Anyone know how many there have been? All in the same place? Has a reason been found for the failure? And out of approx how many sold?

Not stirring, just curious… I’m more than happy with mine, and with the warranty should it have problems.

Hi Vinnyeh

Daffy posted on the Ti thread today that he has seen two break at the weld points for the disc mount. The same thing happened to my mate in Switzerland. To be fair to On One, they coughed up with a replacement frame without quibble and I remember at the time Brant saying he had had two returned with that issue. Is it a design fault? I couldn’t say. Bikes break all the time for many different reasons so I wouldn’t go flaming the 456 just yet.

I’m not sure how to post an image so have a look at the link below to see what happened to my mate’s frame. Personally (and in my unqualified opinion), I’m not convinced that 8 inch discs and Ti hardtails are entirely comfortable bed fellows. If you are chasing down someone on a full susser, I wonder how the forces differ (if at all) between the full susser and the hard tail taking into account that the former by design will move when you ride down the trail? Perhaps someone could explain it to me?

Cheers

Sanny

Just had a look at your pictures and it’s quite apparent that the reason that the frame failed is because the drop-out is welded to the thin plate capping the chain stay rather than the chain stay itself.

I wouldn’t have thought that Brant would have specified that in the design of the 456 so I’d put it down to a mistake by Lynskey.

In theory you’d think that the overall stresses on the brake mount would be greater for a full susser, given it brakes better, is in contact with ground more…

EDIT

it’s quite apparent that the reason that the frame failed is because the drop-out is welded to the thin plate capping the chain stay rather than the chain stay itself.

“quite apparent”? Presumably you mean both stays? Are you expert in bike frame design? I don’t see it as that clear at all

welded to the thin plate capping the chain stay

at a guess id say the ‘cap’ was probably just as thick as the thin tubes used for the stay.

Jim – yeah, that was basically my thoughts, there’s only quite a small weld area onto the chainstay, the weld that’s capping the tube won’t take any of the stress because the cap is so thin. I did some guestimate calcs on the shear stress on the chainstay/seat stay welds and they didn’t come out high enough to be a problem if it was not a weld, but at the weld then there are always gonna be faults. Yes I’m quite sad and consider these things too much.

This is different to the steel ones I’ve seen where the plate is bent over and forms the end caps on the stays, which strikes me as a much more robust joint.

That said there’s quite a few out there that haven’t broken, but I have a feeling it’d be less if that weld area was bigger. The stays on the other side don’t have to react any torque (apart from any drag from the hub which is pretty negligible), so it’s bound to break on the brake side first unless there’s a massive manufacturing defect on the drive side.

My thoughts on stresses in HT vs FS are that probably the HT takes more of a pounding for a given speed as the peak forces will be higher, average forces (i.e. how fast you can stop on a rough surface) don’t matter. Worse for fatigue also as the forces are applied and removed more often. It’s probably pretty negligible thouggh as the maximum force is dictated by what the rider can hold on to more than anything else!

It’s very hard to generalise on cause of failure. It may well be that the rest of the 456s are fine because they aren’t or haven’t been exposed to the same level of stress as the ones which have broken. It would be interesting to know the type of riding the broken ones have been used for, the size of disc rotors used, the weight of the rider, previous crashes (if any). All would have a potential impact. Having seen the breakage for myself, I simply wouldn’t touch one for no other reason than I’ve seen one break and there would always be doubt in my mind about whether the same would happen to me. It’s not necessarily based on a statistically valid sample, just gut feel.

Oh and if someone could post the image I’ve linked to, that would be grand. Less faff for folk to click to find the link. Ta.

Cheers

Sanny

🙂

Damn your keyboard skills flatboy 😈

i used to see this failure a lot and its not just limited to the

compositepro leaves us in suspense……

Does that mean you no longer have a connection with PX/ On one?

Lynskey website

We feel that we have some of the best fabricators in the business. We all have a love for what we do and our workmanship proves it.

Each Lynskey frame goes through various stages of production, each done by hand, to become one of the finest bicycles you can own. We handcraft each frame using only the best materials available. We work with U.S. milled aerospace grade 6al-4v and 3al-2.5v titanium because it allows us to create the most durable, fine tunable and high-performance bicycle you can ride.

😆 😆 😆

shit happens, bikes break the important thing is how its handled afterwards. The only bikes that never break are ones that aren’t ridden enough.

the weight of the rider

You calling me sturdy?

well mine is working perfectly I’ve given it a thoroughly good thtrashing round loads of trails. Maybe it’s down to bad driving ? frame still shouldn’t brake like that though.

Kev

The only bikes that never break are ones that aren’t ridden enough.

my maxlight xc pro after five years of thoroughly good thrashing :

Kev

the new frames have different drop outs don’t they? Could be beta tested versions.

Damn your keyboard skills flatboy

😉

Just had a look at your pictures and it’s quite apparent that the reason that the frame failed is because the drop-out is welded to the thin plate capping the chain stay rather than the chain stay itself.

I’ve just looked at mine and the weld seems to have fairly substantial attachment to both the chainstay and the endcap- would it really make much difference either way?

shit happens, bikes break the important thing is how its handled afterwards.

Pretty much how I feel richc.
Most of the frames I’ve owned over the years have failed in the hands of somebody- it doesn’t bother me unless there seems to be a systemic problem. I can also understand how and why Sanny feels the way he does- it’s just different strokes.

Cove Stiffee after 13 months ownership, cost me £250 to replace a £500 pound frame which lasted just over a year.

So a free replacement sounds pretty good to me.

No sorry computer said no and went into the mode where 4 hours of 3d work just became a passing memory

Theres big moves at planet x – on one to really engineer the little details…Im still doing the thing at on one but Im the kind of bloke who tests and tests and test things till they are proven not only on paper but in real life use

The CEN testing thing is the big topic at the moment and even that is throwing up idisycrosies

but they do correlate with real world testing which is kind of strange

Im more happy at the moment people are showing an interest in the why and how it died rather than the old school way that products were just rubbished after all theres a lot of ill formed opinions which do get precipitated to become fact

Not just On-Ones

My Ti Carver was immediately replaced under warranty

Bigrich mentions dropout change on later versions, i have one of the first batch
(no 29) and my dropouts are different to those shown in pics(mounting eyelet is
integrated rather than welded on)anyway had it a year past April and still reckon
its the best hardtail if not bike i have ever owned!For reference im 95kg and the bike gets pretty well hammered a couple of times a week.

mine looks the same type as in the picture – I’ll post it later when Im at home. Ordered mine June ’08.

Kev

Er, snap. Replaced under warranty very quickly and with a funny story which i won’t relay here to protect the innocent! Mine gets ridden like the hardcore hardtail it is marketed as, still love it to bits and would buy another. I reckon it would be better with the stays extended slightly and the disc mount overlapping the seats for a larger weld area but this would probably heat stress the tubing too much as you would be welding 8mm plate to thin tubing.

You pay the **** tax for Ti and then this happens…oh noes!

That’s slightly shoddy fabrication, all in the name of aesthetics.

“**** tax” ? somebody tired

You pay the **** tax for Ti

From somebody who paid £700 for a fishing rod? Who’s username is ‘blingbling? 😯

shit happens, bikes break the important thing is how its handled afterwards.

Nah, sorry don’t agree with the first bit of that at all.

Bikes break and sometimes it’s just shit happening. Sometimes though it’s because there’s a problem (design, manufacture etc). At which point it isn’t just “shit happening” but a real issue that needs sorting out, IMO.

Although this site and a lot of the posting is a great demonstration of how people really analise about issues. Sometimes. No offence like 😉

Fair play to the OP and most of the other posters they seem very balanced and pragmatic about it.

PLus it’s always easier to be laisez faire about £200 of steel frame, not so much for £1000 worth of Ti 😉

😎

Can’t help but wonder if chucking a dinner-plate sized rotor on the back end didn’t contribute. My steel Inbred has a 180 on the back and a 203 on the front, mainly ‘cos my Nixons will only take a 203 and the 180 was handy, as it had previously been on the front. It looks so much like the rotational stress forces from the brake passing into the frame at the joint between the stay and drop-out have overwhelmed the joint. I’m no engineer, I’m just looking at the damage in the pic and extrapolating, but it makes sense to me. Perhaps there should be a maximum size of rotor permitted, as is/was the case with forks.

where’s Brant? doesn’t he usually show up when ‘his’ bikes are mentioned. or is that just when people are raving about them or want to buy one?

not trying to be cynical….

You know how long I’ve been waiting to drop the “**** tax on Ti” line??

I thought of it weeks ago but haven’t had the chance before now 😆

where’s Brant? doesn’t he usually show up when ‘his’ bikes are mentioned.

I left On-One on Feb 1st. I’m not sure whether it’s appropriate or not for me to discuss, but I am still using Lynskey as a fabricator (which dave@planetx could have stomped on, so thanks).

How are the Ragley dropouts designed ? Same designer same manufacturer……………..
Or have seen some ‘design development’?

so-building my ti456 with a 183mm M4 at the back is a bad idea then?

richc – Member
The only bikes that never break are ones that aren’t ridden enough.

Warraloadopish.

terra – mine has a 180mm Tech M4 on the back.
hammered since sept 08 on rock and mountain – no issues (yet) 🙂

It’s not just Ti frames… I’ve had two Pinnacle frames fail in a similar manner within 12 months. Thankfully I now have a different frame (albeit very similar), a Kinesis Maxlight XC Pro2 with far uglier, but ‘beefier’ welds.

http://i253.photobucket.com/albums/hh66/john_walker74/Tractor/P1050123.jpg%5B/IMG%5D

i certainly think Lynskey are a reliable and honest company.
i also think they’d like to protect their product, especially in the UK where Hotlines and On One are pushing their product so heavily now.
it’d be interesting to see what they have to say regarding the concerns on this thread.