Re: The Cracked Carbon Thread

Postby dented on Mon 5/Jul/10 8:41am

Paul_Bags wrote:
Spokes wrote:
RussS wrote:Cracked my Trance Advanced too. Bloody warranty is taking ages - almost feel like getting the lawyer to start some shit stirring if it doesn't get sorted soon. Having a beer a few weeks ago and I told him about how Giant doesn't have any medium frames available anywhere in the world and that I am waiting for the 2011 models to be constructed - he was not impressed and reckons under our consumer guaruntee act I should either get a full replacement or a full refund. There is apparently wording to the effect of 'timely resolution'.

Have had a few people talking about how brittle carbon frames are, but that is total bullshit. According to a friend that does F1 and aerospace carbon fibre construction - a properly constructed carbon fibre frame should be as durable as any other material and he reckons most frame failures are due to piss poor design and/or bad fabrication. He has broken a few alloy frames too and putting them through an x-ray machine found several areas that were starting to crack due to poor design features.


So if they dont have any frames and are waiting for some to be made, what do you expect them to do? Build one just for you?

Or give him a full refund like it says in his post HTH :)

:baaa: :lol:
How'dya like them apples?
dented
User avatar
Member for: 12 years 1 month

Re: The Cracked Carbon Thread

Postby musket on Mon 5/Jul/10 8:44am

Robbie wrote:You bought the wrong brands.


Ibis' break too Robbie...
musket
User avatar
Member for: 15 years 1 month

Re: The Cracked Carbon Thread

Postby Mr_Bob on Mon 5/Jul/10 12:11pm

I've never broken a carbon part, but I've cracked a cro-mo steel frame if that counts.
Who would've thought, bicycle frames from all different frame materials break :crazy:
Mr_Bob
User avatar
"Pedal!"
Member for: 12 years 7 months

Re: The Cracked Carbon Thread

Postby Analog on Mon 5/Jul/10 1:13pm

I've often wondered why carbon is used in mountain bikes. Road bikes - sure. It's light, you can design where the strength is etc. It seems to me that the problem with carbon is that it is quite brittle, and once it's structure is compromised, everything quickly goes pear shaped. Carbon is fine on a road bike or in a mast or something where you generally don't expect point impacts, but on a mountain bike, you kind of expect to crash into stuff or have stuff flicked up. The shock loadings on jumps etc must be pretty severe as well. This would seem to make a material that is reliant on structural integrity for its safe operation a pretty risky choice for mountain bike frames.

Sure, you can destroy steel/ally/titanium frames as well (and sometimes spectacularly!), but it seems to me that in general the material is less prone to damage from things that are typically found when you're out mountain biking. Also, when the frame does fail the failure mode is not so brutal.

Do other people think this as well??
Analog
Member for: 9 years 1 month

Re: The Cracked Carbon Thread

Postby wuffy on Mon 5/Jul/10 1:24pm

Analog wrote:Do other people think this as well??


I do.

That's why i'm changing back to an aluminium full sus frame.

I just can't see how a carbon XC frame can take my riding style. Especially with me being near the 100 mark.
wuffy
Member for: 8 years 6 months

Re: The Cracked Carbon Thread

Postby shmoodiver on Mon 5/Jul/10 1:26pm

WHATA FATTIE
shmoodiver
User avatar
"There he goes. One of God's own prototypes. A high-powered mutant of some kind never even considered for mass production. Too weird to live, and too rare to die."
Member for: 10 years 2 months

Re: The Cracked Carbon Thread

Postby danose on Mon 5/Jul/10 1:34pm

Analog wrote:Do other people think this as well??


over simplistic crap

any material (steel, al, ti or carbon) if spec'd with sufficient thickness in the right places, is up to the job. Similalry, any of those three, if under spec'd will fail (hands up the people on here who've creased a super thin 753 steel top tube)

the 'resistance to crash' damage is just part of the above (i.e. just because the loading on a tube could let you go super thin walled, doesn't mean going thin walled there is a good idea - witness dh oriented carbon frames with 'sacrificial' layers)
danose
User avatar
"I've never met a hill I didn't like"
Member for: 13 years 5 months

Re: The Cracked Carbon Thread

Postby thorg on Mon 5/Jul/10 1:39pm

Analog wrote:I've often wondered why carbon is used in mountain bikes. Road bikes - sure. It's light, you can design where the strength is etc. It seems to me that the problem with carbon is that it is quite brittle, and once it's structure is compromised, everything quickly goes pear shaped. Carbon is fine on a road bike or in a mast or something where you generally don't expect point impacts, but on a mountain bike, you kind of expect to crash into stuff or have stuff flicked up. The shock loadings on jumps etc must be pretty severe as well. This would seem to make a material that is reliant on structural integrity for its safe operation a pretty risky choice for mountain bike frames.

Sure, you can destroy steel/ally/titanium frames as well (and sometimes spectacularly!), but it seems to me that in general the material is less prone to damage from things that are typically found when you're out mountain biking. Also, when the frame does fail the failure mode is not so brutal.

Do other people think this as well??
the properties you attribute to carbon more closely fit Alooooooominum than carbon. Like metal, all carbon is not equall. Bad carbon is bad. Bad alloys are bad (btw, steel and Ti are also alloys). When Lahar (and others) have world beating DH bikes surviving for season after season of pro abuse - there must be something in it. keep feeding the ignorance, I know I do.
thorg
User avatar
"what blog?"
Member for: 13 years 6 months

Re: The Cracked Carbon Thread

Postby phunk on Mon 5/Jul/10 1:41pm

Ignorance tastes funny.
phunk
User avatar
Member for: 13 years 8 months

Re: The Cracked Carbon Thread

Postby thorg on Mon 5/Jul/10 1:42pm

phunk wrote:Ignorance tastes funny.
your supposed to feed it, not eat it silly :rolleyes:
thorg
User avatar
"what blog?"
Member for: 13 years 6 months

Re: The Cracked Carbon Thread

Postby wuffy on Mon 5/Jul/10 2:47pm

shmoodiver wrote:WHATA FATTIE


IKR
wuffy
Member for: 8 years 6 months

Re: The Cracked Carbon Thread

Postby Robbie on Mon 5/Jul/10 2:55pm

This is what you need to buy a quality CF frame:

6-carbon-fiber-wallet_big_1.jpg


:)
Robbie
Member for: 13 years 2 months

Re: The Cracked Carbon Thread

Postby Robbie on Mon 5/Jul/10 2:59pm

musket wrote:
Robbie wrote:You bought the wrong brands.


Ibis' break too Robbie...


reading tonnes of internet stuff, only extremely rarely, and even then usually when crushed between the rider and some rocks.

Unlike those "big brands" Ibis' crash damage and waranty policy is excellent..
Robbie
Member for: 13 years 2 months

Re: The Cracked Carbon Thread

Postby shmoodiver on Mon 5/Jul/10 3:07pm

wuffy wrote:
shmoodiver wrote:WHATA FATTIE


IKR


ditto
shmoodiver
User avatar
"There he goes. One of God's own prototypes. A high-powered mutant of some kind never even considered for mass production. Too weird to live, and too rare to die."
Member for: 10 years 2 months

Re: The Cracked Carbon Thread

Postby Simpleone on Mon 5/Jul/10 4:04pm

Analog wrote:I've often wondered why carbon is used in mountain bikes. Road bikes - sure. It's light, you can design where the strength is etc. It seems to me that the problem with carbon is that it is quite brittle, and once it's structure is compromised, everything quickly goes pear shaped. Carbon is fine on a road bike or in a mast or something where you generally don't expect point impacts, but on a mountain bike, you kind of expect to crash into stuff or have stuff flicked up. The shock loadings on jumps etc must be pretty severe as well. This would seem to make a material that is reliant on structural integrity for its safe operation a pretty risky choice for mountain bike frames.

Sure, you can destroy steel/ally/titanium frames as well (and sometimes spectacularly!), but it seems to me that in general the material is less prone to damage from things that are typically found when you're out mountain biking. Also, when the frame does fail the failure mode is not so brutal.

Do other people think this as well??


Like you name suggests you are living in the past or a parallel universe! Like posted there are good and bad frames in all materials out there, I have seen more broken alloy & steel frames than carbon. Not just because there is more of the latter but because metal at some stage will break, through fatigue. Carbon, on a bike frame generally does not fatigue in the same way, alloy is way more brittle than carbon as a stock material, or less ductile.

The amount of impact force you need to break a (good) carbon frame would have left any other material in heap long before. This weekend I rag dolled a new carbon frame it got a scratch which will be fine, hit a few rocks not worried. Modern good frames are all heavily reinforced to handle this. Have a look at Steve Peat crashing in the Lisbon WC race this year, Carbon bike meets stone wall at speed, fine. Have a look at Easton, Storck, Edge Composites, Niner, Santa Cruz sites watch the testing they do.

I would rather ride a quality carbon frame and parts any day with a few scratches than a scored up alloy or steel frame.

When will this "fragile carbon BS" debate finally die? :butbut:
Simpleone
User avatar
"“Size does matter!”"
Member for: 9 years 4 months

Cycling | Mountain Biking | Post Your Bike - Latest Posts

Who is online

52 Users browsing this website: DotBot, Google [Bot], oldandlazy and 48 guests

REMEBER TO CLICK THE LINKS WHEN BUYING FROM VORB SUPPORTERS


  • GT Bicycles
  • Merlin Cycles
  • ProBikeKit
  • Vorb Shop
  • Wiggle
  • Chain Reaction Cycles