1994/95 Litespeed Obed chain stay question

[Bimdapogs]

Do you guys know what is the wall thickness of the chain stays of these frames? I can't find any info from their catalogues and am still waiting to hear from Litespeed.

I just bought one and it has some damage from chain suck. Some of the scratches (scrapes?) are deep and it worries me a bit - I'm debating whether I should return the frame. :?

I have this pic for now but I'll take better ones later - maybe without flash.

Thoughts?

 

[rider]

How deep is those scratches? Maybe try photo from another angle?
Was it cheap enough to justify those scratches?

 

[Bimdapogs]

Maybe around 0.5-1.0 mm.. I'll lay a flat piece of metal against the scrape when I take another pic later.

I got it for 250CAD or 155GBP for you guys in the UK.

 

[rider]

Hmm, If its meant for You, then probably build it up and ride. Depends what plans/expectations You have?
You know where to look at (it isn't hidden damage) just for peace of mind.
But really, it is up to You! If You aren't comfortable with damage,then return.

 

[hamster]

To be honest at that price it's still a bargain!

The frames of that date are not very sophisticated in tubing (I have a 1994 Catalyst) as you can tell from the weight. I think you will be fine. People tolerate chainsuck of that level on steel frames which usually have thinner walls.

 

[Anthony]

It's a 1994 frame with a much later downtube decal. I don't know the tube spec, but it's likely to be around 0.9mm thick, whereas a steel tube might be 0.6-0.8.

I can't really see anything from your photo, but if the cut is to some extent a dent, what you have left isn't necessarily 0.9 less your 0.5-1.0 estimate, because the inside of the tube may well be bulged out to match. To the extent that it's a dent, I wouldn't worry about it.

 

[Bimdapogs]

Hmm, If its meant for You, then probably build it up and ride. Depends what plans/expectations You have?
You know where to look at (it isn't hidden damage) just for peace of mind.
But really, it is up to You! If You aren't comfortable with damage,then return.

It's going to be my daily driver for commuting and for local trails, so I can prolong the components on my XLM.

To be honest at that price it's still a bargain!

The frames of that date are not very sophisticated in tubing (I have a 1994 Catalyst) as you can tell from the weight. I think you will be fine. People tolerate chainsuck of that level on steel frames which usually have thinner walls.

Yeah, the price included the fork, headset, stem, bar and post - I agree it was a pretty good deal. I heard back from Litespeed, they don't have the spec sheet handy but I was told the same thing - that back then their tubes were thicker.

It's a 1994 frame with a much later downtube decal. I don't know the tube spec, but it's likely to be around 0.9mm thick, whereas a steel tube might be 0.6-0.8.

I can't really see anything from your photo, but if the cut is to some extent a dent, what you have left isn't necessarily 0.9 less your 0.5-1.0 estimate, because the inside of the tube may well be bulged out to match. To the extent that it's a dent, I wouldn't worry about it.

I had some more time to inspect it last night and laid a ruler on the damage. The deepest cut is actually less than 0.5mm. It looked more like a scrape than a dent. I'll upload the pic later.

I think I'll keep the frame. The other thing that Litespeed told me is that if it ever breaks in this particular area, it would not be sudden and I should be given some warning before the failure would occur. I'm hoping it doesn't happen, but I'll inspect it from time to time anyways just like I do with my other bikes.

I will be sorting some parts to get this frame going. I think I'll go with a 1x9 set up.

RF Next cranks
M952 STIs
M952 mid-cage RD
M950 v-brakes

It should be good, can't wait to take it for a spin!

 

[Anthony]

The frames of that date are not very sophisticated in tubing (I have a 1994 Catalyst) as you can tell from the weight.

I heard back from Litespeed, they don't have the spec sheet handy but I was told the same thing - that back then their tubes were thicker.

I'm surprised by this. Litespeeds were made very light at that time, and subsequently were designed heavier/stiffer/stronger as they had to deal with suspension and more dynamic riding styles. I would expect the 1994 (i.e., first ever) Obed to be the lightest ever built, and almost as light as the Ocoee at that time.

 

[hamster]

They weren't using butted tubing on the staysat that time as far as I understand, the light weight was generally from Ti's lower density. The later ones with the ovalised tubes used thinner butted tubing. Earlier ones even had PG tubing for main tubes.

 

[Anthony]

They weren't using butted tubing on the staysat that time as far as I understand, the light weight was generally from Ti's lower density. The later ones with the ovalised tubes used thinner butted tubing. Earlier ones even had PG tubing for main tubes.

It's worth remembering that almost all titanium frames, especially mtb, have plain gauge tubes, and especially the stays. The different characteristics of titanium mean that butted tubes aren't necessarily a good idea. Titanium is much flexier than steel in relation to its strength and it doesn't suffer so much damage from welding. So you don't want a thin area in the middle of the tube to provide flex (if anything with titanium you're trying to minimise flex) and you don't need extra thickness at the welds to sustain strength.

The 1994 Obed had plain gauge tubes throughout, but was still fractionally lighter than the more expensive Ocoee. Litespeed did experiment on some of their high-end frames with cold-worked butted tubes in conjunction with various shaped tube profiles that stiffened the tube sufficiently for butting to be feasible. Even then, I think the middle was only slightly thinner and the main benefit (if any) was probably as a marketing tool. I'm not aware of other companies going down the butting route much at all with ti.