Risks of buying old alloy-framed road bikes ( 15 years+ )

General cycling advice ( NOT technical ! )
peetee
Posts: 4326
Joined: 4 May 2010, 10:20pm
Location: Upon a lumpy, scarred granite massif.

Re: Risks of buying old alloy-framed road bikes ( 15 years+ )

Post by peetee »

The utility cyclist wrote:
peetee wrote:I have always liked steel frames but did once decide I needed to at least try aluminium so got a 1 year old Trek. By the time I had ridden it the three miles to work and back I had had enough of the battering my rear was getting and sold it on.

And that indicates nothing


On the contrary. It indicates that it was significantly harsher to ride than the many steel touring, training and (conparable geometry) race frames I have owned not to mention the carbon and titanium frames I have ridden in the course of my work.
The older I get the more I’m inclined to act my shoe size, not my age.
Magik_
Posts: 17
Joined: 26 Mar 2019, 11:09am

Re: Risks of buying old alloy-framed road bikes ( 15 years+ )

Post by Magik_ »

If there's anything you can say about the prinny frames it's that they were well made, part of the reason they were so expensive and why they probably went belly up is that they were really anal about QC.

+1 for Principia.

I have a Rexe SX (ellipse) 2003 model, bought as a new frame around 2005. I used it for several years of LVRC road racing, hilly TTs and general fast riding. It is still going strong, though with me at a shade under 65kg and used as a race/fast days bike it has had a fairly easy life.
I also have a Principia TT2 time trial bike from around the same time - bought as a secondhand frame and fork - another great bike.

Their stuff was very well made but were supposedly not of the "couple of race seasons then throw away" variety - light but not ridiculously so.

They don't come up for sale that often but seem to sell for very reasonable prices. At the right price I would be happy to buy one if it looked as though it hadn't been abused and subject to a thorough look at highly stressed points such as around the BB and fork ends.


But if you can find something 15 years old, then it's more likely to be sufficiently cheaper than a brand-new bike that it's worth the trouble.


This is the sort of thing I was wanted to hear as most of the bikes I have my eye on have Principia frames. I read great stuff about the Principia frames but the reviews are quite scarce.

By and large little-used road bikes are a bargain; they go pretty much as fast as new road bikes but they cost a lot less and -if you buy them when they are the right age- most of the parts that go on them are still readily available at reasonable prices. So for example a 9s or 10 equipped bike is going to be a very serviceable machine. But you don't get a frame warranty (most are not transferable and are likely time-expired anyway) so it is pot luck if the frame is going to fail or not. Most frames don't break, but all will do, if they see the right conditions....

Check carefully for cracks and damage, then enjoy. My Alu rigid MTB singlespeed has been ridden hard for 20 years and is still fine. Yes, its life is finite, no it hasn't got there yet...
As Brucey says, there are factors which shorten life.


Thanks for the input. I am aware of the fact that aluminium frames will break eventually but as you pointed out, with taking care of them they should last a while. The main issue is that I have to infer what the bike has gone through and how much care was taken of it by the way it looks today, which may not be so easy (especially for me - I am not an expert) but I think that reasonable approximations of its condition/history can be made.

I have always liked steel frames but did once decide I needed to at least try aluminium so got a 1 year old Trek. By the time I had ridden it the three miles to work and back I had had enough of the battering my rear was getting and sold it on.


Thanks for sharing your experience. I am not so much concerned about bike stiffness as I never had any comfort issues on any bike I owned so far and they were all aluminium.

All in all, I decided to get one of the used bikes. I really think you will be amazed by what I got for the money, will post pictures in a week or so! (It's a Principia frame) :D
User avatar
The utility cyclist
Posts: 3607
Joined: 22 Aug 2016, 12:28pm
Location: The first garden city

Re: Risks of buying old alloy-framed road bikes ( 15 years+ )

Post by The utility cyclist »

peetee wrote:
The utility cyclist wrote:
peetee wrote:I have always liked steel frames but did once decide I needed to at least try aluminium so got a 1 year old Trek. By the time I had ridden it the three miles to work and back I had had enough of the battering my rear was getting and sold it on.

And that indicates nothing


On the contrary. It indicates that it was significantly harsher to ride than the many steel touring, training and (conparable geometry) race frames I have owned not to mention the carbon and titanium frames I have ridden in the course of my work.

It indicates nothing with regards to the over generalisation that alu is harsher/less comfortable than steel, you have your anecdote, I have mine, as I said, they cancel each other out.
pwa
Posts: 17409
Joined: 2 Oct 2011, 8:55pm

Re: Risks of buying old alloy-framed road bikes ( 15 years+ )

Post by pwa »

The utility cyclist wrote:
peetee wrote:
The utility cyclist wrote:And that indicates nothing


On the contrary. It indicates that it was significantly harsher to ride than the many steel touring, training and (conparable geometry) race frames I have owned not to mention the carbon and titanium frames I have ridden in the course of my work.

It indicates nothing with regards to the over generalisation that alu is harsher/less comfortable than steel, you have your anecdote, I have mine, as I said, they cancel each other out.


There was a time (1990s?) when the received wisdom was that aluminium alloy has a finite fatigue life and should therefore not be used in situations where flexing is required. Performance ally frames from the likes of Cannondale were made with thin walled very large diameter tubes to counter the unwanted flexing, and were stiffer than the steel frames we were up to that point used to. A harsh ride was the price of that stiffness. But now it seems we can have alloy frame elements that flex and don't end up snapping. Has the alloy changed to make that work, or has something else changed?
Greystoke
Posts: 482
Joined: 8 May 2018, 7:41am
Location: Lincolnshire

Re: Risks of buying old alloy-framed road bikes ( 15 years+ )

Post by Greystoke »

Some bikes have alloy forks now :shock:
I'm sure they're ok......but it goes against all the reasons for not having alloy forks.
peetee
Posts: 4326
Joined: 4 May 2010, 10:20pm
Location: Upon a lumpy, scarred granite massif.

Re: Risks of buying old alloy-framed road bikes ( 15 years+ )

Post by peetee »

The utility cyclist wrote:
peetee wrote:
The utility cyclist wrote:And that indicates nothing


On the contrary. It indicates that it was significantly harsher to ride than the many steel touring, training and (conparable geometry) race frames I have owned not to mention the carbon and titanium frames I have ridden in the course of my work.

It indicates nothing with regards to the over generalisation that alu is harsher/less comfortable than steel, you have your anecdote, I have mine, as I said, they cancel each other out.


That's for the OP to decide. I make no claims towards any other alloy frame or against anything you have said.
The older I get the more I’m inclined to act my shoe size, not my age.
Post Reply