt looked to see if my home insurance policy would cover it, but that would just cause my rates to go up.
Wait that came with Ultegra?
09-07-23, 06:47 PM
#44
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2019
Location: 757
Posts: 11,255
Bikes: Madone, Emonda, 5500, Ritchey Breakaway
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10238 Post(s)
Liked 5,185 Times
in
2,226 Posts
it was a build. I sold 2 bikes bought the parts bought the wheels and built it, because I wanted that frame. If I wanted a carbon frame I would have bought a carbon frame. If I wanted a project one I would have bought a project one. Spent the last of the money on the wheels, so no I don’t have money to replace it. Treks crash warranty is only 20 percent off.
09-07-23, 06:57 PM
#45
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2020
Location: Wake Forest, NC
Posts: 5,795
Bikes: 1989 Cinelli Supercorsa
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3514 Post(s)
Liked 2,927 Times
in
1,776 Posts
I feel sorry for the OP, but a lawsuit ain’t gonna happen. Would cost far too much. Good luck finding enough hard evidence to prove any kind of negligence. You have lots of witnesses? Great. What will all those depositions cost? Don’t forget to factor in witness prep costs.
How much will the frame building expert charge that he’ll need to prove his damages? He’s gonna have to prepare a report and be deposed too.
And if by some miracle it doesn’t get thrown out, and two years later he wins in court, good luck collecting.
How much will the frame building expert charge that he’ll need to prove his damages? He’s gonna have to prepare a report and be deposed too.
And if by some miracle it doesn’t get thrown out, and two years later he wins in court, good luck collecting.
Last edited by smd4; 09-07-23 at 07:07 PM.
09-07-23, 08:44 PM
#46
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 7,887
Mentioned: 38 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6972 Post(s)
Liked 10,970 Times
in
4,692 Posts
I feel sorry for the OP, but a lawsuit ain’t gonna happen. Would cost far too much. Good luck finding enough hard evidence to prove any kind of negligence. You have lots of witnesses? Great. What will all those depositions cost? Don’t forget to factor in witness prep costs.
How much will the frame building expert charge that he’ll need to prove his damages? He’s gonna have to prepare a report and be deposed too.
And if by some miracle it doesn’t get thrown out, and two years later he wins in court, good luck collecting.
How much will the frame building expert charge that he’ll need to prove his damages? He’s gonna have to prepare a report and be deposed too.
And if by some miracle it doesn’t get thrown out, and two years later he wins in court, good luck collecting.
09-08-23, 01:22 AM
#47
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: UK
Posts: 1,404
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 682 Post(s)
Liked 453 Times
in
338 Posts
it was a build. I sold 2 bikes bought the parts bought the wheels and built it, because I wanted that frame. If I wanted a carbon frame I would have bought a carbon frame. If I wanted a project one I would have bought a project one. Spent the last of the money on the wheels, so no I don’t have money to replace it. Treks crash warranty is only 20 percent off.
Looking at your first shots again, and considering how new the bike is, hopefully a few rides will demonstrate that the frame is safe, then I would definitely get that repaired and repainted. It’ll make you feel a lot better. I had a similar sized gouge taken out of a carbon chainstay by my rear mech when I hit a pothole. The repair was expensive (over 500GBP including repainting of metallic paint) but in this case a safety issue so no choice, and it still feels like an “as new” bike, not having the visible damage.
Last edited by choddo; 09-08-23 at 02:28 AM.
09-08-23, 06:12 AM
#48
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2020
Location: Wake Forest, NC
Posts: 5,795
Bikes: 1989 Cinelli Supercorsa
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3514 Post(s)
Liked 2,927 Times
in
1,776 Posts
Perhaps bampilot06 should simply ask the crasher to pay (at least partly) for a new frame. Sometimes people behave reasonably without being sued.
09-08-23, 07:36 AM
#49
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2019
Location: 757
Posts: 11,255
Bikes: Madone, Emonda, 5500, Ritchey Breakaway
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10238 Post(s)
Liked 5,185 Times
in
2,226 Posts
You mean it’s not news to you that you can buy a bike frame? 😉
Looking at your first shots again, and considering how new the bike is, hopefully a few rides will demonstrate that the frame is safe, then I would definitely get that repaired and repainted. It’ll make you feel a lot better. I had a similar sized gouge taken out of a carbon chainstay by my rear mech when I hit a pothole. The repair was expensive (over 500GBP including repainting of metallic paint) but in this case a safety issue so no choice, and it still feels like an “as new” bike, not having the visible damage.
Looking at your first shots again, and considering how new the bike is, hopefully a few rides will demonstrate that the frame is safe, then I would definitely get that repaired and repainted. It’ll make you feel a lot better. I had a similar sized gouge taken out of a carbon chainstay by my rear mech when I hit a pothole. The repair was expensive (over 500GBP including repainting of metallic paint) but in this case a safety issue so no choice, and it still feels like an “as new” bike, not having the visible damage.
Requested touch up paint, not sure how that is going to work out. The frame is grey but the paint is called Dnester black. Trek has about 4 shades of black and 3 shades of grey for touch up paint. Have not gotten a clear answer on if that can be repaired. Filler and paint? Manager comes back today so hopefully I can get some answers.
09-08-23, 10:38 AM
#50
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: UK
Posts: 1,404
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 682 Post(s)
Liked 453 Times
in
338 Posts
Requested touch up paint, not sure how that is going to work out. The frame is grey but the paint is called Dnester black. Trek has about 4 shades of black and 3 shades of grey for touch up paint. Have not gotten a clear answer on if that can be repaired. Filler and paint? Manager comes back today so hopefully I can get some answers.