Arrrrgghhh Aluminium

[Smudger]

Further on the carbon front.

I've just done a pre-ride inspection on my Ridgeback Genesis Day 02 (the first aluminium frame I've
ever bought) and is has a great big crack in the head tube!!

Back it goes - and just after I've upgraded the whole thing!

Back to steel for me next time.

I'll let you know how I get on with getting a replacement frame from Ridgeback.

 

[Pete Jones]

On Thu, 6 Mar 2003 11:40:04 -0000, "Smudger" <[email protected]> blathered:

>I've just done a pre-ride inspection on my Ridgeback Genesis Day 02 (the first aluminium frame I've
>ever bought) and is has a great big crack in the head tube!!

Last autumn - http://www.btinternet.com/~peteajones/bikes/scal-weld2.jpg

The preceding spring - http://www.btinternet.com/~peteajones/bikes/super_crack.jpg

I'm riding a steel frame again, too.

Pete
----
http://www.btinternet.com/~peteajones/

 

[Smudger]

"Pete Jones" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Thu, 6 Mar 2003 11:40:04 -0000, "Smudger" <[email protected]> blathered:
>
> >I've just done a pre-ride inspection on my Ridgeback Genesis Day 02 (the first aluminium frame
> >I've ever bought) and is has a great big crack in
the
> >head tube!!
>
> Last autumn - http://www.btinternet.com/~peteajones/bikes/scal-weld2.jpg
>
> The preceding spring - http://www.btinternet.com/~peteajones/bikes/super_crack.jpg
>
>
>
>
> I'm riding a steel frame again, too.
>
>
> Pete
> ----
> http://www.btinternet.com/~peteajones/

Blimey - and we were all worried about carbon!!!

The RB GD2 has gone back to Ridgeback for a new frame. God knows what I'll get back. I'll
let you know.

Any Cycling Plus journos on this group - take note - there's an article here.

 

[Marten Hoffmann]

[email protected] schreef ...
> Further on the carbon front.
>
> I've just done a pre-ride inspection on my Ridgeback Genesis Day 02 (the first aluminium frame
> I've ever bought) and is has a great big crack in the head tube!!
>
> Back it goes - and just after I've upgraded the whole thing!
>
> Back to steel for me next time.
>
> I'll let you know how I get on with getting a replacement frame from Ridgeback.

With all due respect for your personal "loss": steel is not the answer, perhaps a better aluminium
frame is. Or you just had a spell of bad luck. There is this urban legend about aluminium frames
breaking (much) earlier than steel frames but that's exactly what it is: a legend. At least with
nowadays' aluminium frames.

--
Regards, Marten

 

[Pete Jones]

On Thu, 6 Mar 2003 21:26:01 +0100, Marten Hoffmann <[email protected]> blathered:

>> I've just done a pre-ride inspection on my Ridgeback Genesis Day 02 (the first aluminium frame
>> I've ever bought) and is has a great big crack in the head tube!!

>> Back to steel for me next time.

>With all due respect for your personal "loss": steel is not the answer, perhaps a better aluminium
>frame is. Or you just had a spell of bad luck. There is this urban legend about aluminium frames
>breaking (much) earlier than steel frames but that's exactly what it is: a legend. At least with
>nowadays' aluminium frames.

I've snapped three £500 aluminium frames in the last three years - not crash damage, they just gave
up the ghost: cracked welds, belled headtube, mad creaking noises. How much better do they have to
be? The £250 steel frame that preceded them lasted six years.

Pete
----
http://www.btinternet.com/~peteajones/

 

[Frank]

"Pete Jones" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Thu, 6 Mar 2003 21:26:01 +0100, Marten Hoffmann <[email protected]> blathered:
>
> >> I've just done a pre-ride inspection on my Ridgeback Genesis Day 02
(the
> >> first aluminium frame I've ever bought) and is has a great big crack in
the
> >> head tube!!
>
> >> Back to steel for me next time.
>
> >With all due respect for your personal "loss": steel is not the answer, perhaps a better
> >aluminium frame is. Or you just had a spell of bad luck. There is this urban legend about
> >aluminium frames breaking (much) earlier than steel frames but that's exactly what it is: a
> >legend. At least with nowadays' aluminium frames.
>
> I've snapped three £500 aluminium frames in the last three years - not crash damage, they just
> gave up the ghost: cracked welds, belled headtube, mad creaking noises. How much better do they
> have to be? The £250 steel frame that preceded them lasted six years.
>
I've had an aluminium frame for years, I only realised it was aluminium a couple of days ago when I
started wondering why it had a replaceable dropout (.

 

[Pete White]

"Smudger" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> Further on the carbon front.
>
> I've just done a pre-ride inspection on my Ridgeback Genesis Day 02 (the first aluminium frame
> I've ever bought) and is has a great big crack in
the
> head tube!!
>
> Back it goes - and just after I've upgraded the whole thing!
>
> Back to steel for me next time.
>
> I'll let you know how I get on with getting a replacement frame from Ridgeback.

As I've mentioned in a previous thread, I've just found a crack in my Aluminium Frame. Unlike yours
(which appears to be a relatively new bike) I had the Peugeot for seven years, and did upwards of
twenty-one thousand miles on it (not bad for a cheap bike...) I've done four thousand on my Trek
road bike in its two year life (so far) which is also Aluminium. Maybe you were unlucky, and had a
duff tube in your frame on an off-chance.

Pete White

 

[Andy Welch]

On 6-Mar-2003, Pete Jones <[email protected]> wrote:

> I've snapped three £500 aluminium frames in the last three years - not crash damage, they just
> gave up the ghost: cracked welds, belled headtube, mad creaking noises. How much better do they
> have to be? The £250 steel frame that preceded them lasted six years.

But it's a fair bet that the steel frame was significantly heavier. Maybe not significantly enough
to compensate for the breakages but I don't think we can really conclude that aluminium is
necessarily going to break more often than steel. I'd guess that a 2Kg Al frame would last a fair
while and a 1.2Kg steel one may not be the last frame you ever buy.

Cheers,

Andy

 

[Pete Jones]

Disclaimer: the following applies to mountain bike frames; if you're mincing about on a road bike
you'll be fine....

>> I've snapped three £500 aluminium frames in the last three years - not crash damage, they just
>> gave up the ghost: the £250 steel frame that preceded them lasted six years.
>
>But it's a fair bet that the steel frame was significantly heavier. Maybe not significantly enough
>to compensate for the breakages but I don't think we can really conclude that aluminium is
>necessarily going to break more often than steel. I'd guess that a 2Kg Al frame would last a fair
>while and a 1.2Kg steel one may not be the last frame you ever buy.

Orange Clockwork - maybe a pound heavier, max 1.5 lbs. And the only reason it broke after six years
was because I put the front end in a hole at speed -
http://www.btinternet.com/~peteajones/bikes/snap.jpg

Is frame weight not relevant? In order to make the aluminium frames as durable you'd have to
increase the weight.....which defeats the object of using aluminium in the first place - you end up
with a harsh frame of a similar weight, that you can't fix/repair/alter.

If you're selling a machine as a mountain bike, and it can't be ridden up and down mountains without
breaking, then something's wrong.

Pete
----
http://www.btinternet.com/~peteajones/

 

[Ian Smith]

On Fri, 7 Mar 2003, Pete Jones <[email protected]> wrote:

> Is frame weight not relevant? In order to make the aluminium frames as durable you'd have to
> increase the weight.....which defeats the object of using aluminium in the first place

Not necesarily - you end up with an aluminium frame that's heavier than a less durable aluminium
frame, but still lighter than a steel frame of equivalent strength and durability.

Have you found teh german fatigue test of frames on the web? A genuinely well thought out
experimental examnination of bicycle frame durability ander control conditions. Guess what material
all the frames that completed the test without failing were made of...

regards, Ian SMith
--
|\ /| no .sig
|o o|
|/ \|

 

[Msa]

> I've snapped three £500 aluminium frames in the last three years - not crash damage, they just
> gave up the ghost: cracked welds, belled headtube, mad creaking noises. How much better do they
> have to be? The £250 steel frame that preceded them lasted six years.
>
>
> Pete
> ----
> http://www.btinternet.com/~peteajones/

Care to name the £500 POS frames?

They weren't £100 bikes from the Kays catalogue with the payments spread over 15 years bumping the
price up were they?

--
Mark
______________________________________

"Just ask yourself: What would Scooby Doo?"

 

[Marten Hoffmann]

[email protected] schreef ...

> I've snapped three £500 aluminium frames in the last three years - not crash damage, they just
> gave up the ghost: cracked welds, belled headtube, mad creaking noises. How much better do they
> have to be? The £250 steel frame that preceded them lasted six years.

Sounds impressive (in a negative way) but my bicycle dealer friends tell me there is no "structural"
difference between aluminium and steel frames when it comes to breakages. And our aluminium 1994
Cannondale tandem is still in one piece, despite years of (ab)use both on-road and off.

--
Regards, Marten

 

[Pete Jones]

On Fri, 7 Mar 2003 19:46:45 +0000 (UTC), Ian Smith <[email protected]> blathered:

>On Fri, 7 Mar 2003, Pete Jones <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Is frame weight not relevant? In order to make the aluminium frames as durable you'd have to
>> increase the weight.....which defeats the object of using aluminium in the first place

>Have you found teh german fatigue test of frames on the web?

Do you think they're relevant to real world riding?

A suggestion was made that aluminium frames breaking prematurely was urban myth. My own experiences
suggest otherwise. Note that I make no nonsense claims re: the 'superior ride quality' of steel. The
aluminium frmaes all rode well - they just didn't last very long....

Pete
----
http://www.btinternet.com/~peteajones/

 

[Pete Jones]

On Fri, 7 Mar 2003 22:24:40 +0000 (UTC), "MSA" <[email protected]> blathered:

>> I've snapped three £500 aluminium frames in the last three years - not crash damage, they just
>> gave up the ghost: cracked welds, belled headtube, mad creaking noises.

>Care to name the £500 POS frames?

Trek 8*00, Trek's top of the range hardtail.

Two Gary Fisher Supercalibers, GF's top of the range hardtail.

Now on a Klein Attitude. Rides very well, six weeks on it so far.

Pete
----
http://www.btinternet.com/~peteajones/

 

[Ian Smith]

On Fri, 7 Mar 2003, Pete Jones <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Fri, 7 Mar 2003 19:46:45 +0000 (UTC), Ian Smith <[email protected]> blathered:
>
> >On Fri, 7 Mar 2003, Pete Jones <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >> Is frame weight not relevant? In order to make the aluminium frames as durable you'd have to
> >> increase the weight.....which defeats the object of using aluminium in the first place
>
> >Have you found teh german fatigue test of frames on the web?
>
> Do you think they're relevant to real world riding?

Yes. As I said, it's a well thought out test. The loading regime applied looks to be pretty good one
to examine the real world performance of frames in controlled conditions.

regards, Ian SMith
--
|\ /| no .sig
|o o|
|/ \|

 

[Web Stalker]

"Ian Smith" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> On Fri, 7 Mar 2003, Pete Jones <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Fri, 7 Mar 2003 19:46:45 +0000 (UTC), Ian Smith <[email protected]> blathered:
> >
> > >On Fri, 7 Mar 2003, Pete Jones <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > >> Is frame weight not relevant? In order to make the aluminium frames as durable you'd have to
> > >> increase the weight.....which defeats the object of using aluminium in the first place
> >
> > >Have you found teh german fatigue test of frames on the web?
> >
> > Do you think they're relevant to real world riding?
>
> Yes. As I said, it's a well thought out test. The loading regime applied looks to be pretty good
> one to examine the real world performance of frames in controlled conditions.
>
> regards, Ian SMith
> --
> |\ /| no .sig
> |o o|
> |/ \|

isn't alumium just notoriously hard to weld, and steel really easy....

therefore the chance of an aluminium frame breaking (which from examples shown to me seems to only
happen around the welds), is gonna be higher

and also if mass produced aluminium frame are on the market the quality of the weld is going to be
less, and possibly make the frame more liable to break around the weld....

i remember the original Klein Attitude frames, which were £2500 before Terk bought them, with
massive tubes and welds, which were filed down to make the join nice and smooth.... and the Pace
frames using box section alumium tubes (£800 for frame alone)....do these ever break?