Frame Warranty
Discussion
How much should the amount of warranty on a bike frame come into one's thinking when purchasing a new bike?
After looking at Cannondale and Cube, last weekend i looked at some Trek and Specialized road bikes and have found in my research that the latter both have unlimited warranty's on the bike's frames. Where as the dale and Cube are only 5 years IIRC.
There's quite a bit of info around on people having problems with frames - most within their warranty period but i'm sure there's plenty out there that have had theirs break many years on and have possibly had to buy a new frame or a new bike if the components aren't worth moving over etc etc...
Ironically the LBS i visited last weekend have just started stocking Focus bikes and one chap who'd spent £1800 on a new bike brought it in (whilst i was there) having had it only a week only to find his frame has broken already! No potholes or kerbs involved either!
Aside from the issues i'm having over choosing a new bike (think i need some kind of neutral bike shopped), anyone have any thoughts on the above?
Gaz
After looking at Cannondale and Cube, last weekend i looked at some Trek and Specialized road bikes and have found in my research that the latter both have unlimited warranty's on the bike's frames. Where as the dale and Cube are only 5 years IIRC.
There's quite a bit of info around on people having problems with frames - most within their warranty period but i'm sure there's plenty out there that have had theirs break many years on and have possibly had to buy a new frame or a new bike if the components aren't worth moving over etc etc...
Ironically the LBS i visited last weekend have just started stocking Focus bikes and one chap who'd spent £1800 on a new bike brought it in (whilst i was there) having had it only a week only to find his frame has broken already! No potholes or kerbs involved either!
Aside from the issues i'm having over choosing a new bike (think i need some kind of neutral bike shopped), anyone have any thoughts on the above?
Gaz
5 years is reasonable, IMO.
I have an older Cannondale with the 25 year warranty, and I know that it gave them problems in replacing loads of frames. I guess that's why they've reigned it in now.
The problem is that lighter alu and carbon frames have a fatigue life. They're using "race" technology on consumer bikes as people buy on weight and looks. they will only endure the stresses for so long, and we can't expect manufacturers to keep sending out new frame for a lifetime...
I have an older Cannondale with the 25 year warranty, and I know that it gave them problems in replacing loads of frames. I guess that's why they've reigned it in now.
The problem is that lighter alu and carbon frames have a fatigue life. They're using "race" technology on consumer bikes as people buy on weight and looks. they will only endure the stresses for so long, and we can't expect manufacturers to keep sending out new frame for a lifetime...
WeirdNeville said:
The problem is that lighter alu and carbon frames have a fatigue life. They're using "race" technology on consumer bikes as people buy on weight and looks. they will only endure the stresses for so long, and we can't expect manufacturers to keep sending out new frame for a lifetime...
I understand what you're saying, but does that move things more towards buying a Trek or Specialized with their unlimited warranty's?Also i've already been advised that the frame and then wheels are more important than its components, but what exactly makes a good frame over an average one?
Oh right, I get you...
Well, I suppose it depends on your intent for the bike. 5 years, really, is pretty much what a bike lasts me as a daily rider. After 5 years it's value is pretty much nothing, and you will hopefully have had good service out of it. 8 years down the line if a frame developed a crack would you find yourself thinking "fair do's" or "Where's my warranty booklet!" If you're one mindset or the other than there's your answer.
All other things being equal, the frame warranty could be the deciding factor, but really 5 years is a decent warranty, and I'd let other factors like the fit of the bike, it's specification or weight or just the feel of it when ridden be the primary factor.
Well, I suppose it depends on your intent for the bike. 5 years, really, is pretty much what a bike lasts me as a daily rider. After 5 years it's value is pretty much nothing, and you will hopefully have had good service out of it. 8 years down the line if a frame developed a crack would you find yourself thinking "fair do's" or "Where's my warranty booklet!" If you're one mindset or the other than there's your answer.
All other things being equal, the frame warranty could be the deciding factor, but really 5 years is a decent warranty, and I'd let other factors like the fit of the bike, it's specification or weight or just the feel of it when ridden be the primary factor.
Difficult to say as i guess the circumstances if say after 5 years it develops a crack might determine whether i could afford to just replace the frame/bike or if i couldn't afford to and wished i had the unlimited warranty.
Through the last few months of research i've always said it's more about buying the right bike, but i think i've always been conscious of the components/wheels and overall quality of the bike as i want to get as much quality over all aspects of the bike for the money.
For example i think i'm setting an approx £1500 limit which should get me a very good aluminium framed bike and hopefully good components. At that price i could be tempted by carbon but i'd like to think i'll get far more bike for the bike with an alum frame. (The bike must also be of a more relaxed geometry than say a CAAD 10 which is far more arse up, head down)
But with information now about frames, its making me look more towards the Trek 2.3 or 2.5 as apposed to the Cube peloton 2012 bikes or the Cannondale Synapse range previously considered.......
Through the last few months of research i've always said it's more about buying the right bike, but i think i've always been conscious of the components/wheels and overall quality of the bike as i want to get as much quality over all aspects of the bike for the money.
For example i think i'm setting an approx £1500 limit which should get me a very good aluminium framed bike and hopefully good components. At that price i could be tempted by carbon but i'd like to think i'll get far more bike for the bike with an alum frame. (The bike must also be of a more relaxed geometry than say a CAAD 10 which is far more arse up, head down)
But with information now about frames, its making me look more towards the Trek 2.3 or 2.5 as apposed to the Cube peloton 2012 bikes or the Cannondale Synapse range previously considered.......
I'd have thought a 5yr warranty was pretty good, in fact my initial reaction was "5yrs ? how do they afford that ?".
As WeirdNeville says, they are balancing modern race technology against longevity, something ultralight that shoots up a mountain with a 9st rider and then gets changed at the end of the season isn't going to go down well with a 12st rider hopping off curbs. (Ok, I realise you're probably not jumping curbs but in 5yrs there's a good chance you'll hit a decent pothole)
If it's going to be your only bike and ridden in both summer & winter, then assuming you're covered for the first 12 months then I'd forget the warranty and concentrate more on getting something that fits you well, you enjoy riding and like the looks of it. After 5yrs you'll have replaced bearings/transmission, maybe even the wheels and the paintwork will be looking tired because riding in rain & gritty roads really wears things out. I'd guess by then you'll probably have relegated it to a winter bike and bought a sparkly new one for summer because there are news design trends and you've decided it's not worth upgrading your old one.
brian
As WeirdNeville says, they are balancing modern race technology against longevity, something ultralight that shoots up a mountain with a 9st rider and then gets changed at the end of the season isn't going to go down well with a 12st rider hopping off curbs. (Ok, I realise you're probably not jumping curbs but in 5yrs there's a good chance you'll hit a decent pothole)
If it's going to be your only bike and ridden in both summer & winter, then assuming you're covered for the first 12 months then I'd forget the warranty and concentrate more on getting something that fits you well, you enjoy riding and like the looks of it. After 5yrs you'll have replaced bearings/transmission, maybe even the wheels and the paintwork will be looking tired because riding in rain & gritty roads really wears things out. I'd guess by then you'll probably have relegated it to a winter bike and bought a sparkly new one for summer because there are news design trends and you've decided it's not worth upgrading your old one.
brian
it is rare that a top end alu frames from one of the major brands will fail without there being some contributing factor from the rider such as a crash, dropping off kerbs or some other wholly inappropriate use for the bike. crashing an alu bike shouldnt result in a warranty claim unless you hit other things, just dropping it on a descent shouldnt be an issue.
a warranty is far more important on a carbon frame where fatigue and a crash will write off the frame but even then, would i cash in the warranty or i would probably strip the bits off and then upgrade the frame.
people like cannondale have been making alu bikes for the best part of 25 years so they know their business and the material better than anyone else. if you are looking at alu, the warranty wouldnt come into the purchase decision imo. the caad10 is the best alu bike out there.
as for carbon, i guess it depends how much you think you will need the warranty based on the amount/type of miles you do. if its going to be a commuter or a race bike, the chances of crashing are higher, if its just for sportives and sunday club rides etc then the chances are lower.
personally, if i crashed and it was covered by my insurance and the warranty, if its anything over 3 years i would probably go with the insurance claim and get something different if the premium increase wasnt going to be too high.
a warranty is far more important on a carbon frame where fatigue and a crash will write off the frame but even then, would i cash in the warranty or i would probably strip the bits off and then upgrade the frame.
people like cannondale have been making alu bikes for the best part of 25 years so they know their business and the material better than anyone else. if you are looking at alu, the warranty wouldnt come into the purchase decision imo. the caad10 is the best alu bike out there.
as for carbon, i guess it depends how much you think you will need the warranty based on the amount/type of miles you do. if its going to be a commuter or a race bike, the chances of crashing are higher, if its just for sportives and sunday club rides etc then the chances are lower.
personally, if i crashed and it was covered by my insurance and the warranty, if its anything over 3 years i would probably go with the insurance claim and get something different if the premium increase wasnt going to be too high.
pablo said:
a warranty is far more important on a carbon frame where fatigue and a crash will write off the frame but even then, would i cash in the warranty or i would probably strip the bits off and then upgrade the frame.
as for carbon, i guess it depends how much you think you will need the warranty based on the amount/type of miles you do. if its going to be a commuter or a race bike, the chances of crashing are higher, if its just for sportives and sunday club rides etc then the chances are lower.
personally, if i crashed and it was covered by my insurance and the warranty, if its anything over 3 years i would probably go with the insurance claim and get something different if the premium increase wasnt going to be too high.
Carbon fibre doesn't fatigue, so just using it will not result in failure, as can happen with metal frames.as for carbon, i guess it depends how much you think you will need the warranty based on the amount/type of miles you do. if its going to be a commuter or a race bike, the chances of crashing are higher, if its just for sportives and sunday club rides etc then the chances are lower.
personally, if i crashed and it was covered by my insurance and the warranty, if its anything over 3 years i would probably go with the insurance claim and get something different if the premium increase wasnt going to be too high.
Any breakage in a carbon frame is either due to a defect in the carbon or something damaging the carbon, such as a heavy crash.
Metal bikes still have a place and I'd pretty much agree with what you are saying, but IMO carbon frames are superior and depending on what the use is, usually the better option. Certainly if it is any form of racing, then carbon is usually best.
The article is aimed at forks, but the same applies to frames and covers fatigue and carbon life pretty well: http://velonews.competitor.com/2002/12/bikes-and-t...
I have no idea where this idea that carbon fibre fatigues and 'wears out' more quickly than metals comes from.
I wouldn't give a second thought to the length of warranty on a frame, but I would take into account manufacturers crash replacement policies, since 99.9% of the time, that's going to be the reason your carbon frame is out of action. But even then, there are many places now that will repair a carbon frame and cost no more than paying a decent frame builder to replace a steel tube. Looking to repair a frame, I'd much rather have a carbon frame to repair than an aliminium frame.
I have no idea where this idea that carbon fibre fatigues and 'wears out' more quickly than metals comes from.
I wouldn't give a second thought to the length of warranty on a frame, but I would take into account manufacturers crash replacement policies, since 99.9% of the time, that's going to be the reason your carbon frame is out of action. But even then, there are many places now that will repair a carbon frame and cost no more than paying a decent frame builder to replace a steel tube. Looking to repair a frame, I'd much rather have a carbon frame to repair than an aliminium frame.
is the general consensus then, that carbon has such a high level of fatigue resistance compared to other materials that its considered as irrelevant. surely carbon frames are still subjected to the same vibrations from the road as steel frames? as an example the super stiff carbon TT frames must experience some level of fatigue?
Carbon fibre just doesn't fatigue. It isn't a metal and it is only metals that experience the problem.
Wikipedia explains it fairly well: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metal_fatigue.
Delamination can occur with carbon fibre, but that is a different process and usually heat is the cause, so not a problem with bike frames.
Wikipedia explains it fairly well: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metal_fatigue.
Delamination can occur with carbon fibre, but that is a different process and usually heat is the cause, so not a problem with bike frames.
Obviously bike manufacturers/sellers have a huge stake in it, but every report I've ever seen has put carbon at the top for fatigue and aliminium at the bottom. I honestly think it's just the mental image that people have of carbon shattering and steel bending that colours their instinct on how the materials will last/behave/fail over time.
Good, though long paper here: http://www.calfeedesign.com/tech-papers/technical-...
Another source with a vested interest, but they really do know their stuff.
Good, though long paper here: http://www.calfeedesign.com/tech-papers/technical-...
Another source with a vested interest, but they really do know their stuff.
matt-ITR said:
Carbon fibre just doesn't fatigue. It isn't a metal and it is only metals that experience the problem.
Wikipedia explains it fairly well: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metal_fatigue.
Delamination can occur with carbon fibre, but that is a different process and usually heat is the cause, so not a problem with bike frames.
That's not strictly correct. Carbon fibre does fatigue. If designed and engineered properly, it's comparatively high fatigue threshold along with it's s2w makes it attractive to use in things like bike frames & components.Wikipedia explains it fairly well: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metal_fatigue.
Delamination can occur with carbon fibre, but that is a different process and usually heat is the cause, so not a problem with bike frames.
Of course, the biggest constraint with CF is the additional complexity of manufacture and designing for endurance.
A lot depends on the frame material. I would not buy a CF frame without a decent warranty. Trek / Gary Fisher have excelent warranties and I have a riding buddy who is on his 4th free Top Fuel 9.9 frame. My neighbour has returned 2 Gary Fisher frames.
Personally my Orange has a 3 year warranty, 5 years on the bearings and 1 year on paint. I am on my second '5 and I have never had an issue!
Personally my Orange has a 3 year warranty, 5 years on the bearings and 1 year on paint. I am on my second '5 and I have never had an issue!
bga said:
matt-ITR said:
Carbon fibre just doesn't fatigue. It isn't a metal and it is only metals that experience the problem.
Wikipedia explains it fairly well: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metal_fatigue.
Delamination can occur with carbon fibre, but that is a different process and usually heat is the cause, so not a problem with bike frames.
That's not strictly correct. Carbon fibre does fatigue. If designed and engineered properly, it's comparatively high fatigue threshold along with it's s2w makes it attractive to use in things like bike frames & components.Wikipedia explains it fairly well: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metal_fatigue.
Delamination can occur with carbon fibre, but that is a different process and usually heat is the cause, so not a problem with bike frames.
Of course, the biggest constraint with CF is the additional complexity of manufacture and designing for endurance.
pablo said:
in my head I am thinking of the wings on new airlines which are mostly composite and flex alot during take off, flight and landing which is probably not a fair comparison to a bicycle frame. surely those wings have been designed toflex and are subject to fatigue, especially giventhe temeprature cycle a plane goes through and the forces a re wing is subjected to.
I don't think they are very dissimilar. The component has been designed to flex a certain amount and sticking within those parameters you should have an acceptable amount of fatigue. The same applies to all materials. Also bear in mind the likelihood of being able to collect on the warranty, should you be unfortunate enough to need it. Unfortunately all companies are not the same. Some fall over themselves to help, and others... not so much. All anecdotal and it depends on a few cases either way so I'm not going to offer a lot of evidence to back this up. But keep it in mind and talk to your dealer.
Many thanks for all the replies chaps 
It's definitely sunday club rides, sportives and maybe even for commuting that i want the bike - no real want for racing at all, but i'd still very much like a quality bike but also one that is comfortable, maybe with more a relaxed geometry and i can enjoy riding - increasing my distances so i can work my way up to sportive type events next year. In this respect i know i'll be looking at aluminium rather than carbon which is fine.
However, what i'm finding is nearly every LBS i try always thinks they have the best advice and the best bikes in terms of what they are actually selling. It's very difficult to get an impartial view on what brand/frame/components suit me best. I'd never have picked up the whole frame warranty issue until visiting the trek dealer last weekend. A lot of valid points i'll admit, but straight away i did think " well you would say that when you're trying to sell me that particular brand/model".....
I'd much rather use an LBS than somewhere online, but at the moment online is giving me a better chance of places that sell a lot of brands rather than one or two main ones, can offer better deals and aren't going to sway me into buying any bike off the shop floor.
It's definitely sunday club rides, sportives and maybe even for commuting that i want the bike - no real want for racing at all, but i'd still very much like a quality bike but also one that is comfortable, maybe with more a relaxed geometry and i can enjoy riding - increasing my distances so i can work my way up to sportive type events next year. In this respect i know i'll be looking at aluminium rather than carbon which is fine.
However, what i'm finding is nearly every LBS i try always thinks they have the best advice and the best bikes in terms of what they are actually selling. It's very difficult to get an impartial view on what brand/frame/components suit me best. I'd never have picked up the whole frame warranty issue until visiting the trek dealer last weekend. A lot of valid points i'll admit, but straight away i did think " well you would say that when you're trying to sell me that particular brand/model".....
I'd much rather use an LBS than somewhere online, but at the moment online is giving me a better chance of places that sell a lot of brands rather than one or two main ones, can offer better deals and aren't going to sway me into buying any bike off the shop floor.
Gassing Station | Pedal Powered | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff