Forum home Road cycling forum Workshop

Trek Madone 5.2 BB crack.

billybikerbillybiker Posts: 272
edited July 2012 in Workshop
:shock:

Just taken my Trek Madone 5.2 back to the bike shop with a crack around the BB on the drive side. The bike is an 09 model with Ultegra triple. Anyone else had problems with this? What should Trek do? The bike has been treated carefully, never raced and I'm not overweight. The webs on the chainset appear to have been touching the carbon fibre for some time as there is a witness mark around the BB "shell" which could only mean that the bearing is either loose or the frame is "too big" in this area. As far as I'm aware the mark has only developed in the last 6 months or so and can only therefore be a bearing issue. This bike is a big ticket item and I had expected it to last at least 10 years, this is a bit of a shock-any advice gratefully accepted!!!!!
«1

Posts

  • Monty DogMonty Dog Posts: 20,614
    Something must be amiss for the crank spider to come into contact with the frame - I'd take it to your dealer to get them to have a look. Word of warning though - previous posters have had problems with warranty claims on Trek. Photos would aid discussion.
    Make mine an Italian, with Campagnolo on the side..
  • billybikerbillybiker Posts: 272
    Its at the dealers so I'll wait and see!
  • red_eye5red_eye5 Posts: 57
    Good luck with your warranty claim. I thought Trek were good on this but I was wrong.

    My madone seatmast has cracked and Trek are saying its been overtightend which I dispute but ultimatley it comes down to their word against yours.

    They offerred me a replacement Madone for around £1000. They have redesigned the seatmast on the 2011 model (I wonder why). Reading around forums the number of problems with Madone frames to list a few

    1. Chain stays cracking
    2. Bottom brackets area cracking
    3. Bottom bracket cups wearing out requiring custom made bearings


    I decided not to get another madone. Stick with the conventional designs (call me old fashioned)
  • billybikerbillybiker Posts: 272
    red_eye5 wrote:
    Good luck with your warranty claim. I thought Trek were good on this but I was wrong.

    My madone seatmast has cracked and Trek are saying its been overtightend which I dispute but ultimatley it comes down to their word against yours.

    They offerred me a replacement Madone for around £1000. They have redesigned the seatmast on the 2011 model (I wonder why). Reading around forums the number of problems with Madone frames to list a few

    1. Chain stays cracking
    2. Bottom brackets area cracking
    3. Bottom bracket cups wearing out requiring custom made bearings


    I decided not to get another madone. Stick with the conventional designs (call me old fashioned)

    I've already broken my seat mast! Hopefully the other issues will get sorted, thanks for the post, I'll keep you updated on my saga!
  • bexley5200bexley5200 Posts: 692
    i wont be spending nearly 3 grand on a modone then
    going downhill slowly
  • billybikerbillybiker Posts: 272
    Yes, not good for Trek, but there seem to be even more issues with some other bikes, including Cervelo. I'm not sure that Trek are any worse than the others, I guess its one of the problems with carbon fibre! You pays your money...... Aluminium can snap, steel rusts not sure about Titanium but I'm guessing that most materials have issues somewhere!
  • rakerake Posts: 3,204
    they do when the motto is lighter=better.
  • Monty DogMonty Dog Posts: 20,614
    For the best brand for warranty support - buy a Specialized. Doesn't mean you won't get problems, but generally they treat their customers fairly and often favourably.
    Make mine an Italian, with Campagnolo on the side..
  • billybikerbillybiker Posts: 272
    Hopefully some photos of the BB area!

    [img][/img]P1010631.jpg

    P1010629.jpg
  • Monty DogMonty Dog Posts: 20,614
    That looks to me as though the BB30 insert isn't bonded correctly into the frame and started to move and isn't something to expect from normal use or even abuse. IMO there's no conceivable reason why this would happen unless there's a fault with the frame.
    Make mine an Italian, with Campagnolo on the side..
  • rakerake Posts: 3,204
    is it cracked or has the chain gouged it.
  • John.TJohn.T Posts: 3,698
    rake wrote:
    is it cracked or has the chain gouged it.
    I wondered that.
    Monty. It is not a BB30 bracket. It is BB90 which has bearings pressed directly into the carbon BB shell. There is no insert. It is still a very strange place for a crack to form. It looks more like surface damage from the pictures.
  • red_eye5red_eye5 Posts: 57
    Did you drop you chain onto it and then try to get it back on by peddling whilst it was on top of the bottom bracket?

    Did Trek get back to you?
  • billybikerbillybiker Posts: 272
    red_eye5 wrote:
    Did you drop you chain onto it and then try to get it back on by peddling whilst it was on top of the bottom bracket?

    Did Trek get back to you?

    I don't think I've ever unshipped the chain on this bike so I'm faily confident that these marks and "crack" are caused by the BB bearing moving slightly, hence crack, which has allowed the chainset web to touch the carbon. Well, although Trek say the gauges HAVE been caused by the chain, they are replacing the frame-it should be back in a week. This is great news as the rest of the bike is in top condition and I wanted to hang on to my flightdeck computer which may not be compatable with the new Ultegra levers. I think this certainly gives me the confidence to buy Trek again as this bike certainly rides beautifully and is very light, oh, BTW the new frame is a 5.9 so not sure if this is any better/differant.

    Thanks for the advice and comments.
  • John.T wrote:
    It is not a BB30 bracket. It is BB90 which has bearings pressed directly into the carbon BB shell. There is no insert. It is still a very strange place for a crack to form. It looks more like surface damage from the pictures.

    I'd agree with it looking like surface damage and not structural. If it were structural, I would have thought a crack would have run across the length of the BB due to lateral crank movement?
  • red_eye5red_eye5 Posts: 57
    5.9 2011 frames must be surplus in stock as they seem to be offering that as a replacement for all 5 series Madones.
  • PokerfacePokerface Posts: 7,960
    So - they say the damage WAS caused by the chain and they are still replacing the frame!?


    I'm going to get my Madone frame down to a dealer for a replacement too then! :oops:
  • billybikerbillybiker Posts: 272
    Pokerface wrote:
    So - they say the damage WAS caused by the chain and they are still replacing the frame!?


    I'm going to get my Madone frame down to a dealer for a replacement too then! :oops:

    I just think they don't want to admit that there is a fault, although, unshipping the chain is not unheard of is it? Would a bike not be covered for that as well? Whatever I'm pleased with the result and the speedy response from Trek.
  • PokerfacePokerface Posts: 7,960
    billybiker wrote:
    Pokerface wrote:
    So - they say the damage WAS caused by the chain and they are still replacing the frame!?


    I'm going to get my Madone frame down to a dealer for a replacement too then! :oops:

    I just think they don't want to admit that there is a fault, although, unshipping the chain is not unheard of is it? Would a bike not be covered for that as well? Whatever I'm pleased with the result and the speedy response from Trek.



    If you drop the chain and then rub it against the frame - no matter how much damage it causes - it's your own fault and no warranty in the world will cover you for that. However - Trek have a paint warranty for one year which might be what they are covering the new frame under?

    I'm just surprised they are replacing the frame if there is no structural damage. I'm missing a lot of paint down there on mine from dropping the chain.
  • billybikerbillybiker Posts: 272
    Pokerface wrote:
    billybiker wrote:
    Pokerface wrote:
    So - they say the damage WAS caused by the chain and they are still replacing the frame!?


    I'm going to get my Madone frame down to a dealer for a replacement too then! :oops:

    I just think they don't want to admit that there is a fault, although, unshipping the chain is not unheard of is it? Would a bike not be covered for that as well? Whatever I'm pleased with the result and the speedy response from Trek.



    If you drop the chain and then rub it against the frame - no matter how much damage it causes - it's your own fault and no warranty in the world will cover you for that. However - Trek have a paint warranty for one year which might be what they are covering the new frame under?

    I'm just surprised they are replacing the frame if there is no structural damage. I'm missing a lot of paint down there on mine from dropping the chain.

    I think its cracked as well as scuffed.
  • mudsharkmudshark Posts: 30
    I have a 2009 Madone and have had a bolt break on the seat mast cap twice now - both times after about 1000 miles of riding. This has left me having to get home riding out of the saddle as I imagine it's not a good idea to put weight the saddle with a broken bolt; unfortunately the broken end of the bolt ends up stuck in the mast cap so a new cap is needed.

    Now I assume that the most important thing to get right with the bolts is to tighten to the correct torque. The 1st time it was done by the LBS so hope that was right. The 2nd time I did it using a torque wrench set to 6nm so even if it's not 100% accurate I would hope it's still within the 5-7nm range as the %age difference would have to be large to be outside the specified range.

    Is there anything else that could be a factor? I'm not heavy (156 lbs) or very powerful. My main concern is that a bolt could fail in the middle of a trip leaving me without a bike so have little confidence at the moment anit seems I can't talk to Trek about this.
  • billybikerbillybiker Posts: 272
    mudshark wrote:
    I have a 2009 Madone and have had a bolt break on the seat mast cap twice now - both times after about 1000 miles of riding. This has left me having to get home riding out of the saddle as I imagine it's not a good idea to put weight the saddle with a broken bolt; unfortunately the broken end of the bolt ends up stuck in the mast cap so a new cap is needed.

    Now I assume that the most important thing to get right with the bolts is to tighten to the correct torque. The 1st time it was done by the LBS so hope that was right. The 2nd time I did it using a torque wrench set to 6nm so even if it's not 100% accurate I would hope it's still within the 5-7nm range as the %age difference would have to be large to be outside the specified range.

    Is there anything else that could be a factor? I'm not heavy (156 lbs) or very powerful. My main concern is that a bolt could fail in the middle of a trip leaving me without a bike so have little confidence at the moment anit seems I can't talk to Trek about this.

    Mine did this, I had to buy a new seat mast. I've now got a new bike!!
  • mudsharkmudshark Posts: 30
    Oh! So it wasn't replaced under warranty? Did you sell the old bike? If this happens again I think I'll want a replacement frame so I can use the new style mast cap.
  • billybikerbillybiker Posts: 272
    mudshark wrote:
    Oh! So it wasn't replaced under warranty? Did you sell the old bike? If this happens again I think I'll want a replacement frame so I can use the new style mast cap.

    No full replacement under warrenty
  • porker33porker33 Posts: 636
    Good to hear that Trek did the right thing.

    It is nice to see a positive post about warranty claims as so many people seem to jump on a band wagon condemning a manufacturer before they have the chance to act.

    I don't think the 5.9 is any different to the 5.2 frame (decals apart).

    The only difference I could find between the 2 bikes for 2010 was a crankset and rear mech upgrade to dura ace over the Ultegra for an additional £500 outlay.
  • billybikerbillybiker Posts: 272
    porker33 wrote:
    Good to hear that Trek did the right thing.

    It is nice to see a positive post about warranty claims as so many people seem to jump on a band wagon condemning a manufacturer before they have the chance to act.

    I don't think the 5.9 is any different to the 5.2 frame (decals apart).

    The only difference I could find between the 2 bikes for 2010 was a crankset and rear mech upgrade to dura ace over the Ultegra for an additional £500 outlay.

    I've always had good service from my LBS and Trek but sometimes I think its how you go about your "claim". I think you have to be reasonable and don't go in all guns blazing. It does help that this is my 3rd Trek and I spend most of my spare cash on bikes and kit :roll:

    I think you're right about the 5.2 and 5.9, it was just the kit they hang on the frame. Mine is all Ultegra which I've got to say has been superb and in many ways better than the Dura Ace on my best bike (this rattles!)
  • I've had the same problem with the mast - it's happened twice in 1500 miles now. Apparently the problem is that some masts (particularly on larger frames?) are not quite the right tolerance and rock very slightly. It appears to be nothing to do with rider weight. Trek have designed a new mast to deal with the problem, I gather. Just waiting to hear if one's available.

    The last time mine went, I was about half way round a 75 mile loop. It's not ideal, but if you cut up an inner tube, you can put it inside the mast. Just use the right amount of inner tube to get back to the correct height...
    __________________________________________
    >> Domane Four Series > Ridgeback Voyage
  • Trek have designed a new mast to deal with the problem, I gather.

    Yep, after a bit of pushing I found out that Trek have a new mast cap and one is apparently flying over from the US for me.
  • Chaps do you know when the new mast was introduced.

    I have a 2010 in a 56 and I check the bike over when I clean it, no problems to report. It appears to be earlier versions or is too soon tell?
Sign In or Register to comment.