Physics lesson

On 13/05/14 15:06, jbeattie wrote:


The deal is that when I do get a CF fork case (or any broken part), I
also get all the warranty/recall/complaint information -- computer
runs showing what complaints were received about what parts, usually
by model or part number. Still no bad-fork epidemic. Every part has
problems -- some real, some imagined. And there can be real problem
parts. I defended a half-dozen bad shock fork cases about 15-20 years
ago, all due to a minor manufacturing error. I would expect that if
CF forks were a similar accidents waiting to happen, I'd see the
accidents. Of course, not saying CF forks are universally without
problems. They're not -- and neither are seat posts or handlebars.
All manufactured products have a mortality rate.


Careful. You might confuse SMS with logic and reason.

--
JS

On 5/13/2014 3:13 PM, James wrote:

snip

Careful. You might confuse SMS with logic and reason.

Hmm, I'm one of the only posters in the thread providing referenced
facts and statistics and you're accusing me of lacking logic and reason.
That's precious Frank. I mean James.

On Tue, 13 May 2014 12:10:50 +0000 (UTC), Duane
wrote:

John B. wrote:
On Tue, 13 May 2014 02:01:32 +0000 (UTC), Duane
wrote:

John B. wrote:
On Mon, 12 May 2014 11:09:54 +0000 (UTC), Duane
wrote:

John B. wrote:
On Sun, 11 May 2014 23:17:02 -0700 (PDT), Dan O
wrote:

On Sunday, May 11, 2014 10:41:17 AM UTC-7, Dan O wrote:
On Friday, May 9, 2014 4:25:38 PM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote:

snip

http://www.channel3000.com/news/bicy...ident/25893480

Hmm... Shaina doesn't say she witnessed the crash - just that it's
out in front of her apartment.


More comments: "we saw it happen. no red light at that intersection,
no cones warning cyclists of the giant crack in the road"

Still not definitive, but "giant crack" sounds more like a fork
breaker than a front wheel grabber.

Is the implication here that a bicyclist requires some sort of notice
about road conditions? After all, a "construction zone" is sort of
under construction and one might expect somewhat less then pristine
road conditions.

--
Cheers,


Sometime the whole city is a construction zone. Two cyclists in recent
weeks hit by flatbread trucks used to transport cranes. Two separate
incidents. One dead and one critical.

We have cracks in roads bad enough to take down cyclists without any
construction zone.

If there are cracks in the road large enough to cause a cyclist to
crash wouldn't it be better to either go another way, or in extreme,
get off and push?
--
Cheers,


Most people don't ride into cracks that they see.

And it only has to be wider than a tire.

I know and we have a lot of drain grates on the roads here. Some with
slots that a tire can't get into; some with wide slots at 90 degrees
to the path and some that are parallel. Sort of exciting approaching
one in traffic wondering which way and how wide the grates will be :-)
--
Cheers,


We have the same but I'm mostly not riding that far to the right. Contrary
to some claims. Lol.

But we get these vertical cracks that I think are caused by frost heaves.
My club has a hand signal specifically for them as they're not uncommon.

Frost Heaves? I don't think that we have them here :-)
--
Cheers,

John B.
(invalid to gmail)

On Tue, 13 May 2014 06:45:58 -0700, sms
wrote:

On 5/13/2014 4:20 AM, John B. wrote:
On Mon, 12 May 2014 18:38:31 -0700, sms
wrote:

On 5/12/2014 5:51 PM, John B. wrote:

snip

Thus the number of cases that the Legal Guy has handled is certainly a
good indication of the number of failures that are occurring.

Your mistake is in assuming that every CF fork failure (or any
material's fork failure) resulted in injuries, and that even if injuries
resulted that those injuries prompted a lawsuit.

I'm sure that Jay would tell you the same thing, that a) not everyone
who has a fork fail gets injured, b) not everyone is injured to the
point where they sue for injuries, c) if they do sue for injuries most
claims are settled without a court case. As in most industries, most
cases are settled quietly with no publicity. It's rarely in anyone's
interest to have a protracted legal battle.

I see, you are saying that fork failures aren't dangerous and people
don't bother to report them or claim for a new frame or fork?

Wow, are you from Fox News? I never said anything like that!

No, you said, " not everyone who has a fork fail gets injured, not
everyone is injured to the point where they sue for injuries"

"not everyone who has a fork fail gets injured" sort of indicates that
fork failure isn't particularly dangerous, and

"people don't bother to report them" rather implies that some folks
don't even bother to report the failures.


You seem much like a butterfly flitting here and there, telling one
story here and a different story there.

While anecdotal evidence is not proof of anything, I do know several
people that have had CF frames replaced under warranty after they've
broken, as well as people for whom warranty replacement of a broken
frame was denied. But I know no one personally whose had a broken CF
fork without a broken frame (both have broken together in a crash, but
none separately).

The difference is probably due to the fact that a CF frame will often
crack even when there is no crash or big impact while riding, while CF
forks seem to require some some sort of event for a hidden defect to
cause a "normal" failure. It is a lot easier to carelessly damage the
frame than the fork.

Are you for real? A carbon fiber frame tube just spontaneously fails
while a carbon fiber fork requires "an event".

Over-torque a bolt, clamp the frame into a repair stand, using the wrong
type of car rack, having the front wheel swing around so the handlebars
hit the frame, etc., and you can easily destroy a frame. CF forks have
become more robust due to all the failures when they first came on the
market, though we still do see quite a few CF fork recalls.

The thing that you, and others, need to understand is that your personal
experience is not proof of anything. You need to look at actual
statistics and evidence, and there are far more recalls for CF forks
than for CF frames.

Actually, anyone's experiences are a valid basis. Your vaunted
"statistics" are simply a lot of personal experiences gathered
together.

But you argued above that "CF frame will often
crack even when there is no crash or big impact while riding" and now
you say that more carbon forks are recalled.

Of course you personally are not going to have any issues because you're
out there every day with a precision ohmmeter measuring the resistance
between various points on your frame and seeing if any of the
measurements are changing over time.

It is apparent that you know as little about carbon fiber bicycles as
you do about cheap Chinese flashlights.

--
Cheers,

John B.
(invalid to gmail)

On Wed, 14 May 2014 08:13:35 +1000, James
wrote:

On 13/05/14 15:06, jbeattie wrote:


The deal is that when I do get a CF fork case (or any broken part), I
also get all the warranty/recall/complaint information -- computer
runs showing what complaints were received about what parts, usually
by model or part number. Still no bad-fork epidemic. Every part has
problems -- some real, some imagined. And there can be real problem
parts. I defended a half-dozen bad shock fork cases about 15-20 years
ago, all due to a minor manufacturing error. I would expect that if
CF forks were a similar accidents waiting to happen, I'd see the
accidents. Of course, not saying CF forks are universally without
problems. They're not -- and neither are seat posts or handlebars.
All manufactured products have a mortality rate.


Careful. You might confuse SMS with logic and reason.


What? What? Are you trying to say that Cheap, Chinese, Flashlights,
aren't the best bicycle head light available?
--
Cheers,

John B.
(invalid to gmail)

On 14/05/14 11:32, John B. wrote:


It is apparent that you know as little about carbon fiber bicycles as
you do about cheap Chinese flashlights.

On the contrary, SMS seems to know a lot about cheap Chinese
flashlights, but little about what makes a good on road bicycle light.

--
JS

On Wed, 14 May 2014 12:05:38 +1000, James
wrote:

On 14/05/14 11:32, John B. wrote:


It is apparent that you know as little about carbon fiber bicycles as
you do about cheap Chinese flashlights.

On the contrary, SMS seems to know a lot about cheap Chinese
flashlights, but little about what makes a good on road bicycle light.

I have a number of Chinese flashlights (I confess to using them for a
front light when riding on city streets in the early morning) and
there really isn't a great deal to learn about them :-)

I also pay considerably less for mine then Swarf sells his for.
--
Cheers,

John B.
(invalid to gmail)

On 5/13/2014 6:32 PM, John B. wrote:

snip

Are you for real? A carbon fiber frame tube just spontaneously fails
while a carbon fiber fork requires "an event".

You need to learn to read for comprehension. But of course you don't
really want to comprehend anything.

You probably actually did read what I wrote. Carbon fiber frames fail
while riding but the root cause of the failure is often the user
damaging the frame in some other way that weakens it. Typical causes are
clamping into a repair stand, clamping into a car rack, having the front
wheel swing around and the handlebars crashing into the frame, or over
torquing a bolt.

The real problem here is that you have people desperately trying to
defend something that they purchased, but really they don't have to try
to justify it. CF is light and hence it's a good material for those
trying to minimize weight. That's a good enough reason.

On Wed, 14 May 2014 07:38:41 -0700, sms
wrote:

On 5/13/2014 6:32 PM, John B. wrote:

snip

Are you for real? A carbon fiber frame tube just spontaneously fails
while a carbon fiber fork requires "an event".

You need to learn to read for comprehension. But of course you don't
really want to comprehend anything.

You probably actually did read what I wrote. Carbon fiber frames fail
while riding but the root cause of the failure is often the user
damaging the frame in some other way that weakens it. Typical causes are
clamping into a repair stand, clamping into a car rack, having the front
wheel swing around and the handlebars crashing into the frame, or over
torquing a bolt.

The real problem here is that you have people desperately trying to
defend something that they purchased, but really they don't have to try
to justify it. CF is light and hence it's a good material for those
trying to minimize weight. That's a good enough reason.

No, the "real problem" is your tendency to adroitly delete the body of
the post to allow you to change the meaning of your posts.
--
Cheers,

John B.
(invalid to gmail)