Frame failure (with pictures)

[Qui si parla Campagnolo]

Matt O'Toole wrote:
> On Sun, 04 Jun 2006 09:27:07 -0500, Tim McNamara wrote:
>
> > Well, that's the thing. Metal bends. Carbon fiber breaks.
>
> Mostly true, but the lightest metal frames would break too -- or bend to
> the point of complete collapse, with the same result.
>
> The problem is not the material, but shaving weight to the point where
> there's no margin for error.
>
> Matt O.

bing, bing, bing, we have a winner!!!

Ya know, that couple of hundred grams saving is important!!!

The silliness goes on, it seems like that time of year to shake one's
head at all the crappola that is polluting the bike scene...I see it
everyday, like yesterday with some AC wheels...how do they sell this
****!!

 

[41]

Tuschinski wrote:
> 41 wrote:
> > Tim Lines wrote:
> > > Phil, Squid-in-Training wrote:
> > > > Nick Payne wrote:
> >
> > > >
> > > > One might say, however, that the carbon frame is weaker than a steel frame.
> > > > What would happen if the carbon fork were on a steel frame? Would the steel
> > > > frame fail similarly? Either way, I don't know.
> > > >
> > >
> > > I believe the steel frame WOULD fail similarly. Personal experience
> > > suggests so:
> > > http://home.comcast.net/~lines_tim/poor_schw inn.JPG
> >
> > On the contrary, your photo shows precisely not that: bending but not
> > breaking apart. That's what you want in a bicycle frame failure, not
> > what happened with the carbon fiber reinforced resin frame.
>
> Well in that case I am pre tty sure that the owner of that Schwinn made
> a comparable crash ^^


Why doesn't, or didn't, the original poster just tell us, so that we
don't have to guess?



> But indeed, CF breakage is scary. I have seen CF go in ways I never
> have seen with Steel and Alu. I'm prepared to believe CF has the same
> risk of failure as Steel and Alu, but when it goes... it tends to go
> all the way.

 

[Phil, Squid-in-Training]

41 wrote:
> Tuschinski wrote:
>> 41 wrote:
>>> Tim Lines wrote:
>>>> Phil, Squid-in-Training wrote:
>>>>> Nick Payne wrote:
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> One might say, however, that the carbon frame is weaker than a
>>>>> steel frame. What would happen if the carbon fork were on a steel
>>>>> frame? Would the steel frame fail similarly? Either way, I
>>>>> don't know.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I believe the steel frame WOULD fail similarly. Personal experience
>>>> suggests so:
>>>> http://home.comcast.net/~lines_tim/poor_schw inn.JPG
>>>
>>> On the contrary, your photo shows precisely not that: bending but
>>> not breaking apart. That's what you want in a bicycle frame
>>> failure, not what happened with the carbon fiber reinforced resin
>>> frame.
>>
>> Well in that case I am pre tty sure that the owner of that Schwinn
>> made a comparable crash ^^
>
>
> Why doesn't, or didn't, the original poster just tell us, so that we
> don't have to guess?
>

Good point. For all we know, the rider could have hit a wall or some other
immovable wide vertical object really hard. The back of the fork leg shows
little sign of any wheel/fork/debris impact.
--
Phil

 

[[email protected]]

Well, I hate to break it to all you anti-weight weenies, but he would
have crashed and broke his face even if the bike remained completely
intact. When you get something stuck in your front wheel and get
launched, what happens to the bike is secondary. Is it possible that it
may not have happened if he were riding a 32+ spoke wheel? Certainly,
but then, it may still have. If you have this perverted need to blame
someone, try blaming the stoopid F-head that didn't point out the
hazard and lead the pace line around it. It's called paceline
etiquette, and I can't tell you many times in the past 20 years I've
blown out a front wheel from the **** in front swerving around a hole
at the last second.

Phil, Squid-in-Training wrote:
> Note: linked pictures are rather large
>
> We were on our fast club ride this past Thursday. The trailing rider fell
> victim to low-spoke-count wheels and a separated tire tread on the side of
> the road.
>
> The bike in question is a Giant TCR C3, an all-carbon frame with an
> aluminum-steerer fork. It also is equipped with Xero 20-count paired-spoke
> front wheels.
>
> http://plaza.ufl.edu/phillee/rbt/bc2.jpg
>
> The piece of tire tread (about 2 feet long, and roughly 8 inches wide) may
> have been kicked up by riders just ahead of him. The separated tread caught
> up in the wheel and traveled up to the fork, where it stopped suddenly,
> leaving a rubber streak on the back side of the fork well below where the
> bicycle tire could have been.
>
> http://plaza.ufl.edu/phillee/rbt/bc1.jpg
>
> At that point, the frame probably bent back far enough to hit the downtube,
> upon which the toptube might have then broken.
>
> http://plaza.ufl.edu/phillee/rbt/bc5.jpg
> http://plaza.ufl.edu/phillee/rbt/bc7.jpg
>
> Part of the downtube broke also.
>
> http://plaza.ufl.edu/phillee/rbt/bc6.jpg
> http://plaza.ufl.edu/phillee/rbt/bc8.jpg
>
> All downtube portions of the bike were still connected via fibers
> immediately after the crash. The top tube was not. The EMTs broke off the
> part of the downtube that is separated in the pictures.
>
> The wheels are still perfectly true, and the front wheel has a bend near the
> nipples:
> http://plaza.ufl.edu/julialee/rbt/bc3.jpg
>
> With the downtube broken, the top tube then probably took the majority of
> the load and also broke.
>
> You can see the air bladder thingy that Giant uses to inflate their frames
> during construction.
>
> Rider sustained some broken facial bones, a concussion, and minor cuts. He
> is doing well currently.
>
> --
> Phil

 

[Jay Beattie]

Tuschinski wrote:
> 41 wrote:
> > Tim Lines wrote:
> > > Phil, Squid-in-Training wrote:
> > > > Nick Payne wrote:
> >
> > > >
> > > > One might say, however, that the carbon frame is weaker than a steel frame.
> > > > What would happen if the carbon fork were on a steel frame? Would the steel
> > > > frame fail similarly? Either way, I don't know.
> > > >
> > >
> > > I believe the steel frame WOULD fail similarly. Personal experience
> > > suggests so:
> > > http://home.comcast.net/~lines_tim/poor_schwinn.JPG
> >
> > On the contrary, your photo shows precisely not that: bending but not
> > breaking apart. That's what you want in a bicycle frame failure, not
> > what happened with the carbon fiber reinforced resin frame.
>
> Well in that case I am pretty sure that the owner of that Schwinn made
> a comparable crash ^^
>
> But indeed, CF breakage is scary. I have seen CF go in ways I never
> have seen with Steel and Alu. I'm prepared to believe CF has the same
> risk of failure as Steel and Alu, but when it goes... it tends to go
> all the way.

It is really only scary if it goes in a way that is meaningful to the
rider. The fact that steel bends in a wall impact while CF vaporizes
does not make much difference to the rider, who is sailing like
Superman through the air in either case. I think the no-warning,
non-dramatic, JRA failures are more scary. I don't know if these are
common with CF, though, because we generally see the "big CF crash"
type failures in this NG. I would like to know about the insidious
failure rate.-- Jay Beattie.

 

[[email protected]]

i did this 4 daze ago - easton tent poles slipped of the front bag and
into the spokes then jammed
at low speed - 4-5mph - just moved off
unpleasant. one always second guesses that if you were fast enough you
could step off but one does continue on as the bike STOPS
and i went into a sloping gutter tricep first
poles survived
pass the neomycin
i cannot imagine as the saying stops doing this at 25 mph

 

[John Forrest Tomlinson]

On 6 Jun 2006 07:47:13 -0700, "[email protected]"
<[email protected]> wrote:

> I can't tell you many times in the past 20 years I've
>blown out a front wheel from the **** in front swerving around a hole
>at the last second.

If you don't like what they do or don't do on a ride, don't ride with
those them.

JT

****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************

 

[Doug Taylor]

On 6 Jun 2006 07:47:13 -0700, "[email protected]"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Well, I hate to break it to all you anti-weight weenies, but he would
>have crashed and broke his face even if the bike remained completely
>intact. When you get something stuck in your front wheel and get
>launched, what happens to the bike is secondary. Is it possible that it
>may not have happened if he were riding a 32+ spoke wheel? Certainly,
>but then, it may still have. If you have this perverted need to blame
>someone, try blaming the stoopid F-head that didn't point out the
>hazard and lead the pace line around it. It's called paceline
>etiquette, and I can't tell you many times in the past 20 years I've
>blown out a front wheel from the **** in front swerving around a hole
>at the last second.

Happened to me last month, as I previously posted: result of lack of
etiquette and deep pot hole was two pinch flats, ruined rear wheel rim
(not front), and cracked carbon handlebar. I was "hoping" the rim
could be reformed, but turns out it is a total loss ( Ritchey WCS with
all of 50 miles on it).

Part of the risk you take on any group ride. I can't say I've never
done it myself; could be karma...

 

[Jay S. Hill]

[email protected] wrote:
> someone, try blaming the stoopid F-head that didn't point out the
> hazard and lead the pace line around it. It's called paceline
> etiquette, and I can't tell you many times in the past 20 years I've
> blown out a front wheel from the **** in front swerving around a hole
> at the last second.

I don't blame anybody but myself in those situations. If I'd trashed a
single wheel, not to mention numbers of them beyond rememberence,
because of my inability to see road hazards, I'd modify my riding
technique, starting with where I'm looking, or how much I'm letting my
concentration wane. If I actually trashed wheels, I'd also look at the
type of wheels I'm using.

 

[Tim Lines]

Jay Beattie wrote:
> Tuschinski wrote:
>> 41 wrote:
>>> Tim Lines wrote:
>>>> Phil, Squid-in-Training wrote:
>>>>> Nick Payne wrote:
>>>>> One might say, however, that the carbon frame is weaker than a steel frame.
>>>>> What would happen if the carbon fork were on a steel frame? Would the steel
>>>>> frame fail similarly? Either way, I don't know.
>>>>>
>>>> I believe the steel frame WOULD fail similarly. Personal experience
>>>> suggests so:
>>>> http://home.comcast.net/~lines_tim/poor_schwinn.JPG
>>> On the contrary, your photo shows precisely not that: bending but not
>>> breaking apart. That's what you want in a bicycle frame failure, not
>>> what happened with the carbon fiber reinforced resin frame.
>> Well in that case I am pretty sure that the owner of that Schwinn made
>> a comparable crash ^^
>>
>> But indeed, CF breakage is scary. I have seen CF go in ways I never
>> have seen with Steel and Alu. I'm prepared to believe CF has the same
>> risk of failure as Steel and Alu, but when it goes... it tends to go
>> all the way.
>
> It is really only scary if it goes in a way that is meaningful to the
> rider. The fact that steel bends in a wall impact while CF vaporizes
> does not make much difference to the rider, who is sailing like
> Superman through the air in either case.

That was my thought. Apparently, not everyone agrees.

 

[Tuschinski]

> > It is really only scary if it goes in a way that is meaningful to the
> > rider. The fact that steel bends in a wall impact while CF vaporizes
> > does not make much difference to the rider, who is sailing like
> > Superman through the air in either case.
>
> That was my thought. Apparently, not everyone agrees.


>From my own experiences on my club(50ish ppl)

1. Steel is most vulnerable, but I havent seen anything dramatic. Think
about rips and bending, usually down tube near steerer. Steel is also
more vulnerable with denting, but that can hardly be called a real
failure.
2. CF: Well, I saw 2 superscary failures: A ripped downtube of wich at
least one was the cause of the crash (the other might have been caused
by the crash, though the rider said he felt his bike buckle before the
crash).
3. Alu: nothing beyond some scratches, bents and dents after big
(mass-) crashes. I have not yet seen a non-crash related failure unlike
either Steel and CF

My LBS has about the same experience. He did add that the rear stays
wich are often CF (in a lot of Steel frames too) can get loose at the
connection. For him that was failure #1 (but he said that hasn't led to
a big crash yet as far as he had seen).

CF is pretty good stuff, but if you have seen literally peel a downtube
at 45 kmph you might become a bit apprehensive^^

But in truth, frame failure is pretty rare.

 

[Derk]

Tuschinski wrote:

> 3. Alu: nothing beyond some scratches, bents and dents after big
> (mass-) crashes. I have not yet seen a non-crash related failure unlike
> either Steel and CF
I can give you an example: I bought an aluminium CX frame, that I have been
using for only 1 month or so. This weekend, a bolt/screw was picked up by
my rear tire and was stuck at the side of it. The wheel turned round and
the bolt's head smahed into the chainstay 5-10 times before I could stop.
The result: a damaged/ruined chainstay. I wonder if a steel frame would
have been damaged in this way.

Gr, Derk

 

[Tuschinski]

Derk wrote:
> Tuschinski wrote:
>
> > 3. Alu: nothing beyond some scratches, bents and dents after big
> > (mass-) crashes. I have not yet seen a non-crash related failure unlike
> > either Steel and CF
> I can give you an example: I bought an aluminium CX frame, that I have been
> using for only 1 month or so. This weekend, a bolt/screw was picked up by
> my rear tire and was stuck at the side of it. The wheel turned round and
> the bolt's head smahed into the chainstay 5-10 times before I could stop.
> The result: a damaged/ruined chainstay. I wonder if a steel frame would
> have been damaged in this way.
>
> Gr, Derk

Indeed, wouldn't be surprised if a steel frame would have done better,
because it is a harder material. There are quite a few issues that
Steel frames handle better as anything else: It can be straightened and
it is tougher than Alu. But the problem is hat are a bit more
susceptible in other areas.

But I would count this under the Bends/Scratches failures: perhaps the
frame needs to be replaced, but it is not a 45 kmph *SNAP* moment.

One thing for sure, the problems I have seen (this is just what I have
seen in all these years, ymmv) with frames are different:

Steel;
Bigger failures: Rips, usually at the lugs
Non total loss: smaller dents. Rear derailer get chewed: this is
usually to be straightened. CF rear stays can get loose (can be glued
again by manufacturer)

Alu:
Bigger Failures: Bends or (big) dents, personally havent seen a rip
yet.
Non Total loss: Derailer at the back gets chewed up. Sometimes this can
be replaced. Straightening is a no with Alu afaik. CF rear stays can
get loose (can be glued again by manufacturer)

CF:
Big Failures: Rips
Non Total loss: ? I find it hard to imagine a damaged CF frame not to
be scrapped.

But all these issues are admittingly rare

 

[Jay Beattie]

Tuschinski wrote:
> Derk wrote:
> > Tuschinski wrote:
> >
> > > 3. Alu: nothing beyond some scratches, bents and dents after big
> > > (mass-) crashes. I have not yet seen a non-crash related failure unlike
> > > either Steel and CF
> > I can give you an example: I bought an aluminium CX frame, that I have been
> > using for only 1 month or so. This weekend, a bolt/screw was picked up by
> > my rear tire and was stuck at the side of it. The wheel turned round and
> > the bolt's head smahed into the chainstay 5-10 times before I could stop.
> > The result: a damaged/ruined chainstay. I wonder if a steel frame would
> > have been damaged in this way.
> >
> > Gr, Derk
>
> Indeed, wouldn't be surprised if a steel frame would have done better,
> because it is a harder material. There are quite a few issues that
> Steel frames handle better as anything else: It can be straightened and
> it is tougher than Alu. But the problem is hat are a bit more
> susceptible in other areas.
>
> But I would count this under the Bends/Scratches failures: perhaps the
> frame needs to be replaced, but it is not a 45 kmph *SNAP* moment.
>
> One thing for sure, the problems I have seen (this is just what I have
> seen in all these years, ymmv) with frames are different:
>
> Steel;
> Bigger failures: Rips, usually at the lugs
> Non total loss: smaller dents. Rear derailer get chewed: this is
> usually to be straightened. CF rear stays can get loose (can be glued
> again by manufacturer)
>
> Alu:
> Bigger Failures: Bends or (big) dents, personally havent seen a rip
> yet.
> Non Total loss: Derailer at the back gets chewed up. Sometimes this can
> be replaced. Straightening is a no with Alu afaik. CF rear stays can
> get loose (can be glued again by manufacturer)

I was riding a 20 year old, second generation Cannondale frame when it
developed a gaping crack around about 60% of the downtube just above
the shift lever bosses. I wondered why the front end felt so whippy in
a climb and stopped to look. Egads. I still got home O.K., although
slowly. That thing was rock solid through many years of riding and
racing and outlasted a number of steel frames. Huge bang for the buck
but heavy as a rock by today's standards. -- Jay Beattie.

 

[RonSonic]

On 6 Jun 2006 01:17:54 -0700, "Ron Ruff" <[email protected]> wrote:

>
>Matt O'Toole wrote:
>> Mostly true, but the lightest metal frames would break too -- or bend to
>> the point of complete collapse, with the same result.
>>
>> The problem is not the material, but shaving weight to the point where
>> there's no margin for error.
>
>Similar but not quite... many years ago I was riding a Klein in a crit
>and a rider ahead of me clipped a plastic cone which marked the course.
>It lazily spun around and ended up getting stuck between my front wheel
>and frame. I did a quick headplant, and the bike soared into the air
>(20-30ft according to witnesses)... but the bike, the fork, and the
>front wheel were all straight and true. Of course having the cone stuck
>in there would have kept the fork from bending back.
>
>Still think that Klein was amazingly tough... since it experienced at
>least a dozen hard crashes without structural damage... and weighed
>only 3.5lbs with bottom bracket.

Kleins were not ordinary bikes. Some had "features" I could do without,
especially the mountain bikes. But as a combination of art and engineering they
were special.

Ron

 

[Ryan Cousineau]

In article <[email protected]>,
RonSonic <[email protected]> wrote:

> On 6 Jun 2006 01:17:54 -0700, "Ron Ruff" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >
> >Matt O'Toole wrote:
> >> Mostly true, but the lightest metal frames would break too -- or bend to
> >> the point of complete collapse, with the same result.
> >>
> >> The problem is not the material, but shaving weight to the point where
> >> there's no margin for error.
> >
> >Similar but not quite... many years ago I was riding a Klein in a crit
> >and a rider ahead of me clipped a plastic cone which marked the course.
> >It lazily spun around and ended up getting stuck between my front wheel
> >and frame. I did a quick headplant, and the bike soared into the air
> >(20-30ft according to witnesses)... but the bike, the fork, and the
> >front wheel were all straight and true. Of course having the cone stuck
> >in there would have kept the fork from bending back.
> >
> >Still think that Klein was amazingly tough... since it experienced at
> >least a dozen hard crashes without structural damage... and weighed
> >only 3.5lbs with bottom bracket.
>
> Kleins were not ordinary bikes. Some had "features" I could do without,
> especially the mountain bikes. But as a combination of art and engineering
> they
> were special.
>
> Ron

My great bicyclic aesthetic regret is that the Klein Mantra turned out
to be a dead-end design:

http://www.firstflightbikes.com/1995_Klein_Mantra.htm

http://www.dirtragmag.com/print/article.php?ID=88&category=stuff_reviews

My other bike is a Kona Kilauea,

--
Ryan Cousineau [email protected] http://www.wiredcola.com/
"I don't want kids who are thinking about going into mathematics
to think that they have to take drugs to succeed." -Paul Erdos

 

[Sorni]

Ryan Cousineau wrote:

> My great bicyclic aesthetic regret is that the Klein Mantra turned out
> to be a dead-end design:
>
> http://www.firstflightbikes.com/1995_Klein_Mantra.htm
>
> http://www.dirtragmag.com/print/article.php?ID=88&category=stuff_reviews

Gorgeous death traps! Stink-bug city...

 

[41]

Tim Lines wrote:
> Jay Beattie wrote:
> > Tuschinski wrote:
> >> 41 wrote:
> >>> Tim Lines wrote:

> >>>> I believe the steel frame WOULD fail similarly. Personal experience
> >>>> suggests so:
> >>>> http://home.comcast.net/~lines_tim/poor_schwinn.JPG
> >>> On the contrary, your photo shows precisely not that: bending but not
> >>> breaking apart. That's what you want in a bicycle frame failure, not
> >>> what happened with the carbon fiber reinforced resin frame.
> >> Well in that case I am pretty sure that the owner of that Schwinn made
> >> a comparable crash ^^
> >>
> >> But indeed, CF breakage is scary. I have seen CF go in ways I never
> >> have seen with Steel and Alu. I'm prepared to believe CF has the same
> >> risk of failure as Steel and Alu, but when it goes... it tends to go
> >> all the way.
> >
> > It is really only scary if it goes in a way that is meaningful to the
> > rider. The fact that steel bends in a wall impact while CF vaporizes
> > does not make much difference to the rider, who is sailing like
> > Superman through the air in either case.
>
> That was my thought. Apparently, not everyone agrees.

I think you are missing the points, of which there were two:

(1) CF failure is always catastrophic, and from the descriptions we
have seen here over the years, often without warning, perhaps always
without obvious warning, sometimes JRA. Steel failure is about as good
as you can hope for.

(2) Why don't you just tell us what happened in your accident?

 

[Jay Beattie]

41 wrote:
> Tim Lines wrote:
> > Jay Beattie wrote:
> > > Tuschinski wrote:
> > >> 41 wrote:
> > >>> Tim Lines wrote:
>
> > >>>> I believe the steel frame WOULD fail similarly. Personal experience
> > >>>> suggests so:
> > >>>> http://home.comcast.net/~lines_tim/poor_schwinn.JPG
> > >>> On the contrary, your photo shows precisely not that: bending but not
> > >>> breaking apart. That's what you want in a bicycle frame failure, not
> > >>> what happened with the carbon fiber reinforced resin frame.
> > >> Well in that case I am pretty sure that the owner of that Schwinn made
> > >> a comparable crash ^^
> > >>
> > >> But indeed, CF breakage is scary. I have seen CF go in ways I never
> > >> have seen with Steel and Alu. I'm prepared to believe CF has the same
> > >> risk of failure as Steel and Alu, but when it goes... it tends to go
> > >> all the way.
> > >
> > > It is really only scary if it goes in a way that is meaningful to the
> > > rider. The fact that steel bends in a wall impact while CF vaporizes
> > > does not make much difference to the rider, who is sailing like
> > > Superman through the air in either case.
> >
> > That was my thought. Apparently, not everyone agrees.
>
> I think you are missing the points, of which there were two:
>
> (1) CF failure is always catastrophic, and from the descriptions we
> have seen here over the years, often without warning, perhaps always
> without obvious warning, sometimes JRA. Steel failure is about as good
> as you can hope for.

What is the failure mode in a non-impact situation -- a flaw or a
fatigue failure. Do they explode like in the pictures? -- Jay Beattie.

 

[41]

Jay Beattie wrote:
> 41 wrote:
> > Tim Lines wrote:
> > > Jay Beattie wrote:
> > > > Tuschinski wrote:
> > > >> 41 wrote:
> > > >>> Tim Lines wrote:
> >
> > > >>>> I believe the steel frame WOULD fail similarly. Personal experience
> > > >>>> suggests so:
> > > >>>> http://home.comcast.net/~lines_tim/poor_schwinn.JPG
> > > >>> On the contrary, your photo shows precisely not that: bending but not
> > > >>> breaking apart. That's what you want in a bicycle frame failure, not
> > > >>> what happened with the carbon fiber reinforced resin frame.
> > > >> Well in that case I am pretty sure that the owner of that Schwinn made
> > > >> a comparable crash ^^
> > > >>
> > > >> But indeed, CF breakage is scary. I have seen CF go in ways I never
> > > >> have seen with Steel and Alu. I'm prepared to believe CF has the same
> > > >> risk of failure as Steel and Alu, but when it goes... it tends to go
> > > >> all the way.
> > > >
> > > > It is really only scary if it goes in a way that is meaningful to the
> > > > r ider. The fact that steel bends in a wall impact while CF vaporizes
> > > > does not make much difference to the rider, who is sailing like
> > > > Superman through the air in either case.
> > >
> > > That was my thought. Apparently, not everyone agrees.
> >
> > I think you are missing the points, of which there were two:
> >
> > (1) CF failure is always catastrophic, and from the descriptions we
> > have seen here over the years, often without warning, perhaps always
> > without obvious warning, sometimes JRA. Steel failure is about as good
> > as you can hope for.
>
> What is the failure mode in a non-impact situation -- a flaw or a
> fatigue failure. Do they explode like in the pictures? -- Jay Beattie.

CF-reinforced resin does not fatigue in the conventional sense, so
that's off the table. The resin may degrade or be damaged from various
causes, and the CF may be cut. Also, there is little to no strength in
any direction which has not been accounted for in the design, unlike
metal, which is strong from every angle- that basically would be impact
damage again. As to how they fail in practice JRA, we have descriptions
of many catastrophic such failures, some leading to death or serious
injury. The frequency is, so far, low, but there are enough of them in
service that we see too many reports of them here. In this thread alone
two such JRA failures have been described.

In the May issue of Cycling Plus, there is a feature on latest trends
in the pro peleton. They say that the advance of CF has been stopped,
with many aluminum frames again in the pack. They also say that partly
this may be due to a rash of CF failures last year, although I believe
they were referring specifically to CF rear triangles on otherwise
metal frames. Another trend: the return of conventional hand-made
wheels with box section rims.

I can report one other development which I hope is not a trend: white
lycra bicycling shorts with contrasting colour crotch pad (women's
circuit). At least for the ones I saw the contrasting colour was blue,
not crimson.
..