Quote:

---

vaxn8r wrote:
I don't think you can actually "stress" a CF fork. Barring damage of some sort, or poor engineering, it ought to last forever. A poorly engineered fork ought to fail fairly quickly.

I just don't know how you can be sure the fork failed first, thus causing the accident. It could have been a squirrel, deer, a rock, a stick as you mentioned, who knows?

Anyway, you can't dwell too much on such things. Get a new fork if it's freaking you out...no disrespect intended.

---

Perhaps "stressing" a CF fork is not an entirely accurate description. I meant, for example, if you weighed 250lbs and slammed into potholes every day, besides going broke from repairing wheels, I can't believe it would be too good for the rest of the components including the fork.

Regarding poor engineering. Performance bike components are engineered to be the lightest weight without sacreficing safety and performance. A CF fork can be designed and built to withstand being run over by an M1A1 Abrams tank without damage. Of course that fork would be ridiculously huge, heavy and far in excess of what any cyclist would need. So how much do you remove before the fork is unsafe for a cyclist? Do you then call it poorly engineered? Or just "pushing the envelope"?

The airplane tail section that broke off several years ago CAUSING a horrific crash and loss of life. Was that poorly engineered? It certainly didn't fail quickly (I presume you mean time of usage before failure rather than rate of failure from onset). It lasted many years, hours of service and miles logged before failure.


I am NOT sure the fork failed causing the crash! Several times I said we "believe" and words to that effect. But regardless, there is no other evidence to show otherwise. There is no reason to believe the fork broke apart as a result OF the crash. Eyewitness accounts of events are notoriously inaccurate. Five people, five different stories. So even if my friend DID remember exactly what happend, analysis of the fork would still provide the most accurate evidence of why it failed.

Say for example that the fork was in fact designed to withstand having a one inch oak stick slammed into it at 30mph. Analysis could show that there was a manufacturing flaw because this particular unit was made on a Friday at 4:45 and was missing a layer of CF, for example.

Our debate here seems to stem from your belief that the fork can't be analyzed and I think it can. Also you believe that since there are no eyewitness accounts, accurate info can't be determined. Again I disagree. With all due respect, I'd just as soon end this sub-thread because neither of us can prove our points (unless I drop the fork off to Kestrel) and in fact, are only our opinions.

...And no. I feel no disrespect. As I've said before in this forum: To paraphrase a sig line I like: I may completely disagree with what you say, but I will defend with my life your right to say it.

--------------------
Skuke
95 Carbonframes Tetra Pro
92 Bridgestone MB-1
90 Moser 51.151

Post Extras