Hello people of Reddit, Santa Cruz Bikes is giving me some issues on the lifetime frame warranty, they are claiming that the scuffs being “cosmetic damage” is what caused the lower portion of my downtime to crack.
I’d like your opinions if you don’t mind.
Keeping in mind they already said it is indeed cosmetic damage causing a structural failure.
To me this is the same as claiming a ship will sink because of a scratch in the paint.
Here are some photos. And a link to video of how they do the concrete test in the “test lab” where they smack a frame against concrete, this will be found towards the end of the YouTube video.
Thank you!
https://youtu.be/w5eMMf11uhM?si=rhR1YMU9Xhda9HFx
#santacruzbikes
by Gloomy-Mention5547
18 Comments
This makes no sense to me. Even if Santa Cruz is right that cosmetic damage caused the frame to fail, it should still be covered under warranty. Do you have emails you could share (redacting personal info of course). I’m very curious what they specifically said.
Looks like it got battered pretty good. They have warranty, not crash replacement
But yeah, if they have said its cosmetic, it shouldnt matter
Lifetime warranty should mean the life of the thing. It’s life is over though!
If they are just cosmetic…then they shouldn’t cause any harm. Right? Like that’s what cosmetic means, right? Seems like if they are saying the scuffs are cosmetic then they’re contradicting themselves saying they caused the larger failure.
This was also my experience with Santa Cruz and every other bike related warranty claim I’ve tried. They will look for any reason they can to deny it.
My only good experience has been with a Trek store years ago who gave me a whole new wheel when a freehub failed on a new bike.
There does seem to be a lot of success stories too, so YMMV.
In my mind cosmetic means it can’t cause a failure because otherwise it would not just be cosmetic? Idk how the terms are used in the industry but I would have guessed that once damage causes a failure it would no longer be considered cosmetic?
“Santa Cruz Bicycles will repair or replace at its option any frame or rigid fork made by Santa Cruz Bicycles it determines to be defective in materials or workmanship. The warranty will be in effect for the lifetime of the frame or fork and is available only to the original owner. Notwithstanding the foregoing, frames purchased prior to May 1, 2015 are covered under the previously-existing warranty for five years from the original date of purchase.”
Separate question but… Did this happen spontaneously? Or is this from a crash? Because it looks like the failure is not in the normal load-bearing direction. The top tube normally sees tensile loads so a failure would be transverse but this is linear.
Edit to add: if it was spontaneous (not in a crash) then I would agree that there was an issue with the bonding of the layers or maybe a layer was accidentally scored or otherwise damaged in production and they should replace it… That said, if someone crashed it or, say, was sitting directly on the top tube for some reason and it broke, then they don’t really owe you anything.
The crack is quite weird, and for me it’s not a warranty matter more like a Crash Replacement.
But if they said « the cosmetic damage » caused the frame to crack it’s a bit weird. Do you happen to have like a screenshot of the warranty denial ?
They are saying it isn’t a defect, so it isn’t covered under warranty. Abuse would be a better term than cosmetic, but it means the same thing basically.
Maybe they’re saying the cosmetic damage is indicative of the crash that caused the frame failure.
This is obviously damaged from a crash, I wouldn’t warranty it either.
1. I’d like to see the exact wording they used within context.
2. They know you broke it during a major crash and so are denying the claim… wording doesn’t really matter.
3. I’d be asking how much a crash replacement is.
We’re all curious – did you crash it? Did you wake up one day and the crack had magically appeared?
A few questions.
1. did they say the cosmetic damage “caused” the crack or that it indicates use that *could* cause a crack?
2. How old and well used is the bike?
One thing about workmanship and defect warranties is that they’re generally going to show up pretty early in a bikes life – inherently it’s an issue the bike left the factory with not something that just “shows up” all of a sudden.
The older the bike the likelihood of a defect being the issue goes down pretty substantially so the bar you have to clear for a warranty claim goes up similarly. Your bike looks pretty well used. Unless it’s just a few months old I’d guess this wasn’t a defect either.
I cracked my Santa Cruz frame after crash and Santa Cruz offered me a new frame for a deep discount. I was grateful for that so I would ask for a replacement at a discount.
the dents in the first pic are deeper than cosmetic scratches
I’ve never seen a legit warranty where the carbon failed in a linear fashion.
Jus keep riding it will be fine , if there is a crack just drill a small hole at each end of the crack so it won’t spread any further and you should be good to keep sending it 👍