livedarklions

Entropy is not a consumable.

thumpism 

Background. My own experience with the word is from office supplies in the '80s.

livedarklions

I've certainly heard it used in a lot of contexts throughout my adult life, including to refer to car items like oil and tires, but I think I only heard it applied to bike chains and the like in the last few years.

cxwrench

And yet some people in this thread post advice like they know much, much more than they do. Funny how that happens.

livedarklions

Are you saying lots of people call rims consumables? Guess I'll have to ask around.

wolfchild

Cracks around spoke holes and spokes pulling through isn`t an issue with modern quality rims which were build and tensioned properly...What really wears out aluminum rims are bikes with rim brakes which are ridden a lot during winter when there is a lot of slush, salt and grit on the roads.

terrymorse 

Aluminum rims will fail if ridden long enough, even if the build quality is excellent.

The failure mode is fatigue cracking.

In fact, anything made of aluminum will eventually fail, if it is stress cycled enough times.

Fredo76

The rim failures I read about with regard to being 'consumable' were due to wear on the braking surfaces over time. The reason I said I'd believe it is because my brother said he could see light through a friend's rims once due to such wear. I don't count spokes pulling out as 'wear', but I suppose that is semantics. Handlebar failures caused by sweat is a new one for me, too.

cyccommute 

Usually rim failures from braking are going to show up as cupped sidewall. The metal thins and the pressure of the tire tends to bend the walls out. They can eventually crack and break if used too long.

Banzai

My comment is of tremendous use. Conditions matter as to the "consumability" of a chain.

My winter bike sees very few miles, but the chain is destroyed by road salt every year. My nice road bike sees many fair-weather miles, and chains last a very long time.

The irritating pedantry of this forum at times is why I visit so infrequently anymore.

rsbob 

I have a set of 1980s Mavic rims with untold thousands of miles on them and they are severely cupped. Don’t use them any more as they are on a bike I seldom ride, but have often wondered what would happen when they got too thin. Fortunately never had to find out. Consumable? Definitely.

cxwrench

You might want to rethink this one. I've rebuilt 2 wheels this week from cracks at the spoke holes. It most definitely still happens.

Kapusta

Sure, just about anything MIGHT need to be replaced during the typical life of a bike,

But consumable almost certainly WILL need to be replaced.

Banzai

it is rare if the wheel was built properly.

On the other hand, before disc brakes became ubiquitous, I saw bikes that saw lots of winter use have the brake surface ground to aluminum paste by the rim brakes grinding them with a wet slurry or salt and sand.

rsbob 

I know it’s technically not on the bike, but cycling gloves and shorts are consumables as well.

cxwrench

It's not that rare. I don't know if you work in a shop or not but I see cracked rims all the time. It's also not always whether or not the wheel was built 'properly'. There are lots of crap rims out there. One of the wheels from this week is on it's 3rd rim, second rebuild.

The Chemist

That's my bike. Only original parts on it from when I bought it new are the frame, spacers on the steerer tube, the stem, and the seatpost. Everything else has been replaced, sometimes more than once (on my third handlebar and fourth set of wheels, for instance).

rsbob 

Considering the markup on individual parts, I wonder what is most expensive in the long term; buying a complete bike or doing it your way. (I know not everyone can afford a new bike when the old one gets tired)

Ironfish653

Depends on where you're starting from, as well as how long a time the component replacements are spread over.
One of my favorite bikes is my 1997 Cannondale F-1000. It was about an $1100 build back in the day, LX/XT, and a lot of period '90s goodies (Ringle, MachineTech) It's has had a number of different bar and stem setups over the years, a couple -three chains and about half a dozen sets of tires. Right now, the shock is showing signs of needing another rebuild, and the rims are starting to show their age.
​So I'm looking at spending $500-$700 on the old sled, which won't get me much in a new bike; an equivalent to that old CAAD-3 would run me somewhere in the neighborhood of $1800, which is a much harder pitch to my finance officer.

Now, I don't see, like the post you responded to, the wisdom of taking, say, a 10-year-old Sora bike and doing a full R7000 upgrade and new wheels and all the bits and bobs, when you still end up with a mid-level alloy GIANT.

Banzai

I don’t work in a shop. I am a very good wheel builder: I only ride my own wheels, my friends mostly ride my wheels too. I select rims and spoke counts appropriate for use and weight, and I take care with tension.

I’m not saying it doesn’t happen. I’ve definitely seen it when friends come to me with their OEM wheels and ask me to fix it…then end up with one of my own builds.

A few years back I was having a heck of a time with the Pacenti rims. Had to be exceedingly careful in the build, or they would definitely develop cracks.

Doug64

This might look like a 2013 Bianchi Volpe, but it is what is left of my 2006 Volpe pictured below. Every part on the 2006 except the bars, shifters and stem have been replaced, including the frame under warranty. Some components have been replaced multiple times: chains, chainrings, bottom brackets, cassettes, cables, jockey wheels, wheel bearings, saddles, pedals, and water bottle cages.

I've put a lot of miles on Volpes




This was the reason for replacing the headset.

livedarklions

So I take it you don't subscribe to the theory that once the frame is replaced, it's no longer the same bike. I'd be thinking of that as having taken some of the 2006 bike's parts and putting them on a new bike.

I could probably come up with some legal scenario where it would be important whether it was defined as an upgraded old bike vs. a new bike incorporating some old parts, but I think both answers are equally logical.

I like your bike, btw.

pdlamb

I figure a bike whose frame is replaced under warranty by the "same" model (yeah, I know it's likely changed in a few years) is the same bike. It's only if I acquire another frame and move the parts over that it becomes a different bike.

That said, that's a reasonable case that you're arguing.

livedarklions

It's probably a perspective thing--you may be the only person to whom that particular bike would seem to be the same one because you've used it the same way throughout its entire transition. Someone else would probably think that it's a 2013 bike, not the 2006 bike because they weren't there.

BTW, I'm going to guess that if, hypothetically, you had tried to sell it in 2014, you wouldn't have been telling people it was a 2006 bike, and I think that would be entirely honest and fair to call it a 2013 bike with some 2006 parts on it. I also think it's completely reasonable that for your own purposes, it's really the 2006 bike. I love questions with 2 completely different, plausible answers that are contradictory.

Doug64

I think of it as a new bike, but I liked the old one better. The frame welds were finished much better on the 2006. I have 2 other touring bikes, a Surly LHT and a Cannondale T2, but the Bianchi is still my favorite bike. However, part of the reason for that might have something to do with sentimental value.