So I am back in the frame warranty cycle with Trek and once again I am disappointed. Last time was with my HiFi pro. They replaced the rear end twice. First time was a stock replacement, but the second time they gave this huge alloy thing (vs the carbon seat stays on the one I bought) that was much heavier and kind of killed the ride. I got rid of it shortly thereafter. Now I'm having rear end issues on my superfly 100 (common issue of cracking on the drive side chain stay) and they initially wanted to replace it with another year with a different color that look horrible. The other option was to crash replace the frame for a mere $2700. I went to look at the rear end they sent and its 142x12 vs the 135x5 that is my bike now. So i would also need to buy a hub adaptor at a minimum to fit a piece thatvwould look terrible. So the shop is going back to Trek on the 142x12 issue to see what they come back with. Fingers crossed they might replace the whole frame. My shop has been great with all of this, btw.

So my question is what are your expectations for a "lifetime" warranty on a frame? I ride a lot so i know my bikes take more of a beating than most. But if you tell me a frame is guaranteed it should be just that. In my eyes, if you can't replace a component with the same year/color/geometry then they should provide something better. Not offer something that detracts from the value of the bike and/or requires you to spend money to modify the bike to make it work. I understand they cant keep every piece in stock after a production run but the bike is only 2 years old. 

Part 2, which manufacturers do you think offer the best support for their frames? Ive purchased 5 trek bikes in the last 6 years or so (mostly because of my shop) but if this goes poorly it might be my last. Santa Cruz maybe?

A couple of thoughts.

You want a nimble, lightweight bike? Then you have to make a trade off in regards to durability.

Would it make sense for a manufacturer to give free upgrades of bicycles to riders who tear up frames?

Not defending the manufacturers, who clearly are trying to give the customer what he wants. And today that want seems to be lower weight and higher performance over durability. 

All their warranties have exclusions in regard to normal wear and tear, and what they deem outside of defects in material/workmanship.

If the bike was abused, I'd get your point. But the chain stay failure on these frames is common. And I felt better about buying it BECAUSE there is a lifetime warranty on the frame. So if the manufacturer touts the warranty as part of the value proposition, they need to support it. I'm not out looking for a free upgrade, I just want them to live up to the warranty they sold me. If they had replaced the rear end with the identical rear end I would have been happy. But they can't. And if they can't provide what they promised to provide, then the compromise should be on their end in terms of the solution, not the customer who bought the bike in good faith. That's all I'm saying.

battles2a5 wrote on 10/07/13 at 12:29am:


Here's the Trek limited warranty that should have been provided in writing when you bought the bicycle:

(You need to Login or Register to view media files and links)

Notice the part at the bottom...

THIS WARRANTY DOES NOT COVER:

* Normal wear and tear 

* Damage or failure due to accident, misuse, abuse, or neglect

Of course whether something is normal wear and tear of a failure due to accident, misuse, abuse or neglect is rather subjective. 

IntheBush wrote on 10/07/13 at 1:21am:


What's your point? Trek already said this was a warranty issue so whether or not it should be covered is beyond the point. It's how a manufacturer deals with a valid warranty claim is what we are discussing.

I went away from trek for a short time because of the issue with broken frames. It was cool to get replacements, but 4 times in 4 years is ridiculous. But my current bike is a Trek, and I've had no issues with the frame(gotta love steel) I noticed a thing they have done with a couple people I know,including myself. Trade your FS to a sweet carbon HT. Then you could sell the HT if your hellbent on FS. Try it, and see what happens

One of my first real mountain bikes was a Trek 950 that I had a myriad of problems with. I bought it in NJ to bring to school down here and the local Trek shop at the time wouldn't help me because I didn't buy it from them. So I wrote a very nice letter to their CEO, and got zero response, not even a nice let down. So, Trek has been number one on my list since then, and I won't ride any of theirs or their affiliate's bikes or use their products. So, Fisher, Bontrager, Klein, LeMond, etc have been no go for me since 1989 or so. I hold grudges a long time. At this point, it would take a free bike with a personal letter from the CEO to get me to ride one. Besides that, everyone and their brother has one, and they break like crazy. Look elsewhere and be happy.

KB wrote on 10/08/13 at 10:43pm:

Yup.  What this guy said.