I’ve expressed a few issues to Trek. As I see it:
1. They said the frame is safe to ride and its just a paint stress. Scans have said the frame is ‘structurally unsafe’
– as the rider here I was left wondering who to trust. Now that now the bike has been properly scanned, I am sure it is broken.
2. Trek have refused a warranty (on a lifetime warrantied frame) on the grounds that its not broken and that its my fault anyway.
– thing is it is broken and Trek have not been taken the time to ask how I have used the bike. They made their decision rather arbitrarily it seems.
Im going to see what they say today before I get properly worked up but the more I have been thinking about the concept ‘lifetime warranty’ the more cynical I am about Treks response. It seems that as a manufacturer you can offer anything you like because ultimately you get to make the decision about what you consider warranty anyway:
Me: “Hi Trek. My bike is broken”
Trek: “No its not. Your fault anyway”
Me: “Here is scan. Bike is broken. I didn’t use a frame clamp or bike rack clamp on the top tube and the frame has clearly not been crashed (its in pretty great condition)”
Trek: “Nope. Liar.”
.. thats how it feels at the moment.
This is in total contrast to Cervelo – I have an S3 which I recently put wider rims in. This showed a wonky back end with the rim sitting closer to drive side stays despite perfect dish. Cervelo put an alignment tool to the frame, said sorry and replaced the frame.