A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » rec.bicycles » Techniques
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Canada's most dangerous city for cyclists



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #771  
Old June 3rd 13, 02:37 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
John B.[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,697
Default Canada's most dangerous city for cyclists

On Mon, 03 Jun 2013 09:01:09 -0400, Duane
wrote:

On 5/31/2013 7:49 PM, John B. wrote:
On Fri, 31 May 2013 09:48:01 -0400,
wrote:

On 5/31/2013 9:28 AM, John B. wrote:
On Fri, 31 May 2013 08:30:35 -0400,
wrote:

On 5/31/2013 6:51 AM, John B. wrote:
On Fri, 31 May 2013 06:41:06 -0400, Duane
wrote:

On 5/30/2013 5:15 PM, sms wrote:
On 5/30/2013 1:53 PM, Jay Beattie wrote:

That's not true at all. Name brand producers police production, do
QC, have ISO compliant factories, have sophisticated domestic
designers.

The bottom line is that the direct buyers of these frames are not
reporting any more failures than the buyers of name brand frames. Well
part of it may be Frank's theory of risk compensation and the buyers
of the frames direct from China are treating them better.

I'm not seeing well made CF frames breaking in great number. Maybe
the bleeding edge stuff is disposable, but even if that is true,
that's why you get the lifetime warranty.

As I said, that's the value advantage of buying a Trek or Specialized
from an authorized dealer, it's the warranty.


I don't agree with that. The warrant may make you more comfortable with
the idea of buying a bike with a frame that isn't lugged steel but the
dealers provide a lot of value added dimensions to the bike. Jay gave
you several examples. My Tarmac frame is a result of a lot of
engineering, testing and design. That doesn't come for free. And the
bike is more than the frame.

At any rate, not everyone is going to buy their frame and put together a
bike from scratch. If they do, they won't have a Tarmac. They'll have
a CF frame bike that they built themselves. Plusses and minuses there.


I've always been a bit ambiguous about "life time warranty". Is it
because they've built something that never breaks or is it that it
breaks so often that they need to offer the warranty to get people to
take them :-?

I think that the warranty is meant to deal with people's perception that
the frames are not as durable as a bike made of metal.

could be although I don't remember carbon golf club shafts being
touted as having a lifetime guarantee. Or all the fiberglass yachts
:-)

But I think that you are right. Perception is everything.

I don't know about it being everything but when I bought my bike I asked
about the durability. You hear a lot of people saying that CF frames
are fragile. On the other hand, the only frame that I ever broke was
aluminum and that was the fork that cracked.


There is no reason that carbon fiber composites have to be fragile,
in fact fiberglass boats, made with a much weaker reinforcing material
are far from fragile. But, working with a material that is really only
strong in tension, and attempting to build something that is extremely
light, when lack of weight is the mark of success, does tend to result
in something that is less strong then it is possible to make.

As for perception... Do you ask about the durability when you buy a
steel or aluminum frame? Probably not as they aren't perceived to be
fragile.



No. That was my point. Also, I work in the heat treating industry so I
understand a bit about steel. I didn't know anything about CF. Still
don't know much about it except that it's light and seems to ride well.


It's bunches of little bitty black threads all stick together with
glue :-)
--
Cheers,

John B.
Ads
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Chichester: dangerous cyclists again Mr Benn[_5_] UK 17 May 18th 12 07:17 AM
Toronto is Canada's most hazardous city for both cyclists and pedestrians Sir Ridesalot Techniques 11 May 30th 11 04:33 PM
Dangerous bike lane obstructions in Redwood City Mike Jacoubowsky General 201 February 9th 08 06:36 PM
Dangerous bike lane obstructions in Redwood City Tom Sherman[_2_] Social Issues 188 February 9th 08 06:36 PM
WA is a dangerous place for cyclists bjay Australia 15 December 7th 04 12:45 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:44 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.