fork condition

[zzy]

While I fully understand why, some of you are a bit overly cautious about forks. They're better built than most people think thanks to strict regulations. And they don't 'go bad' over time.

[Mark McM]

Originally Posted by zzy

While I fully understand why, some of you are a bit overly cautious about forks. They're better built than most people think thanks to strict regulations. And they don't 'go bad' over time.

This is true. But that shouldn't lull one into laxity about periodic inspection.

[Peter P.]

Originally Posted by zzy

While I fully understand why, some of you are a bit overly cautious about forks. They're better built than most people think thanks to strict regulations. And they don't 'go bad' over time.

I agree. Loss of clearcoat is a paint problem, not a carbon problem. Your fork passed the coin tap test and you see no cracks in the carbon. As has been suggested; inspect it periodically and you'll catch problems before they become injuries. Or buy a steel fork and eliminate all worries!

How do you know if the dropouts are still bonded to the fork leg?-Grab 'em and twist. If they don't move, you're good.

I had a friend with a Vitus aluminum frame and fork. Went to remove the front wheel once, and the dropout well, dropped out of the fork leg. That's how he knew it was time to replace it.

[beanboy99]

fantastic. thanks. I'll give it a try while it's up on the stand.

Is there any data (not anecdotes but actual data) on non-accident failure rates of carbon forks? I'm guessing it's pretty rare but I'd be curious exactly how much so.

[beanboy99]

Originally Posted by charliedid

Yeah I dunno...

That fork have an aluminum steerer? I'd maybe yank on those fork dropouts every so often but that thing is as much aluminum as it is carbon isn't it?

That's a good question. I've never taken it off to see.

Is unbonding dropouts the most common way these forks fail?

[djdj]

Once something like this gets in your head, it is hard to forget. And of course it is typically safer to err on the side of caution (Paceliners as a whole seem to be more cautious than most). However, clear coat or paint aging doesn't mean the structure is failing. Routine checks for cracks, failing joints, etc. of frame, fork and wheels makes sense. But I wouldn't throw out a fork simply because of a clear coat issue; there's no need to fill up the local dump with perfectly usable parts. That fork appears to be rather robust.

[DRZRM]

I had the dropout loosen on a Serotta F-1 fork, I must have chased the creak for months before someone here suggested that I try to twist the dropout, and it turned under load. If it is not shifting or creaking it is probably OK to ride, or at least I'd still ride it if I needed to, but I'd start looking for a replacement.

Good luck!

[mhespenheide]

I guess I'm the dissenting opinion here, but I think that forks of that era were for the most part (wildly?) over-engineered. If you can't see any damage to the carbon and it passes the tap test and the dropouts are solid in the fork, I'd ride it and keep monitoring it.

On the other hand, I once replaced an Alpha Q fork right after buying a bike because I could see faint scratches in the carbon at the top of the fork, likely caused by gravel that was carried by a too-large tire. Damage to the carbon isn't worth messing with.

[duff_duffy]

I’d ride that, no problem. I’d check over periodically like any other part on bike. If someone has had fork fail I’d bet they answer differently but I’ve never had an issue on my older forks thankfully. Let’s see the rest of bike!

[dddd]

Nothing in the photo suggests any pending problem, but it does show exposure to sunlight and which should not affect the structure significantly.
Normal use best I can tell.

Any random used bike purchase should be checked for any recalled components, a few forks have been recalled over the years.

Measuring the clamped dropout thickness can be compared to any published company standards for wear in this area (but which is more of a suspension fork thing)

[zzy]

Originally Posted by mhespenheide

I guess I'm the dissenting opinion here, but I think that forks of that era were for the most part (wildly?) over-engineered. If you can't see any damage to the carbon and it passes the tap test and the dropouts are solid in the fork, I'd ride it and keep monitoring it.

On the other hand, I once replaced an Alpha Q fork right after buying a bike because I could see faint scratches in the carbon at the top of the fork, likely caused by gravel that was carried by a too-large tire. Damage to the carbon isn't worth messing with.

This one is funny to me because AQ forks were some of the most over-engineered forks ever made. I installed many professionally and even spoke to the designer - Dr. Lee. They were incredibly well built and he knew the importance of overbuilding the crown area to make the legs lighter. That annoying insert was just make sure ham fisted wrenches couldn't dent the steerer - I never even heard of a AQ steerer failure which was a big concern in the early days of full carbon forks. He also was one of the first outside Colnago to understand that curved carbon fork blades were pointless. Probably the best carbon layup in the industry at the time too.

Originally Posted by dddd

Any random used bike purchase should be checked for any recalled components, a few forks have been recalled over the years.

Cervelo Wolf TT forks would like a word.. god that was a nightmare.