This is from Weight Weenies re: a Cervelo problem:
…by the skin of my teeth:
What I remember most is staring into space in my basement over the realization that my R3 was cracked. My story has reached conclusion and this is meant as a big-time plug for Cervelo. It has nothing to do with the R2.5 de-bonding fiasco.
What happened:
-I was replacing a bottom bracket that had a failed bearing and noticed the non-drive cup hardly had any torque on it. So, I tried to re-torque it.
-I started at 20ft pounds. I heard cracking long before I got there. I thought the new carbon/ti BB must be faulty. Instead, it was the flanged, drive-side, of the BB that was beginning to crack its way out.
-Two cracks followed arcs, each ~5mm away from the metal shell and concentric to it.
The damage must have occurred either during the last time I did the BB, or sometime between then and now, I thought. The question, of course, was is this a warrantee issue?, or would Cervelo maintain I over-torqued their two-piece bottom bracket shell.
After sending pictures to Cervelo for a determination and Calfee for an estimate of repair, Cervelo came back and wanted to see the frame. Once in their hands, I was told they would have to cut in to it to reach a final conclusion. At this point, I had an estimate that was for a small fraction of the R3 crash-replacement cost and I had already maintained with the dealer that I would need it back, if it weren't going to be warranted. Things were getting touchy.
Two days after cutting it apart I got the call that they would be sending another frame out, no charge, but that the official position was that it was not a warrantee replacement. Huh? The bottom bracket had been over-torqued, they said. Cervelo felt that because they hadn't published a torque spec, sympathy should be taken upon owners who use proper torque wrenches and end up in this situation (a shop probably would have been stuck). I used values as high as 45 foot pounds, which is about 5 below the maximum specified by Park Tool for Campy/Shimano for cartridge ISIS brackets. When removing stuff, I still use a torque wrench and sometimes add higher numbers (~10ft lbs) to free fasteners. I was requesting a warrantee replacement on the basis that, all things considered, the numbers that frame saw were within reason.
They conceded to the dealer that ISIS bottom brackets pose a different kind of stress on the shells than do exo BBs. They weren’t admitting a flaw, so much as informing that the failure mode is different (over expansion) and that mine was consistent with ISIS. I felt better when the new frame appeared with a torque spec tag on it that said 25.8 foot pounds! Evidently, these tags are to come on Cervelo frames going forward.
Given that there are a number of bottom brackets with higher maximal values, I thought this was definitely something to share. So, go easy and GO CERVELO!
So much for Cervelo engineering, quality, and so on. Thanks, but no thanks.
…by the skin of my teeth:
What I remember most is staring into space in my basement over the realization that my R3 was cracked. My story has reached conclusion and this is meant as a big-time plug for Cervelo. It has nothing to do with the R2.5 de-bonding fiasco.
What happened:
-I was replacing a bottom bracket that had a failed bearing and noticed the non-drive cup hardly had any torque on it. So, I tried to re-torque it.
-I started at 20ft pounds. I heard cracking long before I got there. I thought the new carbon/ti BB must be faulty. Instead, it was the flanged, drive-side, of the BB that was beginning to crack its way out.
-Two cracks followed arcs, each ~5mm away from the metal shell and concentric to it.
The damage must have occurred either during the last time I did the BB, or sometime between then and now, I thought. The question, of course, was is this a warrantee issue?, or would Cervelo maintain I over-torqued their two-piece bottom bracket shell.
After sending pictures to Cervelo for a determination and Calfee for an estimate of repair, Cervelo came back and wanted to see the frame. Once in their hands, I was told they would have to cut in to it to reach a final conclusion. At this point, I had an estimate that was for a small fraction of the R3 crash-replacement cost and I had already maintained with the dealer that I would need it back, if it weren't going to be warranted. Things were getting touchy.
Two days after cutting it apart I got the call that they would be sending another frame out, no charge, but that the official position was that it was not a warrantee replacement. Huh? The bottom bracket had been over-torqued, they said. Cervelo felt that because they hadn't published a torque spec, sympathy should be taken upon owners who use proper torque wrenches and end up in this situation (a shop probably would have been stuck). I used values as high as 45 foot pounds, which is about 5 below the maximum specified by Park Tool for Campy/Shimano for cartridge ISIS brackets. When removing stuff, I still use a torque wrench and sometimes add higher numbers (~10ft lbs) to free fasteners. I was requesting a warrantee replacement on the basis that, all things considered, the numbers that frame saw were within reason.
They conceded to the dealer that ISIS bottom brackets pose a different kind of stress on the shells than do exo BBs. They weren’t admitting a flaw, so much as informing that the failure mode is different (over expansion) and that mine was consistent with ISIS. I felt better when the new frame appeared with a torque spec tag on it that said 25.8 foot pounds! Evidently, these tags are to come on Cervelo frames going forward.
Given that there are a number of bottom brackets with higher maximal values, I thought this was definitely something to share. So, go easy and GO CERVELO!
So much for Cervelo engineering, quality, and so on. Thanks, but no thanks.
You just put a dampener on my Cervelo SLC-SL frameset dreams. I know they are not traditional in shape - but aren't they the result of like 1000 computer simulations by the proverbial engineers in lab coats? 
