Ethics on Post Crash Parts Usage

[tuxbailey]

So after my accident and the bike being totaled, I stripped the bike and gave away the broken frame to someone for a resurrection project.

I wonder about the ethics of given away other functional parts and whether that is a good idea (liability wise) or should I just throw them away.

For example, brakes, FD, RD, shifters, cassette.

I wouldn't re-purpose the bar, stem as I don't know what kind of impact it suffered.

I wonder what the right thing to do is.

[thegunner]

be up front about it and i think it's fine?

i'd gladly hang some scuffed but functional parts on a race bike :)

[mktng]

depends on condition.

but if you're thinking about or already prepared to give them away (free), but worried about ethics.
just trash/destroy them and don't lose sleep over it

[GregL]

I wouldn't re-purpose the bar, stem as I don't know what kind of impact it suffered.
This is my general "policy" for all crashed parts or parts that I don't have a personal history with. It's all about honesty, transparency, and good will to fellow humans.

Greg

[Jaybee]

For example, brakes, FD, RD, shifters, cassette.



These parts are probably fine, if a little rashed. Check that they still work, then pass them on with full disclosure - in the unlikely event they do fail, it's a Lyft ride home, not an ambulance ride.

[pjbaz]

I'll use some parts post-crash, but never bars. I have steel DeRosa that was crashed and has a dent and I've ridden it without concern.

[ElvisMerckx]

I'm having trouble imagining a crash that would render every part completely destroyed -- unless maybe that crash involved a steam roller or locomotive.

Are the brake calipers damaged at all? How about he crankset or front derailleur? My point is there has to be at least a handful of parts that were completely unaffected by the crash.

Can you describe the crash and/or show pictures of the bike post-crash?

[danesgod]

Are these all metal parts were talking about?

[nooneline]

Yes, everything is ruined, send it to me for proper disposal.

[Spaghetti Legs]

If they’re Campy, I’ll take ‘em :)

I see no issue whatsoever, even selling, if you disclose they’re from a crashed bike. I recently bought a crashed bike for the parts, discarded the frame, fork stem, front rim. Drivetrain parts should be easy to tell if broken and unlikely to pose some hidden life/limb safety issue.

[rain dogs]

Provided the parts were actually affected by the crash... which should be easy enough to see then

Selling them = unethical
Giving them away free = their responsibility (but you probably could be sued in the US tdh) and unethical if you believe they may be compromised
Using them yourself = whatever floats your boat

[kramnnim]

In what way would selling the parts be unethical? For sale, derailleur with road rash from a crash, cage slightly bent, pulleys spin fine.

[rain dogs]

In what way would selling the parts be unethical? For sale, derailleur with road rash from a crash, cage slightly bent, pulleys spin fine.

Well I don't know what your definition of unethical is, but to me, when I see people selling crashed parts they would continue your above example as:

other than the road rash, it's basically new. New $200, Your's for $100.

That to me isn't right. A crashed item, that potentially is weakened is not even close to the same as a 'used' item that has never been crashed. A crashed/damaged item should be sold for more than about 10-20% new value. Ie. Your new $200 derailleur should be sold for no more than about $30-40.

They should write "Could potentially snap off your bike and cause a crash at any moment, BUY AT YOUR OWN RISK"

At that point, just give it away. Or strip your bits and pieces and use them. People don't write that because they want much more than just 10-20%. What happens is people don't like that their item is all ratched up so they sell it to some 'sucker', all along validating their over-priced ask by downplaying the damage (which they really have little idea about) and they go buy a new and safer one.

That may not be the definition of "unethical" but I think it's pretty dirty.

Think about car value, where I'm from it is law to disclose when a car has been involved in a serious accident (over certain value etc) and people don't disclose ALL THE TIME and hope people don't check, because they don't want their car to sell for peanuts..... which is what the value is when they do disclose. No different in my opinion with bike parts.

[d_douglas]

I bought a used bike from a guy locally. The bike was pieced together and looked amazing. It turns out that he didn't disclose that the frame had had a minor repair, plus when I stripped the parts, I found that the seatpost was cracked and the bar was cracked as well.

When I approached him to advise him and ask for compensation, he just told me I was out of luck and that if I had wanted to pull the post or unwrap the bars, he would have done so (?!?!?!)

He told me to get lost and refused to follow up afterwards. Needless to say, the guy is an immoral goof. I decided to let it die because I have other ways to invest my efforts. He is a well known guy in the local cycling community, so I have *accidentally* dropped his name in conversation with LBSs to say what happened, and they just shook their head.

I would never sell something that I believe might be compromised, or if I did, I would openly disclose the history of the part. In the case of the handlebar, it went into the garbage, though it was 'rideable'....

[vqdriver]

if i'm reading it right, it sounds like the op wants to gift the items, not sell them.
the ethics of gifting anything with a caveat is that you make the caveat really really clear. if they want free drivetrain parts then i don't foresee any issues.
the brakes, i'd probably destroy. even if unmarked.
if i wouldn't use em i wouldn't let anyone else either.

[93KgBike]

Clearly, personal ethics differ on the question of whether to allow parts to be used by others after you've crashed them.

But everyone seems to agree that full disclosure of the crash is absolutely necessary.

There's also another lesson here: when building a bike from used parts, or buying a used bike, you must disassemble it and rebuild it so that each part can be inspected.

I have straightened bent (steel) bars and used them without issue, and rebuilt brake calipers as well. Metal parts (with the exception of magnesium alloys) have never failed me catastrophically. So I wouldn't be conservative about reusing them. But I'd try to never use a part I hadn't thoroughly inspected.

Bike co-ops and used parts/bike sellers require us to employ caveat emptor. They can't know everything.

[ElvisMerckx]

the brakes, i'd probably destroy. even if unmarked.
if i wouldn't use em i wouldn't let anyone else either.

This I don't get. I crashed plenty in my racing days, and never ever messed up a brake caliper. Can you elaborate on this concern?

Also, what kind of apocalyptic wrecks are you guys getting into? I've bent frames, tacoed wheels, ripped off rear derailleurs, bent handlebars, scuffed levers, etc. But I've never been in a wreck so catastrophic that I'd have any concern for every other part on the bike.

[Then again, I raced in an era of metal parts.]

[Blue Jays]

Paceliners are getting into bicycle wrecks so horrendous that the cassette is getting destroyed? Dang!

[tuxbailey]

Paceliners are getting into bicycle wrecks so horrendous that the cassette is getting destroyed? Dang!

Well, the cassette and wheels were not destroyed and I plan use the wheels myself if they are straight. Cassette is a freebie since I am using 11 sp now so I might as well give the cassette along with the 10 sp RD.

BTW, parts are actually spoken for...