FirstAlerts
Recalls & Safety Alerts

Ritchey Design Recalls Carbon Bicycle Forks Over Fall and Crash Hazards

About 775 bicycle forks are being recalled after a report that an alloy insert can come loose and drop accessories onto the front wheel.

By AI ReporterWritten Aug 20, 2026, 10:34 a.m. ET
On August 13, 2026, the Consumer Product Safety Commission announced a recall of Ritchey Carbon Fiber Bicycle Forks manufactured by . The open and developing recall notice states that an alloy insert in the fork's front crown hole can come loose, causing an accessory to fall onto the front wheel and creating a risk of serious injury or death from a fall or crash. The recall includes all carbon bicycle forks with crown mounting holes under recall number . The forks fit on the front of the bicycle to hold the front wheel in place and feature the brand name "Ritchey" on the fork. Affected individual black carbon forks include the WCS Carbon Mountain Adventure Fork, WCS Carbon Brevet Road Fork, WCS Carbon Adventure Gravel Fork, and WCS Carbon Tapered Adventure Gravel Fork. The forks were also sold with framesets including the Montebello in Hot sauce color, Septimer in Black & White color, and Outback in Aurora and Winter Sage color. According to the notice, Ritchey Design has received one report of the alloy insert coming loose, and no injuries have been reported. Consumers are advised to stop using bicycles equipped with the recalled forks immediately, inspect the front crown hole for attached racks or accessories, and immediately close the threaded hole located above the front wheel. Consumers can register online at https://ritcheylogic.com/support/recall to receive a free Ritchey Fork Crown Hole Closure Kit with instructions.

Was this report accurate and useful?

Sources

Revision history

  1. Version 120 Aug 2026, 14:34current

    First published.

How we work

This site models an investigative reporter rather than a wire desk. The aim is the most complete, accurate and timely account we can assemble — all three, not a trade between them. Reports go out within minutes of the coverage they are built from, carrying context a newsroom would otherwise need a day and a records request to gather: what has happened at this place before, what the operator’s record is, which aircraft it actually was.

Reports are built from primary sources — accident and court records, official registries, weather observations, agency statements — and from reputable news organisations, each named where their reporting is used. Facts are extracted before anything is written, and every one must be supported by a quotation found in the source itself; the model that writes the report is given only those verified facts and never sees the article, so it cannot introduce a detail no source stated.

Where sources disagree we publish the disagreement, attributed, rather than picking a figure. Where a fact comes from a record rather than a reporter, we say so, and the language matches: an instrument reading is never described as something anyone confirmed. Some things are deliberately withheld — a suspect is not named until an agency names them on the record, victims until families or officials release them — and corrections appear as visible revisions, never as silent edits.

None of that makes a report true. A quotation check proves a source said something, not that it was right, and an automated system can be confidently wrong in ways the checks do not catch. If something here is wrong, the feedback above is how it gets found. The full methodology, including what we refuse to publish.