I have a QR Tequilo and today i noticed it looks like it may have a crack on the fork. The section in question is about an inch above the QR decal and just below where the blade begins to curve toward the steerer tube. The alleged crack begins a bit in from the leading edge of the blade, goes across the outer edge of the blade, around the back side and a very short distance across the back side. How can i tell if the fork is truly cracked how will i know if it is a material breach of the fork’s structural integrity is a fork normally covered under the manufacturer’s warranty for the frame?
how old is your bike? what color is your bike? do you have any idea what kind or style of fork it is?
Look at it this way… You have now a very nice and effective PAPER WEIGHT 
My Tequilo is a 2001 model purchased new from Helen’s in Oct 02 (could be sept or nov - can’t remember off the top of my head but have receipt somewhere). It’s the stock fork that is red at the top with a fade to clearcoat over the carbon fiber weave. The 01 frame (though i am probably not telling you anything you don’t already know) is black & red.
I looked at the warranty language at rooworld.com but it was unclear to me whether or not the fork is considered a component or part of the frame - each having different warranty periods. I am guessing it qualifies as a component in which case i am probably out of luck.
I really can’t tell if it is cracked or not but won’t be riding it until i get it checked out - hopefully this weekend i’ll be able to get it looked at.
650c if it makes any difference.
“My Tequilo is a 2001 model”
i can’t be of any existence. if it was a model that was built when i was running QR then i could give you an opinion. but it was built after my time.
Brain no worky before coffee.
-Robert
Dan - I appreciate the effort. As always, you are a true statesman of the sport.
Oh, and i am sorry to hear that you are now questioning your existance.
I’d like to see an article on which bike manufacturers do to support their products. By model and by year. Perhaps there would be quite a bit of resistance to it by the manufacturers. I can’t see them complaining too much if the article just describes their stated policies and doesn’t go into user experiences.
I wouldn’t mind seeing user experiences either if it was done right. Wouldn’t it be great if we had a database where we could enter the serial numbers of the bikes we own. Then surveys could be cross referenced to this database so we know it’s not somebody with a monetary interest who is slamming or praising something.
I have a 2003 QR Tequilo and I cracked my fork on both sides in roughly the same area you did. I didn’t get any warranty coverage, and ended up with the new Easton EC90 Aero. The replacement fork is incredible, and my LBS felt bad for me, so they gave me an incredible deal. I hit a dog while riding with one of the owners.
----->Trent
Hey, I jumped in on this late, but here’s my 2 cents FWIW:
If you suspect your fork is cracked key word: SUSPECT. Do not ride it. At all. The injuries that result from a sudden fork failure are almost always serious. They are usually facial and dental. The worst non-fatal cycling accident I saw was a facial at 15 mph onto the pavement. The person nearly died from tooth fragments lodged in their throat. It happened 400 feet from where I am typing this.
You may not be able to detect if the material is breeched. Your bike shop may not either. But if their is reasonable concern, replace it.
Put it this way, if it were a helicopter rotor blade, would you fly in it?
The fork may be covered. QR/ABG is very good about warranty service. That said, remember, this is racing equipment. That means a “lifetime warranty” is good for about 3-4 years max. That is a reasonable lifespan for the product. Some products less. Racing equipment is optimised for performance, not durability. If you got three seasons out of it, you did good. Time to replace.
Look at it this way: We never get a consumer in our store saying, “I want to buy the heaviest, sturdiest, most overbuilt triathlon frame you have becasue I want it to last 20 years…”
Instead they say, “What is the lightest, fastest frame you can sell me?”
Tom - Thanks for the advice and input. Take a look at the feedback i got from an LBS.
I took it in to the LBS yesterday for a quick look. This LBS is not a QR dealer - InsideOut Sports is my local dealer I but didn’t have time to get out there. Here is what the LBS said: (and by the way, while i was in there i ran into my primary physician who was asking some very basic questions about buying a first tri bike. they pulled the old “stand over this one trick.” This shop sells nothing but slack road bikes and a mix of MTB/tandems/kids bikes. Not wanting to interupt the expert fitting i saw going on, i kept my mouth shut but plan on gong in for some unscheduled blood work this week.) They thought it was probably just a paint crack at the seam where the carbon and aluminum come together (i had not thought of that but the line i am seeing is VERY straight) They said they see this a lot on Treks - of course they are not a trek dealer and my bike is not a trek, so i am not really sure why they felt it important to say this. They seemed to think that “it wouldn’t just break off while i was riding” and that “it would make a lot of noise and be obvious” if there was a reasonable threat of a serious problem. They would ride it but “watch it carefully.”
Based on your feedback, the feedback from the LBS and my instincts, my plan is to: I am going to call ABG on Monday to find out if this is a known/common problem and ask for guidance. Based on what ABG says, I may or may not get the fork into IOS for a looksee. In the meantime, i will mount a digital camera with a constant loop live feed to a plasma screen that i will wear on my wrist at all times to “Watch it carefully” as the LBS suggested.
That said, remember, this is racing equipment. That means a “lifetime warranty” is good for about 3-4 years max. That is a reasonable lifespan for the product. Some products less. Racing equipment is optimised for performance, not durability. If you got three seasons out of it, you did good. Time to replace.
The way the problem with the fork is described, it sounds like their may have been an accident some time back and the results are just now showing up, so what I am saying below has nothing to do with ABG. But with all due respect to Tom, his comments above describe a situation that would be unacceptable. To say that it is acceptable to have to replace a frame or fork with lifetime warranty after 3-4 years of racing is ridiculous, and a misunderstanding of good engineering and design. It is full-well possible to design a bike frame or other parts that are very light and very durable, and that is what bike companies should be doing. No bike company designs forks to work for 3-4 years and then crack, they would be ON crack if they did. Could you imagine the litigation?
Lifetime is lifetime, of course there are the usual limitations such as crashes, original owner, etc, but we’re not driving Formula 1 cars here. We’re not talking professionals racing in a controlled environment with 100 ewngineers monitoring the equipment continuously, we’re talking ordinary human beings buying a bike at a bike shop who have a real risk of serious harm if the product malfunctions. A bike company has to or at least should engineer so much safety margin into its products given that we don’t know what the consumer will do with the bike, that it should never fail.
Of course, a part can always fail especially if the part has been damaged invisibly in a crash or something like that (and hopefully the company has had the sense to design a fail-safe mode into the product) but to expect only 3-4 years out of a lifetime guaranteed part is not right. And I can tell you that ten years down the road something happens to your Cervelo, lifetime will mean lifetime.
I’ll tell you something Gerard, and this is not a Cervelo/Gerard ass-kissing contest as I am sometimes accussed of on this forum and elsewhere.
Your take on this is distinctly different that many other manufacturers, and that is a big part of what sets Cervelo apart from (and above) other manufacturers or, excuse me, distributors.
Cannondale bikes (and this is not a condemnation of them- I am racing on an IM2000 frame right now) have warning stickers on them about their durability and the necessity to inspect them and discontinue riding if there is a crack.
In the
Cannondale owner’s manual there for the Optimo tubing bike there is an addendum that says, direct quote: “you have chosen perfromance and light weight over durability”
Litespeed makes a titanium bike with a 200 pound weight limit.
Cervelo, that i am aware of, is the only company perfroming the degree of fatigue or “lifespan” testing on their bikes that they are- probably higher than anyone else in the industry. It would seem no one else is concerned about the longevity or durability of their bikes to the degree Cervelo appears to be. We use that as a selling point. It is a tag line in some Cervelo print ads.
I wish more consumers understood how valuable it is.
I don’t mean to take this thread in a different direction, but the previous two posts reflect a question I’m wrestling with right now. Our bike club is fortunate to have a frame sponsor who sells us frames at a discount. We can get their frames for around $650. These frames are extremely light. I’m sure they’re made by some manufacturer in Taiwan, and not a lot of thought has gone into their design. They use a standard geometry and a standard lightweight tubeset. It’s what I call a disposable bike. Race on it two years, sell it for half what I paid and get another discount frame. The other bike I’m considering has a lot of engineering behind the design to produce a frame that is light (though maybe not as light as the other one) but rugged and reliable. I’m sure this frame will last many years. This frame costs about twice as much as the team frame, though I feel I can afford it so cost is not too much of a factor.
The question is should one go with the cheap short-lived light frame or the more expensive, better quality, long lasting frame. Or is this such a personal choice that there can’t be an answer.
I’m confused. If the manufacturer says it’s a lifetime warranty I’m not expecting a 3 to 4 year life expectancy.
In fact if my forks were to break down in 3 to 4 years, even if they had no lifetime warranty, I’d sue. As I’m sure most everybody here would. Nobody risks their lives over things like this no matter who they are.
Well Curmudgeon, your confusion is well founded.
Firstly, the term “Lifetime Warranty” can be misleading. It can be interpreted as meaning the duration of the owner’s lifespan, i.e., until they die. Or, it can mean the lifespan of the product.
In the case of the lifespan of the product, that is nearly impossible to quantify in advance. I believe Gerard eithr told me that on the phone or I read it from him here in a post.
Consequently, for some products, you can only determine if their lifespan has expired once it has expired. Part of the reason for this is people use up products at a different rate. A determined athlete riding a bike hard 150+ miles per week will cause the product to reach the end of its lifespan much quicker than a rider who is lighter, rides less, and operates the bike in a less demanding environment.
I think there are some products with a “Lifetime Warranty” that literally means “As long as the owner is living”. I think Craftsman brand tools either are or were warranted like this.
However, other products have a “Lifetime Warranty” that extends to the normal lifespan of the product, subject to evaluation/approval by the manufacturer/distributor/vendor.
And things do just wear out.
Gerard made a good point that we aren’t tlaking about Formula 1 cars here, on the absolute emerging edge of experimental technology. Pragmatically, he is right.
However, consider that the equipment sitting on my sales floor today is more advanced, lighter, more aerodynamic and more expensive to make than bicycles used by the most elite, professional cyclits in the world just 12 years ago.
Street-level consumers want what the pros ride. But they want it without any of the limitations.
They want a Formula 1 car with a 100,000 mile, bumper to bumper warranty. That is an unreasonable expectation. The reality lies somewhere between those two extremes.
Additionally, some people mistake a warranty for a subscription. In general, warranties apply to **defects **in materials and workmanship. That suggest there was something wrong with the equipment when it was made, at the time it was made. If it takes 3-4 years of hard use to manifest a failure, that is not likely (although still possibly) a defect at the time of manufacture. It probably just wore out, or was crashed, or was damaged on a car rack or by a mechanic accidentally.
And finally, Gerard has the priveldge of living in Canada, where I beleive that liability laws may be different than the U.S.
I notice Cervelo bicycles do not cme with an owner’s manual. Becasue of that, we have to have the buyer make two additional initials acknowledging that no owner’s manual is provided by the manufacturer and that the buyer accepts the responsibility to use reasonable and customary care in familiarizing themselves with the equipment prior to operating it. Additionally, they must initial (and sign at the bottom) a document that states they understand they may ask us any questions regarding the safe operation of the bike- ackowledging that we have offered to answer any of these questions prior to the owner incurring a loss.
Sound silly? It isn’t.
I was sued for $980,000.00 + $90,000.00 in costs because, and I quote this directly from the complaint as I remeber it vividly:
“The Defendant, Bikesport, Inc., 1, Failed to provide adequate warning of the risks associated with operating a bicycle in an urban environment, and: 2, Failed to provide the Plaintiff with the opportunity to read the owner’s manual prior to a test ride, as described on page 3 of the owner’s manual.”
That was worth $1 million, 2.5 years out of my life (how long the entire lawsuit took), 10 days in court, 4 hours on the stand and unquantifiable other expense.
The person who filed the complaint lost. They got nothing from us or our insurance company. In 10 days of trial and after $90,000.00 preparing their case, including over 5 hours of expert medical witness testimnony, they failed to establish our comparative negligence contributed to the plaintiff’s loss.
After all that, we won, they got nothing, and I had to go through hell.
So yeah, if you even suspect your fork is broken, there is only one thing I can legally tell you in the U.S. without being “negligent”: Discontinue use immediately and replace.
Thanks Tom for your thoughtful reply.
I wasn’t aware of this alternate interpretation of “Lifetime Warranty”. I’m accustomed to Lifetime Warranty meaning it lasts the life of the person who bought the product. The hardware I specifically know something about, which has no impact to human health, is meant to give out in 20 to 40 years. Other things I know very little about, like carbon Trek bike frames, seem to wear out much sooner yet they honor their Lifetime Warranty as I expect them to. Craftman tools break quite frequently but they also honor their Lifetime Warranty. SnapOn tools are a bit different. They also have Lifetime Warranties but they stake their reputation on their tools never breaking. Of course if it ever does break they replace it. Many hiking companies also have Lifetime Warranties. I have taken advantage of them for over 20 years. Thermarest and Gregory backpacks come to mind.
After doing a bit of research though I found that there is indeed a whole different perspective on what a lifetime warranty means. As can be found at http://www.usatoday.com/money/perfi/columnist/lamb/0004.htm which describes the problems.
I must say that I strongly dislike companies that offer these types of “lifetime warranties”. I’ll leave it understated like that.
I would say my answer to that question depends on what durability we are talking about. I would split it up in two groups. The first group is what most people focus on, mimic a rider pedalling teh bike and see how many cycles the frame goes before it breaks. This is the type of durability thatis covered by a lifetime warranty, so it is important from that point of view. The problem is that the lifetime warranty can be a big let-down, in the sense that people feel that as long as their purchase has such a warranty, they will be OK. Even if it breaks, you get a new one, right? But how long will it take to get a new one, will it be replaced or repaired, how good will the repair be, will you be without your bike for the most important race of the season, etc. So even with a lifetime warranty, you want to avoid ever having to use it. Tom will know this better, but there are a few manufacturers with lifetime warranty that make it so difficult to actually claim on it that it becomes useless. But it sounds good on the sales floor.
The good thing about this kind of durability is that even if the frame fails, it is usually not catastrophic. So it is a pain in the neck, but not a broken neck (although with some of the carbon frames nowadays it can be quite dangerous too). The second type of durability, focusing on how durable a frame is in special circumstances (for example hitting a curb or a pothole) is much more important in light of your safety. Aluminum frames usually do quite well in impact tests, simply due to the ductility of the material. Carbon is a horrible material for this, so it takes quite a bit of engineering to get it right. Very, very few carbon frames currently on the market meet the standards that I feel should be mandatory in this regard, and I am quite afraid about what is going to happen in the next few years with these frames. A frame slowly debonding due to a fatigue problem is one thing, but your front end snapping off when hitting a pothole is quite another.
Bottomline, if you think your frame is flawed in that it will slowly come apart in a fatigue situation, you may notneed to worry about it nearly as much as if your frame might not be very good in an impact situation. Of course, you don’t really know, all you know is that not much effort was put into the design. FRames made without any engineering are not per definition bad, they could be very good just by the luck of the draw. The problem is, you won’t know until you have yours tested and then it will be unrideable.
Well, without being all bum licky about it, one of the things I most like about my Dual is the frame strength. I’m 6ft, 210lbs in your money. I don’t think I am particularly ‘easy’ on my equipment, and certainly as soon as I found a crack etc I would replace.
Having said that, I feel pretty safe on my Cervelo. And fast too. But safe beats fast, most of the time.
Add that to the list of reasons I am going down the mountain in Nice in two weeks on an R2.5.
Because I trust it.