WD40 has a weak staying power and damages some plastics. I use protectants developed for airplanes reasoning that, if they work there, they should be good enough for my bikes. There is also Frame Saver that I suspect to be related.
Rear fork tubes plugs
- Thread starter CEBEP
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
WD40 has a weak staying power and damages some plastics. I use protectants developed for airplanes reasoning that, if they work there, they should be good enough for my bikes. There is also Frame Saver that I suspect to be related.
Schwinnsta
Senior Member
- Location
- New Orleans, LA USA
Boeshield T-9 would be better. It was developed by Boeing as a rust inhibitor, and one application will last a few years. It sold in different forms including as a bicycle lubricant in liquid form and also as an aerosol spray. The latter would be better for spraying into tubes. I use it to prevent rust on cast iron woodworking surfaces.
berlinonaut
Veteran
- Location
- Berlin Germany
Maybe you should read the statement from Brompton again and as well as my last part of the posting. The statement has been part of the technical FAQ provided by Brompton for ten years or more. Once more you claim to know more about the Brompton and the way it is made than the people that actually construct and build it. Isn't that a bit arrogant? And no, the statement is no bullshit.
Before painting, each frame is pre-treated with a chemical anti-corrosion treatment. This protects the bare metal and prevents any surface corrosion that may develop, penetrating through the metal.
But it does penetrate just fine. So yes, this statement is BS.
berlinonaut
Veteran
- Location
- Berlin Germany
When you look at this case you will recognize a couple of things:
- it is not inside out. So obviously it has nothing to do with the inside of the frame not being painted
- the bike in question is a Raw Laquer. Raw was invented in around 2005 and has had some issues from the beginning. Due to that it was even paused to offer it for a couple of years. Reason is that the Raw bikes are manufactured in a different way than the "normal" Bromptons (and the way has changed over the years as well). The poster in the thread wrote that his other Brompton has basically no rust at all, despite being ridden in the same conditions (salty winter roads) and being ~20 years older than the bike in question.
- there are about 800.000 Bromptons out there. Which relevance has a single occurance, that does not even reasonate with the statements you gave above.
So I am wondering: Who is talking BS here?
According to the statement, due to chemical treatment for rust protection, rust can not penetrate from surface to bare metal. It doesn't say about protection level or period of time that this treatment protects the frame. It's irrelevant how many Bromptons out there or for how many years. According to this statement rust can not penetrate from surface to bear metal. And it obviously can . Anyone with rust in the frame or fork can take Brompton to court any day based on this statement, which is probably why they removed it. So yeah, this statement is BS.
And precisely because Brompton frames rust, just like any other steel frame on any other bike of any other producer, users like me are looking for means to protect it from rust.
Last edited:
12boy
Guru
- Location
- Casper WY USA
Read our man Sheldon Brown and VeloOrange who extoll the virtues of coating the inside of tubes with some type of oil which in turns dries to form a hard waterproof layer. Obviously you need to rotate the bike this way and that to ensure it is all covered. There products designed for this and WD40, Boeshield and linseed oil have also been used. I use Boeshield and none of my steel framed bikes have rusted out. Many high end lugged bikes have had a cutout in the BB to avoid water pooling in and rusting the BB, so the concept of leaving bike tubing to drain is pretty well established.
I asked my local Brompton dealer about their suggestions regarding rust protection. They told me to never use WD40 and use this one instead.
Which is apparently a chain lube, but that's what they say will offer adequate rust protection. Lots of different opinions in the internet.
berlinonaut
Veteran
- Location
- Berlin Germany
You should read sorrowly and try to understand what's written rather than interpreting. Brompton wrote:
Before painting, each frame is pre-treated with a chemical anti-corrosion treatment. This protects the bare metal and prevents any surface corrosion that may develop, penetrating through the metal. Often visible in the open tube ends, this rusting is on the inside of the frame tubes and is purely cosmetic than a structural problem. The electrostatic spraying of powder paint means the powder cannot enter into the inside of tubes easily and means that there is no paint on the inside of tubes beyond the first 3-10mm. Consequently, the inside surface of the frame on a Brompton is unpainted and can appear ‘rusty’ but this will only be a surface discolouration due to the chemical anti-corrosion treatment.
Quite a difference to your "issue" and claimed understanding:
According to the statement, due to chemical treatment for rust protection, rust can not penetrate from surface to bare metal.
"Through" and "to" do clearly have different meanings here. Also, Brompton does refer to the bare metal and the whole thread is about the inside of the tubes and the question wether a plug would be helpful here. Weaknesses that apply to Raw Laquer (and only to Raw Laquer) in certain circumstances to not really help with the topic.
Wether you exect or would like something different is a different story. Matter of fact is: Brompton rear frames have been rusting through sometimes in earlier years from inside out. There are at least two theories why that happened and possibly the root cause is an aggregation of both. Does not matter too much as the problem seems to be gone since roughly 2008. It did however never affect the seatstays (where the plugs from your ebay offering fit) - there is simply no problem here and never has been. It was mainly the chainstay that was affected and the little crossbar at the lower end of the rear frame.
Rusting inside out is a completely different problem than rust from the outside through issues with the paint. The latter is what has happened to the bike you linked from bikeforums.net and furthermore it is an issue specific to Raw Laquer bikes (and seems only to affect a small amount, possibly not only depending from usage conditions but also maybe from certain production ranges). It is not a general problem, not even on Raw Laquer bikes.
So what do you want? Getting better understanding of the topic, getting a justification for buying plugs, sprays and stuff (no matter if necessary or not) or bashing on Brompton (no matter if justified or not)? If the first is your goal mixing up things clearly does not help at all and overestimating own competence does neither.
People bashing on Brompton is probably the biggest hit for you here. Anyone claiming Brompton did or may have done anything wrong will immediately have you standing up and writing long post showing them their place and asking how they dare to have their own opinion when Brompton already expressed theirs. I'm not saying Brompton produces bad quality bikes, but I don't have to love any and everything about it. I'm just not that kind of person, one who blindly trusts the brand with anything they say or do. If you didn't understand what I want, there is no need to answer until you do.
Last edited:
I do not think the issue of contention here is so much of Bromptons as of logical reasoning, going from small details to wide generalizations, and of ways of tackling problems in life. Yes, Brompton can be just an example and posting on chat site can be a place for life lessons - where we play is where we have a chance to learn.
