Trek recalls some 2013 Madones

Front brake can fail - consumers advised to stop riding and take bike to dealer

by John Stevenson   December 13, 2013  

Trek Madone 5.2 is one of the bikes affected by the recall.png

 

Trek Bicycles is recalling some models of 2013 Madone bike because of problems with the front brake.

The recall involves model year 2013 Trek Madone bicycles with model numbers 5.2, 5.9, 6.2, 6.5, 7.7 or 7.9, and serial numbers starting with WTU and ending with G or H. A list of all serial numbers included in the recall is at Trek's website.

Trek’s UK media maven Chris Garrison told us that UK riders who had affected Madones “should take it into a retailer for inspection. If it's got the problem bolt, we will replace the brake for them.”

Chris added that Trek UK had already sent out notices to customers that they knew had purchased this bike via a Trek retailer.

If you have one of the affected bikes, you should stop riding it immediately. The problem affects the front brake cable clamp bolt on the brake quick-release, which could come loose. This could allow the cable clamp to detach and potentially result in the loss of use of the front brake.

Trek has received five reports of loose bolts.

Some of the recalled models are custom-ordered Project One Madones. The model number is printed on the bicycle frame. The serial number is printed on a sticker underneath the frame of the bicycle. The bicycles were sold in a variety of colors.

17 user comments

Oldest firstNewest firstBest rated

I would advice any one with a trek to stop riding it. crappy frames, bad geometry, even worse saddle pen solution on these models, and usually the worst bottom brackets that come loose of the carbon after 2 years of riding.
(only reason to by a trek might be it's lifetime warranty scheme)

posted by KnightBiker [39 posts]
13th December 2013 - 12:24

like this
Like (14)

Just for balance, I bought a trek a few months ago and love it. The geometry is spot on for me.

If I could have, say, 6 bikes, would it stop me drooling over others that I don't have?

posted by notfastenough [2890 posts]
13th December 2013 - 12:35

like this
Like (24)

KnightBiker wrote:
I would advice any one with a trek to stop riding it. crappy frames, bad geometry, even worse saddle pen solution on these models, and usually the worst bottom brackets that come loose of the carbon after 2 years of riding.
(only reason to by a trek might be it's lifetime warranty scheme)

i'm interested to know how their frames are 'crappy', exactly? just curious. sounds to me like you just don't like Trek. that's your perogative, but don't dress up your prejudices as informed comment, eh. just say, "I hate Trek"

cactuscat's picture

posted by cactuscat [301 posts]
13th December 2013 - 13:29

like this
Like (21)

as a reaction on cactus cat:
Well - having had 5 different trek frames of which 3 had problems with their bottom brackets after 20.000 km each and the fourth one had a geometry for it's size that needed a 45 degree downward stem to give me the same position for same frame size compaired to their previous model. Also when wanting a longer seatpost, having to pay extra for their ridiculous solution that can't be used on any other bike.
so it's definitely more then just not liking the brand, more like first hand experience.

with their warranty scheme they can afford to build crappy frames because they give you back a new crappy frame. the thing is most people will forget about the waranty, or will never make the milage needed to get the wear and tear i did or will simply be fed up with it. (Nice earning model for a company don't you think?)

posted by KnightBiker [39 posts]
13th December 2013 - 13:51

like this
Like (23)

i hate trek

doper bikes, co owned by the worlds biggest doper.

oh and only available in beige.

the equivelant of a yawn on two wheels

posted by russyparkin [575 posts]
13th December 2013 - 14:05

like this
Like (22)

KnightBiker wrote:
as a reaction on cactus cat:
Well - having had 5 different trek frames of which 3 had problems with their bottom brackets after 20.000 km each and the fourth one had a geometry for it's size that needed a 45 degree downward stem to give me the same position for same frame size compaired to their previous model. Also when wanting a longer seatpost, having to pay extra for their ridiculous solution that can't be used on any other bike.

In contrast I have a bontrager built by trek, 15years old, I have had two Lemonds built by trek, I did manage to snap one but the warranty got me a vastly better one. I also have had two Top fuels, easy jet killed one the other is going strong.

Your stem issue, blame the "sportive" geometry thing, I wish manufacturers would just build bikes with fairly low front ends and riders just use the stem to get the height up if needed!

mrmo's picture

posted by mrmo [1008 posts]
13th December 2013 - 14:09

like this
Like (27)

KnightBiker wrote:
the fourth one had a geometry for it's size that needed a 45 degree downward stem to give me the same position for same frame size compaired to their previous model. Also when wanting a longer seatpost, having to pay extra for their ridiculous solution that can't be used on any other bike.

you bought the wrong size bike, then? naughty old trek, making bikes that aren't your size.

cactuscat's picture

posted by cactuscat [301 posts]
13th December 2013 - 14:29

like this
Like (25)

mrmo wrote:
KnightBiker wrote:
as a reaction on cactus cat:
Well - having had 5 different trek frames of which 3 had problems with their bottom brackets after 20.000 km each and the fourth one had a geometry for it's size that needed a 45 degree downward stem to give me the same position for same frame size compaired to their previous model. Also when wanting a longer seatpost, having to pay extra for their ridiculous solution that can't be used on any other bike.

Why buy Five if the experience was that bad...... Wink

posted by roos [3 posts]
13th December 2013 - 15:09

like this
Like (18)

KnightBiker wrote:
as a reaction on cactus cat:
Well - having had 5 different trek frames of which 3 had problems with their bottom brackets after 20.000 km each and the fourth one had a geometry for it's size that needed a 45 degree downward stem to give me the same position for same frame size compaired to their previous model.

Bottom bracket, or bottom bracket insert ?

Not sure why you're complaining about a geometry change, they're not contractually obliged to keep it the same from year to year...didn't you check it first ?

posted by JonD [176 posts]
13th December 2013 - 15:23

like this
Like (32)

mrmo wrote:

Your stem issue, blame the "sportive" geometry thing, I wish manufacturers would just build bikes with fairly low front ends and riders just use the stem to get the height up if needed!

a) choice of hi-rise stems -130 mm up to 170-200 effective ?
b) it looks a bit crap
c) longer headtube is probably a better engineering solution wrt to headtube and headset

To be fair, manufacturers tend to offer *other* models with non-'sportive' geometry, so it can't exactly be that difficult to get what you want. If the name offends you, just get some stickers made up Wink

posted by JonD [176 posts]
13th December 2013 - 15:27

like this
Like (19)

JonD wrote:

a) choice of hi-rise stems -130 mm up to 170-200 effective ?
b) it looks a bit crap
c) longer headtube is probably a better engineering solution wrt to headtube and headset

To be fair, manufacturers tend to offer *other* models with non-'sportive' geometry, so it can't exactly be that difficult to get what you want. If the name offends you, just get some stickers made up Wink

Problem is that the cheaper bikes from the mainstream brands seem to be built along sportive lines rather than race lines. Don't get me wrong if you want a sportive bike fine, but if you don't or prefer a low front end sharper steering etc.

Could be worse I guess, cheap XC race bikes.

mrmo's picture

posted by mrmo [1008 posts]
13th December 2013 - 15:54

like this
Like (19)

Cactuscat wrote:
'you bought the wrong size bike, then? naughty old trek, making bikes that aren't your size.'

your'e not paying attention: needing a higher seatpost and a lower stem does not constitute the need for another frame size. i couldn't go higher because the frame would be too long for my corpus, not for my legs. but a racy position was suddenly out of the question because the frontend got 12 cm higher.
with their seat-post system the height of the seat post is limited. + i didn't buy it it was the fourth frame i got back because the previous 3 frames had the same bottom bracket failure.

As i said i they have good waranty, because i got most of them back but no frame should fail within 20.000 km of usage with no accidents. their frames dit 3 times in a row, if it would happen to you you wouldn't be happy with it either.

posted by KnightBiker [39 posts]
13th December 2013 - 18:18

like this
Like (15)

Appears to be the front brake QR attachment is possibly faulty. Seems to be the Bontrager Speed Limit integrated brakes? This would never be an issue on a fixie.

Ride your own ride

posted by CanAmSteve [116 posts]
13th December 2013 - 19:05

like this
Like (12)

Re the 'sportive geometry' discussion, bear in mind that Trek do 3 different geometries for the Madone; H1, H2, H3.

If I could have, say, 6 bikes, would it stop me drooling over others that I don't have?

posted by notfastenough [2890 posts]
14th December 2013 - 4:07

like this
Like (13)

notfastenough wrote:
Re the 'sportive geometry' discussion, bear in mind that Trek do 3 different geometries for the Madone; H1, H2, H3.

and how much does the cheapest H1 cost? That really is my point, if you don't have a lot of money you can't get the "race geometry"

mrmo's picture

posted by mrmo [1008 posts]
14th December 2013 - 9:44

like this
Like (10)

Ok so Trek have a faulty part. Big deal. They're admitting the error and resolving the issue.
I have two Treks, managed to buy both of them in the right size and with the right geometry for me, I guess that's the advantage I gained from going to my LBS (who know about all this stuff) and them sticking me on the bike that was right for me - in both cases, a Trek. They're fantastic bikes and I love them.

It's a shame knightbiker had a bad experience, some of which does seem to be product related and some self-inflicted. But I'm sure we could find an unhappy cannondale/project x/pinarello/Raleigh customer in just as little time.

I'm not affected by all this - so enough of forums, I'm off out on my bike.

posted by madhouse [38 posts]
15th December 2013 - 7:54

like this
Like (11)

@ madhouse -
i don't agree with 'some of it being self-inflicted' i do agree with not being serviced by my dealer as well as it should have been in the case of the last frame I got back. The case of my bottom brackets failing 3 times is by no means self-inflicted and is a failure that I have heard from more Trek-owners. (which doesn't apply to their current range as far as i know, but then still i think the current frames leave to be desired in terms of how they are designed geometry-wise and innovation wise)

that said, i agree, most big manufacturers will probably have clients with similar grievances.

posted by KnightBiker [39 posts]
16th December 2013 - 13:00

like this
Like (9)