slightly damaged frame--ride it?

Pat said:

I was given a good looking early mountain bike, built
about 1990. I took it to the yard to wash it and
discovered slight bulges in the down tube and top tube.
The funny thing is, the undersides of both tubes have
these slight wrinkles, but the top side of the tubes do
not look or feel in the least as if they are bent.

Sounds like he ran into something.

Quoted message said:

I can understand that the head tube/fork angle to the
frame may not be the same as Trek intended in 1990, but
what I don't know is: is this frame dangerous to ride? Can
somebody with experience give me some insight on this?

Eventually it will crack at those points. It is probably
also out of alignment and, as you said, has steeper angles
than were intended. You might be able to ride it for a
long time with no problem, but you might not. At least
keep an eye on those areas for cracks. Better to not use
it, in my opinion.

--

David L. Johnson

__o | Accept risk. Accept responsibility. Put a lawyer
out of _`\(,_ | business. (_)/ (_) |

On Sun, 11 Apr 2004 13:31:20 -0400, "David L. Johnson"

may have said:

Pat said:

I was given a good looking early mountain bike, built
about 1990. I took it to the yard to wash it and
discovered slight bulges in the down tube and top tube.
The funny thing is, the undersides of both tubes have
these slight wrinkles, but the top side of the tubes do
not look or feel in the least as if they are bent.

Sounds like he ran into something.

I agree. The head tube angle is probably steeper now.
If it still has the orignal fork, I'd expect it to be
bent as well.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I can understand that the head tube/fork angle to the
frame may not be the same as Trek intended in 1990, but
what I don't know is: is this frame dangerous to ride?

You will only find out if it fails.

Quoted message said:

Can somebody with experience give me some insight on

Quoted message said:

this?

Eventually it will crack at those points. It is probably
also out of alignment and, as you said, has steeper angles
than were intended. You might be able to ride it for a
long time with no problem, but you might not. At least
keep an eye on those areas for cracks. Better to not use
it, in my opinion.

I'll second that. The frame might be safe to ride from a
simple "will it fail suddenly and soon?" standpoint, but
given that it's already likely to have toe-to-wheel
clearance issues and squirrely handling due to reduced
trail, I can't see that it's worth messing with. Personally,
I'd part this one out and just keep the useful bits.

--
My email address is antispammed; pull WEEDS if replying via e-mail.
Typoes are not a bug, they're a feature.
Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.

Pat said:

I was given a good looking early mountain bike, built
about 1990. I took it to the yard to wash it and
discovered slight bulges in the down tube and top tube.
The funny thing is, the undersides of both tubes have
these slight wrinkles, but the top side of the tubes do
not look or feel in the least as if they are bent. So, I
figure someone jumped off of a ledge just a bit too high,
causing these tubes to be compromised like that. Is it
safe to just ride on pavement, though? I can't see that
the metal is broken because the paint is only a bit flaked
on the underside of the down tube where the wrinkle is. I
can understand that the head tube/fork angle to the frame
may not be the same as Trek intended in 1990, but what I
don't know is: is this frame dangerous to ride? Can
somebody with experience give me some insight on this?

That is a front impact . Jumping dents the top of the tubes.

Your question is one of degree. Have an experienced frame
repair person look at it or send me photos.

You should turn the fork 90 degrees and sight it, from the
top of the stem straight down. And/or have its alignment
checked by someone with alignment gauges and experience.

--
Andrew Muzi www.yellowjersey.org Open every day since 1
April, 1971

Quoted message said:

Pat said:

I was given a good looking early mountain bike, built
about 1990. I took it to the yard to wash it and
discovered slight bulges in the down tube and top tube.
The funny thing is, the undersides of both tubes have
these slight wrinkles, but the top side of the tubes do
not look or feel in the least as if they are bent.

David L. Johnson said:

Sounds like he ran into something.

(p)>>I can understand that the head tube/fork angle to the
frame may not be the

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

same as Trek intended in 1990, but what I don't know is:
is this frame dangerous to ride? Can somebody with
experience give me some insight on this?

(The cautious DLJ)> Eventually it will crack at those
points. It is probably also out of

Quoted message said:

alignment and, as you said, has steeper angles than were
intended. You might be able to ride it for a long time
with no problem, but you might not. At least keep an eye
on those areas for cracks. Better to not use it, in my
opinion.

That's not clear to me. A mid price MTB with 1.2mm tube may
be readily straightened with no real risk if the damage is
slight to moderate. We have straightened literally over a
hundred front-impact frames over the years, the bulk of
which are still on the road. OTOH we would refuse the job if
there were cracks at those bulges, for example. The problem
is, we don't know how significant his damage is. Better to
get an experienced eye on that frame, I think.

--
Andrew Muzi www.yellowjersey.org Open every day since 1
April, 1971