Hincapie's broken fork in Paris-Roubaix




>> There could not have been a second train. It was a single track railway.
>
>
> Even if they're going the same direction?

A section section is not impossible. I do not think
railroad safety should be a joke.


--
---
William O'Hara
 
Michael Press wrote:
> In article
> <[email protected]>,
> "spin156" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > I have to
> > kind of laugh at all the people that pooh-pooh tying and soldering.
> > For something that some experts scoff at, it sure seems to get popular
> > every year when this race is run.
>
> How did it come about that cyclists started to tie and
> solder spokes?
>
> --
> Michael Press

You got me. Like anything else, someone was probably just trying to
build a better mousetrap. If one hub is good, then two is better
(???). Do you know?

>From what I have read, it seems that there is one school that believes
it strengthens the wheels and there are some who do it just to keep a
broken spoke under control.

Cheers,
Bill
 
> This pretty clearly *was not* a CF fork failure. The only question I
> have is: did Trek change the fork column on the Bontrager Satellite
> fork in an attempt to save weight? If the answer is "yes", then the
> decision looks a bit foolish now. If the answer is "no" and that is the
> stock fork column, I would have big time reservations about commuting
> on that fork (that's apparently how it is positioned: as a "commuter"
> fork).

Or you could draw the conclusion that PR isn't a good commute route...

--Mike Jacoubowsky
Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReaction.com
Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA

"Ozark Bicycle" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> D'ohBoy wrote:
>> JFT asked OB:
>>
>> > Your comments demonstrate such anti-lawyner, anti-marketing contempt
>> > it's
>> > nutty. There are times those sentiments might be appropriate, but you
>> > seem to relish displaying them. So I ask again -- why the bitterness?
>>
>> Probably the carbon.
>
> This pretty clearly *was not* a CF fork failure. The only question I
> have is: did Trek change the fork column on the Bontrager Satellite
> fork in an attempt to save weight? If the answer is "yes", then the
> decision looks a bit foolish now. If the answer is "no" and that is the
> stock fork column, I would have big time reservations about commuting
> on that fork (that's apparently how it is positioned: as a "commuter"
> fork). And, maybe a voluntary product recall is in order.
>
>
>
>> OB has a thing - he keeps spouting about
>> "soul-less" bikes which he, apparently, has extrapolated to the mfr's
>> of same.
>>
>
> Hey, Trek makes what Trek makes. Most of their stuff leaves me cold,
> but lotsa folks love 'em. BFD.
>
>
>> Plus, lawyers and marketeers ARE frequently agents of Satan.
>>
>>
>
> Ya think!?!
>
 
Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:
> > This pretty clearly *was not* a CF fork failure. The only question I
> > have is: did Trek change the fork column on the Bontrager Satellite
> > fork in an attempt to save weight? If the answer is "yes", then the
> > decision looks a bit foolish now. If the answer is "no" and that is the
> > stock fork column, I would have big time reservations about commuting
> > on that fork (that's apparently how it is positioned: as a "commuter"
> > fork).
>
> Or you could draw the conclusion that PR isn't a good commute route...

Maybe PR isn't a good commuting route, but George H. insists he had no
other way to get to work that day.

Jason
 
On 11 Apr 2006 06:24:51 -0700, [email protected] wrote:

>This is just bizarre, blanket, anti-lawyer statement. What kind of
>suit would exist here? What kind of information would lawyers parse in
>this kind of situation? I'm not a lawyer in the US, so I understand
>you folks are a little more sensitive (mostly from tv lawyering than
>reality, IMHO), but calling out us lawyers in this kind of situation is
>just absurd. Now if we are going to bash marketers, I'll get in
>line... ;)

*Any* press release in the US will be vetted by lawyers. It's nothing
special, Just SOP.

Jasper
 
In article <[email protected]>,
Michael Press <[email protected]> wrote:

> In article <[email protected]>,
> "spin156" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > I have to kind of laugh at all the people that pooh-pooh tying and
> > soldering. For something that some experts scoff at, it sure seems
> > to get popular every year when this race is run.
>
> How did it come about that cyclists started to tie and solder spokes?

It started back when Starley invented the tangentially spoked wheel back
in the days when your front wheel was 60" in diameter. A broken spoke
meant a whole lotta metal flopping around, maybe jamming into the fork
and tossing the rider over the bars. The spokes were tied and soldered
to restrain them, not because it made the wheel stronger. Prior to
Starley all wheels were radially spoked.
 
In article
<[email protected]>,
"spin156" <[email protected]> wrote:

> Michael Press wrote:
> > In article
> > <[email protected]>,
> > "spin156" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > I have to
> > > kind of laugh at all the people that pooh-pooh tying and soldering.
> > > For something that some experts scoff at, it sure seems to get popular
> > > every year when this race is run.
> >
> > How did it come about that cyclists started to tie and
> > solder spokes?
>
> You got me. Like anything else, someone was probably just trying to
> build a better mousetrap. If one hub is good, then two is better
> (???). Do you know?
>
> >From what I have read, it seems that there is one school that believes
> it strengthens the wheels and there are some who do it just to keep a
> broken spoke under control.

I have yet to hear a persuasive argument for tying and
soldering spoke; much less seen reports of any testing
that supports the practice.

The only practical advantage was on penny-farthing
bicycles where a broken spoke of that length was
dangerous. Hence tying and soldering to prevent a broken
spoke from whipping around dangerously.

Some folks like to tie and solder spokes for the aesthetic.

--
Michael Press
 
In article <[email protected]>,
"Jay Beattie" <[email protected]> wrote:

> Ozark Bicycle wrote:
> > [email protected] wrote:
> > > This is just bizarre, blanket, anti-lawyer statement. What kind
> > > of suit would exist here? What kind of information would lawyers
> > > parse in this kind of situation? I'm not a lawyer in the US, so
> > > I understand you folks are a little more sensitive (mostly from
> > > tv lawyering than reality, IMHO), but calling out us lawyers in
> > > this kind of situation is just absurd. Now if we are going to
> > > bash marketers, I'll get in line... ;)
> >
> >
> > It's not clear to whom or what you are specifically replying.
> >
> > If it was to my comment about "lawyers on retainer", I merely meant
> > that Trek almost surely passed the statement regarding the Hincapie
> > incident by their lawyers to be sure they were minimizing their
> > legal exposure. IOW, the lawyers were just doing their job.
>
> Legal exposure for what? The chances of Hincapie suing are zero.
> This is a public relations issue and not a legal issue.

I think to reduce legal exposure to plaintiffs pointing to a highly
publicized event that might support their own claims against Trek.
Lawyers are paid to think about this stuff, after all.

> > FWIW, in the lawsuit happy USA, it's not inconceivable that a Trek
> > customer with a broken fork would use the already notorious
> > Hincapie incident to bolster their claim in a defective product
> > suit.
>
> I have defended other manufacturers in broken fork cases, and I have
> never seen a fork broken at the top of the steerer. It is almost
> always at the crown/blade interface, and on rare occaision at the
> crown steerer interface.

This is a very unusual failure. I've never seen another one like it,
although back in the Old Days it was thought that if the stem was not
sufficiently inserted into the steerer, the pressure of the wedge or
expander on the threaded portion of the steerer could cause it to break.
I've never seen a steerer broken in this fashion, although that's no
more valid scientifically than tiger repellant- "you see any tigers?"
"Nope." "See, it works!"

> I doubt that evidence of the Hincapie failure would be admitted in an
> unrelated lawsuit since there are rules prohibiting the admission of
> evidence relating to "dissimilar" accidents/failures. So, unless a
> subsequent suit involved the same failure, in the same place, with
> the same fork under the same circumstances, the Hincapie failure is
> not coming in. Most plaintiffs claim to be injured while "just
> riding along" and not while racing the PR, so I doubt Trek will have
> to cope with the Hincapie failure in any real lawsuit. It may come
> up on voir dire, though -- and may not, considering how little people
> know about professional cycling. That is the only place that I would
> worry about it, but then again, that kind of voir dire would also
> bring out that Trek is raced by pros, won the TdF, etc., etc. -- Jay
> Beattie.

This is way more than I know about the law. Must be why you went to law
school!
 
Michael Press wrote:
> > >
> > > How did it come about that cyclists started to tie and
> > > solder spokes?
> >
..
>
> The only practical advantage was on penny-farthing
> bicycles where a broken spoke of that length was
> dangerous. Hence tying and soldering to prevent a broken
> spoke from whipping around dangerously.

> --
> Michael Press


So, you asked a question which you already knew the answer to. I
am curious, what exactly was your purpose in asking this question?

-- Bill
 
Michael Press wrote:
> In article
> <[email protected]>,
> "Vee" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Yeah, it seems like there are always plenty of mechanicals to go around
> > on this race. My question is, why don't they ride bikes that are
> > suitable for the cobbles? Would the 5-6 pound weight penalty of a
> > sturdy cross bike slow them down? Surely 700x38 or 700x42 tires would
> > be much easier on the bikes and riders than
> > kasillyum-race-lite-4000-tubie tires.
>
> More than three-quarters of the race is not on cobbles
> where very large tires would be too much of a handicap.
>
> --
> Michael Press

I wonder what percent of riders are delayed or DNF because of
mechanical problems on the P-R. I've only seen a couple (on video),
and it seemed like endless flat tires, taco'd wheels, bike swaps, and
riders crashing out. I find it hard to believe that the 23-28mm tires
these riders are using are the best compromise between cobbles
durability/comfort and smooth road performance. Maybe there are fewer
mechanicals than I think?

-Vee
 
On 11 Apr 2006 06:13:53 -0700, "Vee" <[email protected]> wrote:

> Surely 700x38 or 700x42 tires would
>be much easier on the bikes and riders than
>kasillyum-race-lite-4000-tubie tires.

Surely. You should be advising a ProTour team.

JT

****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************
 
On Tue, 11 Apr 2006 19:38:28 GMT, Michael Press <[email protected]> wrote:

>In article
><[email protected]>,
> "spin156" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> I have to
>> kind of laugh at all the people that pooh-pooh tying and soldering.
>> For something that some experts scoff at, it sure seems to get popular
>> every year when this race is run.
>
>How did it come about that cyclists started to tie and
>solder spokes?

There are 2 reasons to tie-and-solder spokes
1. Make the wheel stronger or stiffer. This is probably not true --
Brandt says it's not true.

2. Keep the spoke from going into the frame/derailleur/wherever. This
seems very valid to me.

JT

****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************
 
Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:
> > This pretty clearly *was not* a CF fork failure. The only question I
> > have is: did Trek change the fork column on the Bontrager Satellite
> > fork in an attempt to save weight? If the answer is "yes", then the
> > decision looks a bit foolish now. If the answer is "no" and that is the
> > stock fork column, I would have big time reservations about commuting
> > on that fork (that's apparently how it is positioned: as a "commuter"
> > fork).
>
> Or you could draw the conclusion that PR isn't a good commute route...
>
>


Or, a reasonable person (with no turf to defend) could draw the
conclusion that, once crashed, this fork may be a ticking time bomb. Of
course the rough pave of P-R accelerated it's demise after Hincapie's
first crash, but would you feel confident a year or two after a crash
commuting daily on that fork, through random rough pavement, potholes,
etc., etc.?
 
On 10 Apr 2006 20:06:55 -0700, "Ozark Bicycle"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>
>Sally wrote:
>> "Mike Jacoubowsky" <[email protected]> wrote in
>> news:[email protected]:
>>
>> > The official press release, from Zapata Espinosa at Trek, 4/10/06
>>
>> That's a pretty quick CYA.
>
>That's what all those lawyers on retainer are for.
>
>And didn't ya just love Bruyneel's kiss-the-sponsor's-ass statement?

Hell, I remember old-time Indy car racing during the tire wars watching drivers
try to describe what happened without using words like "flat."

Ron
 
> Or, a reasonable person (with no turf to defend) could draw the
> conclusion that, once crashed, this fork may be a ticking time bomb. Of
> course the rough pave of P-R accelerated it's demise after Hincapie's
> first crash, but would you feel confident a year or two after a crash
> commuting daily on that fork, through random rough pavement, potholes,
> etc., etc.?

Well yeah, if we want to talk about reasonable people, we *do* have to
wonder why the heck somebody didn't pay attention to the person who was
suggesting they ought to get George off that back after he crashed it the
first time. This failure is going to play out on multiple levels.

But no, I wouldn't feel comfortable on any fork after a serious crash,
steel, aluminum or carbon. It's amazing when I think about the things I've
gotten away with over the years. Three stem failures (two of which I recall
quite vividly, but the third I can't place anymore... my past is becoming
more distant, by a year it seems, with each passing year... funny how that
works!). Blown front tires on descents, one that, by rights, should have put
me in the hospital at least, but somehow I rode it out. Spectacular crashes
back when I raced.

And yet for some stupid, idiotic reason, I haven't found the time to replace
the 35k mile handlebars on what is now my rain bike. An accident waiting to
happen, something I trust my life to a couple times a week, descending at
speed... and I'm casing on George for not replacing his bike? Or my
customers for not understanding that they might have damaged their fork in
that crash that thrashed just about everything else?

--Mike Jacoubowsky
Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReaction.com
Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA

"Ozark Bicycle" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:
>> > This pretty clearly *was not* a CF fork failure. The only question I
>> > have is: did Trek change the fork column on the Bontrager Satellite
>> > fork in an attempt to save weight? If the answer is "yes", then the
>> > decision looks a bit foolish now. If the answer is "no" and that is the
>> > stock fork column, I would have big time reservations about commuting
>> > on that fork (that's apparently how it is positioned: as a "commuter"
>> > fork).
>>
>> Or you could draw the conclusion that PR isn't a good commute route...
>>
>>
>
>
> Or, a reasonable person (with no turf to defend) could draw the
> conclusion that, once crashed, this fork may be a ticking time bomb. Of
> course the rough pave of P-R accelerated it's demise after Hincapie's
> first crash, but would you feel confident a year or two after a crash
> commuting daily on that fork, through random rough pavement, potholes,
> etc., etc.?
>
 
[email protected] wrote:
> amakyonin wrote:
>> The cyclingnews article on the bike quotes a Trek representative in
>> discussing the steerer: "No, it's aluminium; it's been blasted then
>> anodized black". Presumably by "blasted" he means bead blasted. Are
>> either of these two practices sound things to do on an aluminum
>> steerer? Is there any value in bead blasting aluminum? I would think
>> that this process increases the risk of cracking in stressfull
>> conditions as was experienced by Hincapie. I also wonder how much the
>> elastomer damper contributed to the failure.
>
>
> Oooh! Oooh! I know this one!
>
> Lots of people bead-blast aluminum. Deda does it to at least some of
> their handlebars, and I believe GT did it to some of their aluminum
> frames in the late '90s. The reason this is generally done is that
> bead blasting causes the outer aluminum to deform plastically,
> compressing in the radial direction. (That's why it has that nifty
> flat, textured finish). This plastic deformation causes residual
> stress, keeping the outer aluminum in a "compressed" state.
>
> The claim is that this resitual stress improves fatigue life. Since
> cracks don't typically grow in regions under compressive stress
> (tension is generally what makes cracks propogate) then keeping the
> outer "fibers" of aluminum in compression keeps microcracks from
> propagating and that's where the improved fatigue life comes from. As
> I said, that's the claim. It makes sense to me from a mechanics of
> materials perspective, but I have no idea whether the theory actually
> translates into real-world fatigue-life benefits.

It doesn't, according to my instructor from yesterday's lecture. With a
mean stress below 0, fatiguing cycles still produce fatigue failures, even
if there is a compressive stress. I'm trying to remember exactly what it
was he said, but I'll ask again and find out.

--
Phil, Squid-in-Training
 
>> Legal exposure for what? The chances of Hincapie suing are zero.
>> This is a public relations issue and not a legal issue.
>
> I think to reduce legal exposure to plaintiffs pointing to a highly
> publicized event that might support their own claims against Trek.
> Lawyers are paid to think about this stuff, after all.

This stuff about lawyers has gotten way out of hand. The broken fork at PR
isn't likely to figure into any sort of legal action, ever. In the first
place, the bike had already been crashed once, and afterward discussions
when forward regarding getting George off that bike. Unfortunately, they
didn't go forward enough. Second, the conditions weren't at all typical of
normal use of the product, and would likely void *any* manufacturer's
warranty. Third, PR is infamous for breaking both bikes and riders, and as
far as I know, there haven't been lawsuits in the past.

In my humble opinion, the press release was most-likely scrutinized very
closely by the head of marketing, head of product, and the president of Trek
bicycles. They would all view this from an issue of concern for the rider,
concern for team image & results, and, of course, concern for the image of
the company (and possible effect on sales).

> This is a very unusual failure. I've never seen another one like it,
> although back in the Old Days it was thought that if the stem was not
> sufficiently inserted into the steerer, the pressure of the wedge or
> expander on the threaded portion of the steerer could cause it to break.
> I've never seen a steerer broken in this fashion, although that's no
> more valid scientifically than tiger repellant- "you see any tigers?"
> "Nope." "See, it works!"

The fact that it's unusual, and yet from a product in common use, makes it
more likely it was a result of the previous accident.

--Mike Jacoubowsky
Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReaction.com
Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA
"Tim McNamara" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>,
> "Jay Beattie" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Ozark Bicycle wrote:
>> > [email protected] wrote:
>> > > This is just bizarre, blanket, anti-lawyer statement. What kind
>> > > of suit would exist here? What kind of information would lawyers
>> > > parse in this kind of situation? I'm not a lawyer in the US, so
>> > > I understand you folks are a little more sensitive (mostly from
>> > > tv lawyering than reality, IMHO), but calling out us lawyers in
>> > > this kind of situation is just absurd. Now if we are going to
>> > > bash marketers, I'll get in line... ;)
>> >
>> >
>> > It's not clear to whom or what you are specifically replying.
>> >
>> > If it was to my comment about "lawyers on retainer", I merely meant
>> > that Trek almost surely passed the statement regarding the Hincapie
>> > incident by their lawyers to be sure they were minimizing their
>> > legal exposure. IOW, the lawyers were just doing their job.
>>
>> Legal exposure for what? The chances of Hincapie suing are zero.
>> This is a public relations issue and not a legal issue.
>
> I think to reduce legal exposure to plaintiffs pointing to a highly
> publicized event that might support their own claims against Trek.
> Lawyers are paid to think about this stuff, after all.
>
>> > FWIW, in the lawsuit happy USA, it's not inconceivable that a Trek
>> > customer with a broken fork would use the already notorious
>> > Hincapie incident to bolster their claim in a defective product
>> > suit.
>>
>> I have defended other manufacturers in broken fork cases, and I have
>> never seen a fork broken at the top of the steerer. It is almost
>> always at the crown/blade interface, and on rare occaision at the
>> crown steerer interface.
>
> This is a very unusual failure. I've never seen another one like it,
> although back in the Old Days it was thought that if the stem was not
> sufficiently inserted into the steerer, the pressure of the wedge or
> expander on the threaded portion of the steerer could cause it to break.
> I've never seen a steerer broken in this fashion, although that's no
> more valid scientifically than tiger repellant- "you see any tigers?"
> "Nope." "See, it works!"
>
>> I doubt that evidence of the Hincapie failure would be admitted in an
>> unrelated lawsuit since there are rules prohibiting the admission of
>> evidence relating to "dissimilar" accidents/failures. So, unless a
>> subsequent suit involved the same failure, in the same place, with
>> the same fork under the same circumstances, the Hincapie failure is
>> not coming in. Most plaintiffs claim to be injured while "just
>> riding along" and not while racing the PR, so I doubt Trek will have
>> to cope with the Hincapie failure in any real lawsuit. It may come
>> up on voir dire, though -- and may not, considering how little people
>> know about professional cycling. That is the only place that I would
>> worry about it, but then again, that kind of voir dire would also
>> bring out that Trek is raced by pros, won the TdF, etc., etc. -- Jay
>> Beattie.
>
> This is way more than I know about the law. Must be why you went to law
> school!
 
"Phil, Squid-in-Training" <[email protected]> wrote
in news:FUY_f.715$fG3.27@dukeread09:

> [email protected] wrote:
>> amakyonin wrote:
>>> The cyclingnews article on the bike quotes a Trek representative in
>>> discussing the steerer: "No, it's aluminium; it's been blasted then
>>> anodized black". Presumably by "blasted" he means bead blasted. Are
>>> either of these two practices sound things to do on an aluminum
>>> steerer? Is there any value in bead blasting aluminum? I would think
>>> that this process increases the risk of cracking in stressfull
>>> conditions as was experienced by Hincapie. I also wonder how much
>>> the elastomer damper contributed to the failure.
>>
>>
>> Oooh! Oooh! I know this one!
>>
>> Lots of people bead-blast aluminum. Deda does it to at least some of
>> their handlebars, and I believe GT did it to some of their aluminum
>> frames in the late '90s. The reason this is generally done is that
>> bead blasting causes the outer aluminum to deform plastically,
>> compressing in the radial direction. (That's why it has that nifty
>> flat, textured finish). This plastic deformation causes residual
>> stress, keeping the outer aluminum in a "compressed" state.
>>
>> The claim is that this resitual stress improves fatigue life. Since
>> cracks don't typically grow in regions under compressive stress
>> (tension is generally what makes cracks propogate) then keeping the
>> outer "fibers" of aluminum in compression keeps microcracks from
>> propagating and that's where the improved fatigue life comes from. As
>> I said, that's the claim. It makes sense to me from a mechanics of
>> materials perspective, but I have no idea whether the theory actually
>> translates into real-world fatigue-life benefits.
>
> It doesn't, according to my instructor from yesterday's lecture. With
> a mean stress below 0, fatiguing cycles still produce fatigue
> failures, even if there is a compressive stress. I'm trying to
> remember exactly what it was he said, but I'll ask again and find out.
>

Well, your prof. is wrong. Shot peening has been proven to increase
fatigue life.

--
Mike DeMicco <[email protected]>
 
What's the point of an aluminum steerer over steel? I can see in larger
diameters aluminum has a strength to weight advantage over steel, but in
small diameters? No. I can't help but think if the steerer tube of this
fork were made of steel then it wouldn't have failed.

--
Mike DeMicco <[email protected]>
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

tctucker57
Hincapie Speedsuit
Replies
3
Views
2K
Cycling Equipment
Yojimbo_
Yojimbo_
metgt4
Hincapie Compression Wear
Replies
1
Views
990
Cycling Equipment
TKOS
TKOS
Michael Reyes
How do I fix a wheel with multiple broken spokes?
Replies
6
Views
31
Cycling Equipment
ppalaver
ppalaver
travis200
Fixing a broken spoke on the trail – what to do?
Replies
0
Views
125
Cycling Equipment
travis200
travis200
mosscomes
Broken brake on Cable Doubler 1:2 Set: Looking for ideas/information
Replies
21
Views
797
Cycling Equipment
GearGuru99
GearGuru99
Top Bottom Back