Expected Lifespan of a frame made out of Aluminium or Carbon Fibre or Steel
05-03-21, 01:29 PM
#51
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: St Peters, Missouri
Posts: 30,225
Bikes: Catrike 559 I own some others but they don't get ridden very much.
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1572 Post(s)
Liked 643 Times
in
364 Posts
The more confidentally someone answers this question, the less confidence I'd have in their answer.
__________________
My greatest fear is all of my kids standing around my coffin and talking about "how sensible" dad was.
My greatest fear is all of my kids standing around my coffin and talking about "how sensible" dad was.
Likes For Retro Grouch:
05-04-21, 10:32 AM
#52
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 646
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 185 Post(s)
Liked 36 Times
in
31 Posts
aluminum frame
I recently sold a 7 year old Crosstrail that still looked like it's in new condition. I'm guessing that the frame will have about 3 more years of life, but that's probably about it. Looking at the wear on the rear tire, I'm assuming that I put roughly 2,000 miles on the frame. At one point, there was a paint chip in one of the rear stays that went down to the bare metal, and I'm sure that this was bad enough to where it could form a hairline crack, even if it is totally undetectable. So I just felt that I could no longer trust it for total reliability. And this is why I let it go at a reasonable price. I pointed this out to the buyer, but he still wanted it in spite of the fact that I would never guarantee the bike's longevity. If he gets a year out of it, then I'm sure he'll at least break even on his investment. Still, I would consider this a temporary pandemic purchase if I were him, and would be looking at something new once bikes become readily available again.
We're still putting regular miles on 1986, 1988, and 1989 ST model aluminum Cannondalels, lol. I think they might last forever, lol.
To the OP's original question, I tend to view my own steel frames as lifetime investments. I'm pretty sure my C'Dales will last as long or longer than I do, so, no different than my steel. Our other aluminum frames....less confident. They have much lighter tubing, and in comparison to our vintage C'Dales, hideous welds....and they are good welds by industry standards, just not the pristine grinding/finish that the old C'Dales featured. I check them over regularly, but I don't baby them. One I use regularly on gravel...so far, so good with a couple thousand miles on it.
Our carbon frames....I'm sure they will also last 50,000 miles, I've had and sold in the not too distant past a late 90's trek carbon frame and fork. It was well made, we put quite a few miles on it, and it still looked like new. It likely hadn't had hard use/high miles prior to our purchasing it 2nd hand, since it still had all of the original drive train which showed little wear. I'd had a competing dealership tell me that those old carbon trek's would get "soft" carbon spots, that I should test regularly. I never noticed anything of the sort though.
05-04-21, 10:31 PM
#53
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 219
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 9 Times
in
9 Posts
Interesting...so, you're saying this aluminum frame has 2,000 miles on it, and you don't expect it to last more than another couple years of similar mileage?
We're still putting regular miles on 1986, 1988, and 1989 ST model aluminum Cannondalels, lol. I think they might last forever, lol.
To the OP's original question, I tend to view my own steel frames as lifetime investments. I'm pretty sure my C'Dales will last as long or longer than I do, so, no different than my steel. Our other aluminum frames....less confident. They have much lighter tubing, and in comparison to our vintage C'Dales, hideous welds....and they are good welds by industry standards, just not the pristine grinding/finish that the old C'Dales featured. I check them over regularly, but I don't baby them. One I use regularly on gravel...so far, so good with a couple thousand miles on it.
Our carbon frames....I'm sure they will also last 50,000 miles, I've had and sold in the not too distant past a late 90's trek carbon frame and fork. It was well made, we put quite a few miles on it, and it still looked like new. It likely hadn't had hard use/high miles prior to our purchasing it 2nd hand, since it still had all of the original drive train which showed little wear. I'd had a competing dealership tell me that those old carbon trek's would get "soft" carbon spots, that I should test regularly. I never noticed anything of the sort though.
We're still putting regular miles on 1986, 1988, and 1989 ST model aluminum Cannondalels, lol. I think they might last forever, lol.
To the OP's original question, I tend to view my own steel frames as lifetime investments. I'm pretty sure my C'Dales will last as long or longer than I do, so, no different than my steel. Our other aluminum frames....less confident. They have much lighter tubing, and in comparison to our vintage C'Dales, hideous welds....and they are good welds by industry standards, just not the pristine grinding/finish that the old C'Dales featured. I check them over regularly, but I don't baby them. One I use regularly on gravel...so far, so good with a couple thousand miles on it.
Our carbon frames....I'm sure they will also last 50,000 miles, I've had and sold in the not too distant past a late 90's trek carbon frame and fork. It was well made, we put quite a few miles on it, and it still looked like new. It likely hadn't had hard use/high miles prior to our purchasing it 2nd hand, since it still had all of the original drive train which showed little wear. I'd had a competing dealership tell me that those old carbon trek's would get "soft" carbon spots, that I should test regularly. I never noticed anything of the sort though.
Mrrabbit mentioned about titanium frames. The Lightspeed brand comes to mind, and they were available in the late 1990's for $2,700.00 fully equipped. Not cheap by any means, but they were made with precision and beautiful welds. I would have a Lightspeed today, if I had the funds back then. I am sure there are many Lightspeeds out there, having changed hands several times. And some of them may be passed down through several generations.
05-05-21, 01:27 AM
#54
Dirty Heathen
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: MC-778, 6250 fsw
Posts: 2,182
Bikes: 1997 Cannondale, 1976 Bridgestone, 1998 SoftRide, 1989 Klein, 1989 Black Lightning #0033
Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 889 Post(s)
Liked 906 Times
in
534 Posts
Thats why you don’t see any 50 year old bikes that aren’t made from pure, eternal steel.
(Besides the point that there were very, very few aluminum bikes made at all 50 years ago)
I have, among my regular rides, an aluminum-framed 1976 Bridgestone Super Light, a Headshok equipped 1996 Cannondale F-1000, and a 1997 SoftRide with a carbon beam.
According to the prevailing wisdom of this thread, there is so much destructive potential in my garage, that if there is an incident; you’ll be able to see it from space.
Likes For Ironfish653:
05-05-21, 12:01 PM
#55
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2019
Posts: 1,606
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 581 Post(s)
Liked 921 Times
in
518 Posts
MrCoffee Litespeeds are beautiful but I have seen about half as many broken as I have seen on the road. I suspect many were made to emphasize light weight rather than robustness. Perhaps many people believed the misinformation about 'forever frames' 'fatigue limits' and assumed their bikes could handle more abuse than they should have.
It's not the material but the way the frame is designed and made, and the way it is used, that determines longevity.
It's not the material but the way the frame is designed and made, and the way it is used, that determines longevity.
Likes For ClydeClydeson:
